Battle of Actium [Quenched]
Moderator: Cartographers
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
- Bad Speler
- Posts: 1027
- Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:16 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Ottawa
- Contact:
well...this is my first post in this topic, but only because i don't really like commenting on complicated maps.
Just a suggestion, but I think the army shadows on the sea should be more hexagonal, because i dont think it looks good that theres just a bit of darker colour between the army shadow and the corner of the hexagon
Just a suggestion, but I think the army shadows on the sea should be more hexagonal, because i dont think it looks good that theres just a bit of darker colour between the army shadow and the corner of the hexagon
Highest Score: 2532
Highest Position: 69 (a long time ago)
Highest Position: 69 (a long time ago)
Ya, I like it
The only thing that bothers me is the green tint you used to make the land...
I think it's ugly
Well I guess that depends on tastes...
And the territories at the bottom, 'Lurius' and 'Roma'...Are you sure the army numbers stay in the map and don't come on the border?
The only thing that bothers me is the green tint you used to make the land...
I think it's ugly
Well I guess that depends on tastes...
And the territories at the bottom, 'Lurius' and 'Roma'...Are you sure the army numbers stay in the map and don't come on the border?
Last edited by Gnome on Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Bad Speler...i think that's a great suggestion about the hex army shadows...i'll do some experimenting and see how it looks. Thanks!Bad Speler wrote:well...this is my first post in this topic, but only because i don't really like commenting on complicated maps.
Just a suggestion, but I think the army shadows on the sea should be more hexagonal, because i dont think it looks good that theres just a bit of darker colour between the army shadow and the corner of the hexagon

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
Yes i kinda agree about the ugly bit of the land....sstill trying to think what i can do there.Gnome wrote:Ya, I like it![]()
The only thing that bothers me is the green tint you used to make the land...
I think it's ugly![]()
Well I guess that depends on tastes...
And the territories at the bottom, 'Lurius' and 'Roma'...Are you sure the army numbers stay in the map and don't come on the border?
I'll check on the army numbers on those terrs when the xml testing is done to C about that...and post a adjustment if nexcessary. Thanks Gnome!

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
V21 Land Changes
Gnome...does this do anything to remove the "ugly"Gnome wrote:Ya, I like it![]()
The only thing that bothers me is the green tint you used to make the land...
I think it's ugly![]()
And this map also addresses the solution of hgex army shadowsbad speler wrote: I think the army shadows on the sea should be more hexagonal


* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
- unriggable
- Posts: 8036
- Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:49 pm
unriggable...they are left overs from the earlier terr names that were going to beunriggable wrote:Why are the letters on the legend underlined?
Oa
Ob
Oc
etc.
It has been recently suggested that they should still remain and still preceed the terr names as in
O After
O Cato
O Libo
M Ares
M Enya
M Eros
This way in the drop list for the attack/fort selection they will appear grouped under that underlilne character.

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
Kewl, pleased you like it...i'm still not quite happy with it, so will probably alter it somemore.Gnome wrote:To me it looks way better like this![]()
Now I know what it was that made it ugly, it looked a bit like plastic![]()
plastic wasn't invented back than
It looks more realistic now...Good job

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
-
WidowMakers
- Posts: 2774
- Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Detroit, MI
As long as you keep it closer to this than th eprevious version. I really did not even notice the green color until you changed it. Much better!cairnswk wrote:Kewl, pleased you like it...i'm still not quite happy with it, so will probably alter it somemore.Gnome wrote:To me it looks way better like this![]()
Now I know what it was that made it ugly, it looked a bit like plastic![]()
plastic wasn't invented back than
It looks more realistic now...Good job
I also like the hex circles more. And the underlined text in front of the territory names for the drop down list is very helpful.
QUESTION: Why can't large ships bombard neighboring ships? If they can fire across to hit other large ships they should be able t hit all neighboring ships as well.
WM

Thanks WM.WidowMakers wrote:As long as you keep it closer to this than th eprevious version. I really did not even notice the green color until you changed it. Much better!cairnswk wrote:Kewl, pleased you like it...i'm still not quite happy with it, so will probably alter it somemore.Gnome wrote:To me it looks way better like this![]()
Now I know what it was that made it ugly, it looked a bit like plastic![]()
plastic wasn't invented back than
It looks more realistic now...Good job![]()
I also like the hex circles more. And the underlined text in front of the territory names for the drop down list is very helpful.
Gameplay...WM...just a variation for gameplay. Sure they could do it, but i would prefer to have this way as a variation.QUESTION: Why can't large ships bombard neighboring ships? If they can fire across to hit other large ships they should be able t hit all neighboring ships as well.

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
-
WidowMakers
- Posts: 2774
- Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:25 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Detroit, MI
OKcairnswk wrote:Gameplay...WM...just a variation for gameplay. Sure they could do it, but i would prefer to have this way as a variation.QUESTION: Why can't large ships bombard neighboring ships? If they can fire across to hit other large ships they should be able t hit all neighboring ships as well.

edbeard...forgive my ignorance...what is monitor and merrimac?edbeard wrote:maybe you can think of it as a Monitor and Merrimac situation. where the smaller ships are too low for shots to hit them.
yes kind of silly when there are no cannons involved but you get the idea

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
- unriggable
- Posts: 8036
- Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:49 pm
American civil war, two first ironclad warships. Thy just beat the shit out of eachother, never really fought against wooden ships.cairnswk wrote:edbeard...forgive my ignorance...what is monitor and merrimac?edbeard wrote:maybe you can think of it as a Monitor and Merrimac situation. where the smaller ships are too low for shots to hit them.
yes kind of silly when there are no cannons involved but you get the idea

Thanks unriggable....mmmmm interesting!unriggable wrote:American civil war, two first ironclad warships. Thy just beat the shit out of eachother, never really fought against wooden ships.cairnswk wrote:edbeard...forgive my ignorance...what is monitor and merrimac?edbeard wrote:maybe you can think of it as a Monitor and Merrimac situation. where the smaller ships are too low for shots to hit them.
yes kind of silly when there are no cannons involved but you get the idea

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
- Final Forge
Post questions and concerns if any.
it was a naval battle in the american civil war, with the first ironclad ships. i don't remember which side (the confederates or the union) had which ship.cairnswk wrote:edbeard...forgive my ignorance...what is monitor and merrimac?edbeard wrote:maybe you can think of it as a Monitor and Merrimac situation. where the smaller ships are too low for shots to hit them.
yes kind of silly when there are no cannons involved but you get the idea
edit: ooops... only looked at the 2nd to last page...
sorry
Last edited by lalaland on Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thanks lalalandlalaland wrote:it was a naval battle in the american civil war, with the first ironclad ships. i don't remember which side (the confederates or the union) had which ship.cairnswk wrote:edbeard...forgive my ignorance...what is monitor and merrimac?edbeard wrote:maybe you can think of it as a Monitor and Merrimac situation. where the smaller ships are too low for shots to hit them.
yes kind of silly when there are no cannons involved but you get the idea

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
- unriggable
- Posts: 8036
- Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:49 pm
The large ships wiht the marking can only bombard the bordering large ships, they cannot conquer them; but the large ships can attack and conquer bodering small ships, and the small ships can do likewise.unriggable wrote:Monitor belonged to the union.
Can you clarify: What can the large ships do? I'm not sure if they can only bombard or can they take over small ships?

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi
Thanks Wisse...nice to see you back again.Wisse wrote:woha, this is a bit confusing, 1 thing i don't understand, why are those blue outlines there? are they there for any reason, if so, can we attack from every country to every country or not?
p.s
nice idea
Yes the blue outlines simply provide more definition for the hexes (boats) as to where they border.
Everyone is attackable, there are no impassables with the exception of the large ships and the bombardment at each other only.
Hope this clears your confusion.

* Pearl Harbour * Waterloo * Forbidden City * Jamaica * Pot Mosbi



