California [Quenched]

[The Bison King]

Certainly an improvement. I hope you'll be fixing your signature though...

Yeah I will.

[The Bison King]

Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

Bumping, from last page

[The Bison King]

Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

Ok with this upload you can pretty much see how it's going to be. All the temporary images have been removed and we can start ironing out all the little nitpicks.

[Bruceswar]

I like where this is going, but also I am not liking the floating land mass idea. Connect it into the US somehow.

[Victor Sullivan]

Ack! Yosemite needs to be capitalized!!

[The Bison King]

I like where this is going, but also I am not liking the floating land mass idea. Connect it into the US somehow.

I had it that way earlier and visually it really didn't do it for me. Also I think it works as disconnected conceptually as well. This is about California as it's own place, not a small part of a larger whole.

Ack! Yosemite needs to be capitalized!!

uh... yeah I think you're right. Good catch.

[lostatlimbo]

I really like where this map is headed and have a few suggestions:

The stunning Channel Islands would be a nice island territory connecting from Santa Barbara.

You've left out the infamous Napa Valley - the most renowned region for growing wine in the US. I think Napa Valley deserves its own territory - set snuggly between Santa Rosa and Sacremento.

Fresno and Inyo Forest should not connect. There are no roads over the Sierras. Instead, I would recommend connecting Modesto and Yosemite (which is actually further West than Inyo Forest).

Death Valley is also in an odd spot and rather small. I can understand the tight fit here, but in reality, the southern border of Death Valley's 3,000 square miles lies north of Bakersfield proper.

Lone Pine is a tiny highway village that only serves as a Portal to Mt. Whitney. Since that area is shown on the map where the northern half of Death Valley should be, I would drop it and just make Death Valley a taller territory. And yes, if you haven't seen it, Death Valley comes right up to the edge of the Sierras. Its one of the most amazing sights I've ever seen.

No Name could be China Lake or China Lake NWC.

Being a border town (with Arizona) Needles seems abnormally large here and Palm Springs is out of place. You're also lacking the infamous Salton Sea and the one of a kind Joshua Tree NP. I would suggest rearranging this area as such:



Some territory names confuse me. I think:
Morro Bay should be named San Luis Obispo
Solano should be named Richmond
San Luis (near Stockton) should be Contra Costa

I don't think B.K. really works as a stand in for Berkeley. Perhaps you could use the full name and let the end of it bleed into Oakland a little.

As to the graphics, I like the overall look, but feel that a place as flashy as California should have a little more "pop" to it. Something with stronger colors and less of a watercolored look. I like the idea of the coastline background, but maybe something more like this?
Google Image Search for "california sunset" for more inspiration.
.

Also - definitely need the Californian flag (and bear)


Despite all my criticisms, I think you have the start of a very solid map here and I look forward to the next update!

[Vlasov]

I agree with almost everything in the previous post.

The Channel Islands lie closer to the LA/San Diego coast areas...maybe they could connect to San Diego and/or Malibu/South Bay?

Beverly Hills is actually located south and mostly east of "S.F.V." (San Fernando Valley) -- why not switch their names?

Also, some minor spelling/capitalization issues:
Redwood, not Red Wood
Yosemite, not yosemite
Big Sur, not Big sur
El Dorado, not El Derado
Santa Cruz, not Sant Cruz

[natty dread]

This is looking quite nice. Some crits:

- the insets look blurry. Quite frankly they look like you just copypasted a part of the map and enlargened it for the insets... I think they are going to need some work.

- not a big fan of the colour scheme. Particularly, northern california looks kinda dirty.

- the title could use some work. It seems a bit too simplistic. Also the inset frames, as well as the brown frame around the map could use some ornamentation. They seem a bit boring now.

Good work otherwise.

[The Bison King]

Ok A lot of good feed back It's going to take a bit to address it all. As for the gameplay suggestions that were brought up, I'll be considering some of them but I can't make any promises. Also remember that when it comes to adding territories there are specific start numbers I have to adhere to. Right now I'm at 42 start locations, I can add 2 more territories with out drastically changing the gameplay, but I can't guarantee that I will.

[The Bison King]

The stunning Channel Islands would be a nice island territory connecting from Santa Barbara.

You've left out the infamous Napa Valley - the most renowned region for growing wine in the US. I think Napa Valley deserves its own territory - set snuggly between Santa Rosa and Sacremento.

If I am going to add any territories These would be the two. You'll need to really sell me on why I should add them, not just on a "Because they're there" policy but with some evidence on how it will improve the game play.

Fresno and Inyo Forest should not connect. There are no roads over the Sierras. Instead, I would recommend connecting Modesto and Yosemite (which is actually further West than Inyo Forest).

Where they connect is of little consequence, nor are where the roads are since this isn't a road map. I can definitely switch Yosemite to the hug the mountains on the west though.

Lone Pine is a tiny highway village that only serves as a Portal to Mt. Whitney. Since that area is shown on the map where the northern half of Death Valley should be, I would drop it and just make Death Valley a taller territory. And yes, if you haven't seen it, Death Valley comes right up to the edge of the Sierras. Its one of the most amazing sights I've ever seen.

I don't want to drop Lone pine because I don't want the Sierra Nevada's to be that short on Territories. I have seen that view actually. In fact we sort of have a joke about that. When we were coming up on Death Valley we woke are friend up who was sleeping in the back so that he could see the view. When he checked it out in totally amazement he said "WOW! ... what a shithole!" Ever since then that's kind of been an inside joke between us.

No Name could be China Lake or China Lake NWC.

I actually rather like the name "No Name"

Being a border town (with Arizona) Needles seems abnormally large here and Palm Springs is out of place. You're also lacking the infamous Salton Sea and the one of a kind Joshua Tree NP. I would suggest rearranging this area as such:

I'm not so sure about that re-arrange. It add's both territories and border. I don't want the desert to be that hard to hold.

Also - definitely need the Californian flag (and bear)

I've been trying to ind a way to squeeze it in. I'd like to find a way to add it with out making things too crowded. We'll see.

The Channel Islands lie closer to the LA/San Diego coast areas...maybe they could connect to San Diego and/or Malibu/South Bay?

If I add them maybe they could connect Santa Barbara to Malibu.

Beverly Hills is actually located south and mostly east of "S.F.V." (San Fernando Valley) -- why not switch their names?

With what?

Also, some minor spelling/capitalization issues:
Redwood, not Red Wood
Yosemite, not yosemite
Big Sur, not Big sur
El Dorado, not El Derado
Santa Cruz, not Sant Cruz

Thank you, all incredibly useful.

the insets look blurry. Quite frankly they look like you just copypasted a part of the map and enlargened it for the insets... I think they are going to need some work.

... uh well I did just copy and paste them. There might be a way to make them look sharper in the program. If not I guess I'll just have to re-do them.

not a big fan of the colour scheme. Particularly, northern california looks kinda dirty.

That's more or less an issue of personal preference.

the title could use some work. It seems a bit too simplistic. Also the inset frames, as well as the brown frame around the map could use some ornamentation. They seem a bit boring now.

I completely Agree.

[natty dread]

... uh well I did just copy and paste them. There might be a way to make them look sharper in the program. If not I guess I'll just have to re-do them.

See that's not good. You can't just enlarge raster graphics. You will lose detail. Pixels are square, and if you enlargen a bitmap an algorithm is used to resample the pixels into a larger grid - now this may work for simple patterns or gradients, but anything even slightly more detailed and you're going to end up with blurriness and artifacts.

Thus, the general rule with scaling bitmap graphics: downwards = ok, upwards = no-no.

I recommend just redoing them. If you start trying to enhance what you have now, chances are you'll end up doing more work for it...

[The Bison King]

... uh well I did just copy and paste them. There might be a way to make them look sharper in the program. If not I guess I'll just have to re-do them.

See that's not good. You can't just enlarge raster graphics. You will lose detail. Pixels are square, and if you enlargen a bitmap an algorithm is used to resample the pixels into a larger grid - now this may work for simple patterns or gradients, but anything even slightly more detailed and you're going to end up with blurriness and artifacts.

Thus, the general rule with scaling bitmap graphics: downwards = ok, upwards = no-no.

I recommend just redoing them. If you start trying to enhance what you have now, chances are you'll end up doing more work for it...

Well... I think If I pull over the inset from the source image it will be large enough. The problem is I scaled it back up from an image I had already shrunk.

[natty dread]

Well... I think If I pull over the inset from the source image it will be large enough. The problem is I scaled it back up from an image I had already shrunk.

Yes, try that. And if that fails you can always rescan your painting with a larger dpi.

[lostatlimbo]

If I am going to add any territories These would be the two. You'll need to really sell me on why I should add them, not just on a "Because they're there" policy but with some evidence on how it will improve the game play.

Its not just because they exist, but because these two places are part of California's identity. People all over the world are familiar with wines from the Napa Valley. The Channel Islands are somewhat less famous, but represent the marine diversity and scenic beauty that the golden state is known for.

If you are reluctant to add territories, you could skip the Islands and just rename Santa Rosa to "Napa Valley" instead.

I don't want to drop Lone pine because I don't want the Sierra Nevada's to be that short on Territories.

That's a fair point. If you are going to leave that territory as is, may I suggest you name it "Mt. Whitney" or "Whitney Portal" instead? Its the tallest peak in the contiguous US and Lone Pine wouldn't exist without it.

Where they connect is of little consequence, nor are where the roads are since this isn't a road map. I can definitely switch Yosemite to the hug the mountains on the west though.

It may not be a road map, but it looks odd to have a giant gap in the Sierra mountains, especially there. If you're trying to represent the state, it just doesn't make sense to me to have passage through the most impassable part of the Sierra range.

If you look at the Europa map you don't see unexplained holes in the Alps. Nor with the Himalayas in Asia.

Modesto <> Yosemite just makes more sense and I don't think it would alter gameplay much.

$.02

[The Bison King]

Click image to enlarge.

Here's a taste of the next version (I'll do the small soon)

I changed a lot of the territory names that were disused. I re-imported the LA inset so that it looks less pixelated. Also thanks for that sunset image I dropped that in there and it actually looks really good.

[The Bison King]

Click image to enlarge.

Click image to enlarge.

I also added a warming filter to the palm tree.

Oh, and I moved Yosemite.

[saxitoxin]

I hate to jump in on the eleventh page and I haven't read the whole thing so forgive me if this was already broached, but, in regards to this comment by someone...

the names that are on this map are not of the period. While a pick axe may seem cliche, it does reflect the period. I do not see anything that reflects the 1800's. If you were to make Tahoe "The Ponderosa" then you would be headed in the right direction.

... could the cities just be turned into the Missions instead?

For example, Mission La Purisima Concepción replaces City of Lompoc, Mission Basilica San Diego de Alcalá replaces City of San Diego, etc.

BTW - this is an Über-Fantastico map!*

( *be better if Saxi's house were an objective but c'est la vie )

[The Bison King]

Those names are a little complicated and would be hard to fit don't you think?

[saxitoxin]

Those names are a little complicated and would be hard to fit don't you think?

just use font-face Courier 3

[Victor Sullivan]

Those names are a little complicated and would be hard to fit don't you think?

just use font-face Courier 3

Lol saxi. Though it is nice to see you in the Foundry. I must say, TBK, I'm honestly still not feelin' it quite yet, and the bad part is I'm not sure what can be done to fix it... I'll let you know as soon as I know.

-Sully

[The Bison King]

Ack!!! somewhere along the line I left off the cities on Monterey and Sacramento. I'll have to add those back into the next version.

[natty dread]

Ok, improvement has been made on the insets, but they're still not quite right. The bonus area borders appear blurry. Also the colouring has some white spots... and the territory borders have some holes in them (SFV) and go over the bounds (Orange).

I don't know if you have the borders drawn on the hand-drawn picture, but if so, then you have a problem. If not, then it's an easier fix, you just need to redraw the borders.

Also, in the inset areas on the main map, the territory borders appear pixelated.

Then, some other issues:

- the font. It's just not working for me. I recommend exploring some other fonts (check out dafont.com) although this is just my personal opinion.

- the background and the playable area need to be more distinguished from each other. You could add some drop shadow on the land area, to raise it from the background. Or you could make the background darker, and slightly less in-focus. Either solution should work, it's up to your personal preference which way you'll go.

[Vlasov]

Picky detail: Napa Valley, not Nappa Valley

[Teflon Kris]

Just a random interjection to say that the background is really cool on this map.



Would it be cool to tilt the map?

Anyway, looking forward to this one.