Sorry, Bruce, but you're simply not paying attention. When a map is revamped, it is purely a graphical revamp. Gameplay isn't changed one iota. And as far as changing names, does it really make that much of a difference? If there's a more geographically appropriate name that could be used, shouldn't some attempt be made to use it?
Bruceswar wrote:Only good revamp I can remember was the France Revamp.
British Isles - Nope
Classic - Nope - Both times
France - Good and needed
Brazil - Not looking good..
Germany - Bad Bad Bad
And you're not only cherry-picking revamp examples, you're wrong on a couple of them. Classic was not a revamp, in the official sense that the word is used. And France has never been revamped, it's a standalone map so I have no idea what you're talking about.
Plus to say that RJ's Brazil revamp is not head-and-shoulders above the current map... well, I suppose everyone can have an opinion, but that one doesn't make any sense to me.
And you're omitting the Indochina, Circus Maximus, and Middle East revamps, all of which substantially improved the graphics of those maps.
One final point: I respect your opinion, and I'm glad that you've come in here to speak your mind, but for you to say:
Bruceswar wrote:Maps are supposed to be original ideas, not taking someone elses idea and trying to make it better.
is disparaging and pretty damn disingenuous. An insane amount of work goes into these revamps, and people are putting in the hours (unpaid) for the betterment of the site. Many of CC's older maps are simply not as good-looking as the newer ones, and while old maps may have a nostalgia factor for some older players, it's better for the site to have its flagship geographical maps look halfway attractive.