Moderator: Cartographers
oaktown wrote:The trick will be writing all of this up in a way that is clear to the lowest common denomiator CC user. If you go with the symbols over the lines you will have one symbol for the shipping lanes, one for the ports, and I'm guessing a different symbol for the canal (since the canal is part of the shipping bonus and the ports are not). Your legend will have to explain who can attack what as well as how the shipping lane bonus works - this could be a bit wordy.
lgoasklucyl wrote:The words of the shipping lane could be the same color as the port symbols, and it could just be:
"Each (port symbol) can attack its respective color lane; and each (shipping lane symbol) can attack ports of the same color."
Um, your oceans are in the wrong place.
I like the basic idea of the post symbols - now that the attack dots are gone I see that it'll be important to make the port symbols and sea routes stand out to make it impossible to miss them. The wheels with the light strokes get lost over the sea for me. Dark stroke will be necessary - the wheel in the legend is the best in my opinion.
You are aware that the sea routes to the islands are gone?
There are some little spacing points that I see - Orange Walk and The Cayes look bunched; the "Atlantic Sea Route looks like it is more a part of the mini map than the main map; and I like how the wheel on the south coast of Canal seems to be more on land than on sea.
The map is coming along nicely, Igo... glad to see you're back at it!
Compass is washed out. It looks like you found that image on google, then pasted it onto this map, then desaturated (or used a darker layer blend) to remove the background. It still doesn't fit with the map
Would you consider droping the helms all together, and just adding sea routes, like you had it earlier in the previous versions? Or in the Italy map? I just think the Pacific and Atlantic Sea Routes in the middle of the ocean are a bit confusing. I've added an alternate wheel just to show you a different style. I added a little shadow on the ground to make it "pop" more.
Consider using a black outline/stroke on your lakes. It may help. (not sure)
Is there a way to keep your legend seperated from the rest of the map, like maybe in a subset box or some type of border around it? I think the map would look a bit better if that were cleaned up a bit. See my example. Not saying this is the greatest, but it cleans up that area more.
PSD included, feel free to use or trash this. Good Luck.
Photoshop CS3 File Link Below
http://www.sendspace.com/file/u0jnv3
lgoasklucyl wrote:OakWould you consider droping the helms all together, and just adding sea routes, like you had it earlier in the previous versions? Or in the Italy map? I just think the Pacific and Atlantic Sea Routes in the middle of the ocean are a bit confusing. I've added an alternate wheel just to show you a different style. I added a little shadow on the ground to make it "pop" more.
-I/quite a few people like the additional attack routes as a new gameplay feature- makes it interest past a straightforward map and avoids a lot of bunching up the center like on Indochina (nowhere near as much, but it could end up similar).
anyone who starts in nicaragua is at an obvious disadvantage: as well as being stuck in the middle of the map, it isn't next to a tiny bonus. we can reduce this disadvantage by merging 4 of nicaragua's regions into 2 (merge RAAN with RAAS and jinotega with chinandega, perhaps?).
i also think there would be fewer starting issues if the 2-region el salvador bonus became a 3-region one by adding santa ana in western el salvador (the san salvador troop count can be moved sotuh-east, with the name can going in the sea).
to restore the starting count of 32 regions, an extra one in guatemala reduces the existing benefit of staring in the north (in 4-player singles, it's always nice to start at one end of a linear map, especially next to two easy bonuses).
to help nicaragua even more (after being reduced to 5 regions), maybe the helm at rio san juan can disappear, sheltering it more?
Incandenza wrote:While adding a terit to el salvador isn't a bad idea, I tend to think that nicaragua can stay the way it is... given the sea lanes, this'll be a pretty easy map to move around in, and it's not like someone's going to really "start" in nicaragua (and even if they did, they have quite a few options for proceeding). In a 1v1, sure, if someone predominantly drops nic and their opponent ends up strong in the small bonuses, that sucks, but that's kinda life when you're talking 1v1s on small maps. And the map is small enough already.
The thing that works for me now is that nic is something of a transitional area, a bonus that probably won't be held all that often, but nevertheless serves as the overland attack route from north to south.
lgoasklucyl wrote:Way to fast-post my extra long post breaking his apart
Incandenza wrote:The hippo speaks wisdom, even though the way he used "playful" in the last paragraph has always felt like nails on a chalkboard to me...
Incandenza wrote:btw, you should update your first post, as there are now 34 terits, not 32.
whew, a lot has happened since I last checked in. There seems to be concerns that Niacaragua is at a disadvantage because of 1) its size and 2) lack of proximity to a small bonus.
It seems like a simpler remedy would be to just make Costa Rica a three territory +2 region. Merging Guanacaste and San Jose would mean it has three territories, two of which are northern borders and two of which are southern borders.
We wouldn't have to eliminate a territory, because there'd be 33 territories (the sea routes no longer have to start neutral) which means the following # of starting positions:
- 1v1: 11 each, 11 neutrals
- 3 player: 11 each, 0 neutrals
- 4 player: 8 each, 1 neutrals
- 5 player: 6 each, 3 neutrals
- 6 player: 5 each, 3 neutrals
- 7 player: screw em... nobody should start seven player games on a small map.
- 8 player: see above.
I think it might be worthwhile to code El Salvador as starting positions. Splitting up El Salvador between the two players means 31 starting territories, so there would still be 11 territories for each to start the game. Splitting up additional regions - the three territory regions - just means fewer neutrals in a 1v1, which in turn means a bigger drop for the first player, which is what we're trying to avoid.
RjBeals' mini map is worthy of closer inspection: note the playful font he's used for the regions, which really works with the colors you have going on so far, lgoask. And the border makes it really sharp - sharpen the little map up and you can get away with making it smaller, as he has. As for his flowers...
Incandenza wrote:The hippo speaks wisdom, even though the way he used "playful" in the last paragraph has always felt like nails on a chalkboard to me...
lgoasklucyl wrote:leprepotamus wrote:It seems like a simpler remedy would be to just make Costa Rica a three territory +2 region. Merging Guanacaste and San Jose would mean it has three territories, two of which are northern borders and two of which are southern borders.
With your suggestion, however, wouldn't Costa Rica still have three border territs? I don't know the math, but would that make it a +2 or +3?
lgoasklucyl wrote:-I can't even begin to tell you how excited I am to have this territ count. A map just small enough to NOT give the 1st play; 12 territ advantage is something I can look forward to greatly. I hate having to go second in a 12 or 13 starting territ map.
oaktown wrote:A ship's wheel behind each of the sea routes would tie them together. As it is, I'm afraid users will think that the wheels can attack each other, as they can on other CC maps - making the Sea Route symbols more prominent might help alleviate this. Better yet, make the sea route symbol slightly different, and slip it behind the words "Sea Route" in the legend. And a period after sea route.
Plenty of room to bring the compass down - it's crowding the map title.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users