Moderator: Cartographers
Kaplowitz wrote:the.killing.44 wrote:Kaplowitz wrote:Speaking of the double line, you are missing them by Topaz...
See my post ā¦
.44
Sorry,i missed that...
The map is looking great by the way!
MrBenn wrote:I raised this earlier (nothing like reading the last few pages of comments before posting )...
MrBenn wrote:the lake by Topaz is a coastal lake, and hence has a more wobbly shoreline and doesn't have the still-water ripples.
oaktown wrote:actually, now that LedZep mentioned it, I have a beef with the bridges. The shadow below them is too far below them, suggesting that the ground level is considerably lower than the level at which the edges of the bridge touch ground. The effect is that the bridges look like they are floating above the earth rather than anchored to them. I'd say either curve the bridges more (not less as suggested) or bring the shadows up a few pixels.
aage wrote: Maybe you're right, but since we receive no handlebars from the mod I think we should get some ourselves.
Thanks for the comments but I have to say that the one-way and bridges look better bent. They show that they go OVER things. Water and mountains. I think they look good the way they are. Is there anything else?LED ZEPPELINER wrote:when i look at this map, it is absolutely stunning, but then i notice the bridges, and one way border. It is not that they are bad, actually they are quite good, but i just don't think they fit the feel of this map. For the bridges, maybe just don't have them curve, just keep them going flat. as for the one way border: i would suggest it being flat also, but also maybe have the mountains dodge it slightly, so that it runs right through them, just a thought. Also i see that you have this really cool double border line thing going on around the lakes, but when you get to the ocean coast, they aren't there, maybe try including the double border line, i think it would make it look better, and keep the map held together nicely. Hope this is helpful. otherwise for that though, the map is quite spectacular,
My bad on the lake by Topaz. When I had to redo the terts for GP, I used the ocean from Rj's earlier map but did not turn it into a lake. I will fix that and make it look similar to the other lakes.the.killing.44 wrote:but the "lake" by Topaz seems to have the border of the ocean. Explanation? or just a small mistake.
Other than that, the only thing I can see is that the red border around the "lake" by Sauron and Ironcrest seems a bit more red and sharp than the others.
.44
The shadows have been raised a couple pixels and it does look better.oaktown wrote:The shadow below them is too far below them, suggesting that the ground level is considerably lower than the level at which the edges of the bridge touch ground. The effect is that the bridges look like they are floating above the earth rather than anchored to them. I'd say either curve the bridges more (not less as suggested) or bring the shadows up a few pixels.
I have to disagree here too but that is just my opinion. I think the old mountains were not as sharp. The blended in too much. These have a better shape and the highlights are more dynamic.LED ZEPPELINER wrote:i personally liked the old mountains better, just saying i think they fit the map better
WidowMakers wrote:I have to disagree here too but that is just my opinion. I think the old mountains were not as sharp. The blended in too much. These have a better shape and the highlights are more dynamic.
What does everyoen else think?
WidowMakers wrote:I have to disagree here too but that is just my opinion. I think the old mountains were not as sharp. The blended in too much. These have a better shape and the highlights are more dynamic.LED ZEPPELINER wrote:i personally liked the old mountains better, just saying i think they fit the map better
What does everyoen else think?
oh srry i was looking at this map
Instead of this map, which has the better mountains that i was talking about
LARGE Version 12
sailorseal wrote:My big boy banana was out the whole time
AndyDufresne wrote:Forever linked at the hip's-banana! (That sounds strange, don't quote me.)AndyDufresne wrote:Many Happy Bananas to everyone, lets party...with Bananas.
--Andy
Ruben Cassar wrote:My only concern is that I think the large version seems to be the size of the small version! I saw a version of the small map somewhere and it's way too small. So I think the sizes of the small and large versions should be upped a little.
I agree. Here are the XML images they are still valid even with the small tweaks I have made.oaktown wrote:Ruben Cassar wrote:My only concern is that I think the large version seems to be the size of the small version! I saw a version of the small map somewhere and it's way too small. So I think the sizes of the small and large versions should be upped a little.
Personally I appreciate that some mapmakers don't feel the need to use every pixel at their disposal, but the small is quite small. Could we see the small with some army counts dropped on there to get a sense of whether or not it is big enough for play?
AndyDufresne wrote:3 Digits on Una looks like the only place where there could be a problem on the small map...
So it would be a smelly map?MrBenn wrote:If this map were cheese, it would be Wensleydale with Cranberries, on Poppy-seed biscuits...
Final Forge I say!
MrBenn wrote:Final Forge I say!
oaktown wrote:MrBenn wrote:Final Forge I say!
If we don't see the jury in the next day or two I'll PM them... looks to me like we're still waiting on all three thumbs.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users