Moderator: Cartographers
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
Ogrecrusher wrote:Why not put the mountains back, at least the Rockies, then if you need an impassable where there isn't a natural feature, use the barbed wire.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Alaskan Viking wrote:I am also not a huge fan of the barbed wire...
WidowMakers wrote:Alaskan Viking wrote:I am also not a huge fan of the barbed wire...
I agree. The mountians were easier to spot and looked better.
The barbed wire on the legend is great however.
I also like the legend and the visual chaos of the bonus group names.
I think the paint is a bit flat looking and too square.
Maybe make it look more like paint on a wall.
WM
jefjef wrote:How about extending the Abilene barrier along the Amarillo border too. I like the channel that would create.
Ogrecrusher wrote:But seriously, the mountains are much clearer. Why not put the mountains back, at least the Rockies, then if you need an impassable where there isn't a natural feature, use the barbed wire.
iancanton wrote:if el paso and amarillo cannot assault each other, than this wil make both of their large bonus zones easier to hold, which is beneficial. irrespective of whether this is done, the gameplay stamp will remain valid.
iancanton wrote:nova scotia has the only name in the sea that is diagonal. it'll look better horizonal, like all of the others.
iancanton wrote:in new england, MA massachusetts (area 10,500 square miles and population 6,000,000) is a more appropriate name for the region currently called VT vermont (area 9,600 square miles and population 600,000).
iancanton wrote:the region labelled as grand forks is in fact the location of duluth. grand forks is actually in north dakota and is located in our grassland region, which is apty-named. since minnesota region is only half of a state, consider calling it minneapolis or st paul.
iancanton wrote:san luis potosi is a city that is over five times as big as neighbouring zacatecas, so i suggest changing the name accordingly. this isn't as high-profile as leaving out massachusetts, since most non-mexicans have heard of neither san luis potosi nor zacatecas.
iancanton wrote:the barbed wire isn't so easy to see against the colours on the map. nice idea, but it needs to be made more obvious. there's stylistic merit to having the rockies present as mountains too.
iancanton wrote:the new legend gives a sense of decay. just the job!
ian.
gimil wrote:If the USA is in civil war, then why is Canada and Mexico part of the map?
I can see an underlying talent for graphics with you image, however this particular map image you have here in my eyes doesn't quite hit par with what I would expect for a map to get a graphics stamps. I can't really put my finger on the problem but there is certainly something that needs to be changed to get this map up to scratch.
andydufresne wrote:The legend looks pretty terrific now. Major step up from a couple of drafts ago. I like the thematic style and feel of this map. Great job.
Would your quote in the left corner look better in the Gulf? It seems cramped in the left corner---however, that empty space in the Gulf might be better for overall visual balance. Just some random thoughts.
MrBenn wrote:You could probably make the legend narrower, so that it takes up less of the overall space of the map - it feels a little bit stretched out (and the star is no longer the same shape as the main map).
Will everything still fit on the small map?
isaiah40 wrote:MrBenn wrote:You could probably make the legend narrower, so that it takes up less of the overall space of the map - it feels a little bit stretched out (and the star is no longer the same shape as the main map).
Will everything still fit on the small map?
I gather when you say narrower, you mean height wise?
MrBenn wrote:isaiah40 wrote:MrBenn wrote:You could probably make the legend narrower, so that it takes up less of the overall space of the map - it feels a little bit stretched out (and the star is no longer the same shape as the main map).
Will everything still fit on the small map?
I gather when you say narrower, you mean height wise?
Yes, I was referring to the height - I should have made that more clear
Users browsing this forum: No registered users