Moderator: Cartographers
Evil DIMwit wrote:Oh, I like this one. Simple but an underrepresented area.
You'll want to put some starting neutrals around -- one on each oasis and then at least 3 more to bring it down to a balanced starting territory number. I recommend one in Morocco, one in Mauritania, and one in Niger so that players have no chance of starting out with those small bonuses. Also, pretty much every bonus you have is overvalued but we can hammer that out in Gameplay.
GSP JR wrote:I also like this one. I am fond of the map design as well, maybe a bit of clean up (the bridges, anchors, and mountains need work), but I like how the borders are not all uniform thickness and have a bit of a rough feel. The colors seem ok, but I think the oasis/desert theme would do well with more browns/ tans, natural colors.
I agree that the bonuses seem high, and I think it would make gameplay more interesting with not only each oasis, but also the docks start neutral.
Interesting concept, I can't wait to see how it develops.
Kowalskii wrote:Hi!
I like the map, it's very original. But you must make the bridges and hills a bit better. But on the whole a good job !
Rih0 wrote:Some things to help on your mapmaking: (This is just some advices, you don´t really need to make them, but in my opinion, you should)
You can take those army circles out.
Instead of those arrows connecting territories to names like abuja, tunis, tozeur and tataounie, try abreviating their names as Eastern Front(E.F.)
Im worried about the border. The way it is, I think it may be hard to make two versions(big and small) You can reduce the border size a little, or even take it out.
theBastard wrote:the map looks good. when you have here Oasis, did you think about any desert territories (maybe jungle also) as killer neutrals or decay territories?
natty_dread wrote:Your map is too wide btw. It is currently 915px × 476px when the maximum size for the large map is 840x800.
Rih0 wrote:Instead of those arrows connecting territories to names like abuja, tunis, tozeur and tataounie, try abreviating their names as Eastern Front(E.F.)
natty_dread wrote:Actually, using abbreviations is not a good solution. It makes the map much harder to read - players need to check back and forth between the map and the list of abbreviations. Now you have way too many abbreviations - even in places where they are in no way necessary. Whoever put you up to this??
Less abbreviations = better. It doesn't matter if some territory names overlap borders, as long as you can still see which territory borders which clearly.
Abbreviations should be only used as a last resort, ie. when there's no way to put up the whole territory name without sacrificing legibility.
nilcius wrote:That is an interesting thought, but is it a plus gameplay-wise? I mean, if I put some killer neutrals, there should be some reason to conquer it, otherwise it's pretty useless. I might be missing something here, but, let me know how you see this
theBastard wrote:nilcius wrote:That is an interesting thought, but is it a plus gameplay-wise? I mean, if I put some killer neutrals, there should be some reason to conquer it, otherwise it's pretty useless. I might be missing something here, but, let me know how you see this
well, if it is plus for GP must say any mods or skilled guys...
the right is that this change your map/idea. I only noticed that to have complex Sahara - Oasis (which save lifes), - desert (which take lifes).
but the map is good without them
rockandrull wrote:What are the anchors for?
Industrial Helix wrote:In response to your Design Brief, we're stickying this map. When I get a chance to talk to Tacktix about it I'll let you know and we'll see about advancing this map.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users