Moderator: Cartographers
AndyDufresne wrote:I think you are on the right track regarding the bonuses now. Sud feels a little odd, but I understand the reasoning as it only has two borders.
AndyDufresne wrote:On a graphics note, what if you used the same gray stroke (or perhaps slightly darker) as the color for the title and your sig, rather than the black?
--Andy
edbeard wrote:That'd make sud-est a 5 territory 4 border continent...+4 now? Even though it can be made into a 3 border continent by taking Kenscoff?
edbeard wrote:I could take Cotes de Fer and put that with Sud-est. It's totally not part of that area in real life but I've made a lot of other alterations too. This is about making a map not a real representation of these zones.
That'd make sud a 4 territory 2 border +2
That'd make sud-est a 5 territory 4 border continent...+4 now?
oaktown wrote:edbeard wrote:I could take Cotes de Fer and put that with Sud-est. It's totally not part of that area in real life but I've made a lot of other alterations too. This is about making a map not a real representation of these zones.
That'd make sud a 4 territory 2 border +2
That'd make sud-est a 5 territory 4 border continent...+4 now?
Hmm.. crap... if you could knock it down to three borders it would be a perfect +3. What if the attack route from the Ile was moved from Leogane to Port-au-Prince: this would protect leogane and give the Ouest region another internal attack route, which it could use.
My only other thought on this map is that the rivers are a bit tight in some places, and will just get thinner in the small version. Maybe widen some a pixel to make the impassables clear?
edbeard wrote:I don't think there'll be confusion about the rivers. There's a glow around the borders which distinguishes them from the river, and the border lines get smaller with the smaller map too! The proportion remains the same. Wait until the small version comes around again.
edbeard wrote:As for the Leogane route...my only problem with that is that it makes it possible to hold sud-est with just two borders. Though you need to hold six territories. I'll think about this a bit more.
edbeard wrote:The Port-au-Prince route is a good idea. It is a port after all and it does open up that area a bit. The only problem is the name will cover the route a bit.
edbeard wrote:does taking away that route to Leogane make Ouest into a +4 region?
oaktown wrote:edbeard wrote:does taking away that route to Leogane make Ouest into a +4 region?
I don't think so - it still has as many territories to defend, and by adding an internal route you are actually making the region harder to conquer in the first place because you can't evacuate your armies out of any territory until you have the entire thing.
oaktown wrote:Another thing - do you think you can fit the Fort Liberte title in the territory? It looks like there's space, and the less you have floating in the dead area the better.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:Edbeard for the sake of consistancy would you consider testing all terr names in white with the black stroke? I suspect this will feel a little better than the current terr colours on the map.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:We going to see an update anytime soon?
oaktown wrote:•Is that little island in the south really flat on the bottom like that?
oaktown wrote:• Especially on the small map, it might not hurt to play around with the area that Desdunes, Paul, and Gonaives come together, as Desdunes and Gonaivesa are pretty close.
oaktown wrote:• weren't you hoping to make the north and south even in terms of bonus and borders, assuming games could end up as a two-sided north/south stand off? Because I'm still raising my eyebrows at the fact that Ouest is six terits with 4 borders for +5, while Nord is seven terits with 4 borders for +4. Seems like you could make them the same (either 4 or 5) and the total top/bottom bonuses would be the same. I get that the north has one less border, but it does have to defend positions in all three regions while the south has Sud-Est safely tucked away. I also get that Nord will be pretty easy to conquer, since it's very linear.
oaktown wrote:And i don't mind the text not having a uniform color, but what bugs me is that the color over the seas looks crisper than that on the land - the stroke perhaps does that?
edbeard wrote:oaktown wrote:And i don't mind the text not having a uniform color, but what bugs me is that the color over the seas looks crisper than that on the land - the stroke perhaps does that?
it does do that but to me it looks fine. It's readable everywhere which is the most important part.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
oaktown wrote:since nobody other than I has expressed any concern with the current bonuses...
edbeard wrote:....
1. graphics. good for stamp? damn right it is.
edbeard wrote:the rest of the borders are fine. people will be able to tell the difference between thicker river borders and thinner territory and continent borders which have a light stroke around them. thanks though!
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Users browsing this forum: No registered users