Conquer Club

North America 2.0 [Quenched]

Care to peruse completed maps? Take a stroll through the Atlas.

Moderator: Cartographers

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Postby reverend_kyle on Thu Aug 31, 2006 3:56 am

AK_iceman wrote:
Boxcutta wrote:I haven't read the thread, but S. Greenland and Labrador should be linked IMO.

But if you did that then 4 of the 5 territories in that continent would be borders. It would be better to link it to Nunavik, which is already a border.

I actually like it the way it is tho, looks great Dublin. :D


great point, I second.
DANCING MUSTARD FOR POOP IN '08!
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby reverend_kyle on Thu Aug 31, 2006 3:57 am

I have another question.. and i"m sure its too late.. but Could we at least make the general shape of north america more to scale.. that bugs me everytime I look at it.
DANCING MUSTARD FOR POOP IN '08!
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby DublinDoogey on Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:56 am

reverend_kyle wrote:I have another question.. and i"m sure its too late.. but Could we at least make the general shape of north america more to scale.. that bugs me everytime I look at it.


I'm not really sure what you're saying, this is to scale, this is what North America looks like. My very first map wasn't to scale, it was one of the maps where the poles are stretched out, but this is a normal map, I can't remember what the different ones are called, maybe a mercater?
User avatar
Private DublinDoogey
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:03 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby reverend_kyle on Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:40 pm

DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I have another question.. and i"m sure its too late.. but Could we at least make the general shape of north america more to scale.. that bugs me everytime I look at it.


I'm not really sure what you're saying, this is to scale, this is what North America looks like. My very first map wasn't to scale, it was one of the maps where the poles are stretched out, but this is a normal map, I can't remember what the different ones are called, maybe a mercater?


Greenland seemed to small, but looking at other maps you're right.
DANCING MUSTARD FOR POOP IN '08!
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby DublinDoogey on Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:46 pm

reverend_kyle wrote:
DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I have another question.. and i"m sure its too late.. but Could we at least make the general shape of north america more to scale.. that bugs me everytime I look at it.


I'm not really sure what you're saying, this is to scale, this is what North America looks like. My very first map wasn't to scale, it was one of the maps where the poles are stretched out, but this is a normal map, I can't remember what the different ones are called, maybe a mercater?


Greenland seemed to small, but looking at other maps you're right.


ok :)
User avatar
Private DublinDoogey
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:03 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby reverend_kyle on Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:50 am

DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:
DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I have another question.. and i"m sure its too late.. but Could we at least make the general shape of north america more to scale.. that bugs me everytime I look at it.


I'm not really sure what you're saying, this is to scale, this is what North America looks like. My very first map wasn't to scale, it was one of the maps where the poles are stretched out, but this is a normal map, I can't remember what the different ones are called, maybe a mercater?


Greenland seemed to small, but looking at other maps you're right.


ok :)


You left off the islands that are around greenland and it threw me off.. but I think tis better w/o them.
DANCING MUSTARD FOR POOP IN '08!
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby DublinDoogey on Fri Sep 01, 2006 3:13 am

reverend_kyle wrote:
DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:
DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I have another question.. and i"m sure its too late.. but Could we at least make the general shape of north america more to scale.. that bugs me everytime I look at it.


I'm not really sure what you're saying, this is to scale, this is what North America looks like. My very first map wasn't to scale, it was one of the maps where the poles are stretched out, but this is a normal map, I can't remember what the different ones are called, maybe a mercater?


Greenland seemed to small, but looking at other maps you're right.


ok :)


You left off the islands that are around greenland and it threw me off.. but I think tis better w/o them.


yup, thanks too. it was too messy lookin with them, and it allowed me to move greenland closer to canada to keep my map from being too tall. i guess in that respect, the scale is a little bit off.
User avatar
Private DublinDoogey
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:03 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby reverend_kyle on Fri Sep 01, 2006 3:31 am

DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:
DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:
DublinDoogey wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I have another question.. and i"m sure its too late.. but Could we at least make the general shape of north america more to scale.. that bugs me everytime I look at it.


I'm not really sure what you're saying, this is to scale, this is what North America looks like. My very first map wasn't to scale, it was one of the maps where the poles are stretched out, but this is a normal map, I can't remember what the different ones are called, maybe a mercater?


Greenland seemed to small, but looking at other maps you're right.


ok :)


You left off the islands that are around greenland and it threw me off.. but I think tis better w/o them.


yup, thanks too. it was too messy lookin with them, and it allowed me to move greenland closer to canada to keep my map from being too tall. i guess in that respect, the scale is a little bit off.


all necessary too. How long til thsi suckers quenched.
DANCING MUSTARD FOR POOP IN '08!
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby happysadfun on Fri Sep 01, 2006 8:30 am

the mountains are a tad hard to see. and the actual name for the region you call ottawa is the golden hoseshoe. it's a little bigger, but would still work.
ImageChildren, this is what happens to hockey players, druggies, and Hillary Clinton.

Rope. Tree. Hillary. Some assembly required.
User avatar
Cadet happysadfun
 
Posts: 1251
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:06 pm
Location: Haundin at DotSco, Being Sad that Mark Green Lost in Suburban Wisconsin

Postby Bad Speler on Fri Sep 01, 2006 8:55 am

happysadfun wrote:the mountains are a tad hard to see. and the actual name for the region you call ottawa is the golden hoseshoe. it's a little bigger, but would still work.


I think it's alright for it to stay Ottawa. Even I didnt know that's what the region is called, and I'm from Ottawa!
Highest Score: 2532
Highest Position: 69 (a long time ago)
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Bad Speler
 
Posts: 1027
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: North America 2.0 [Final Forge]

Postby rayjret on Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:43 am

DublinDoogey wrote:Here's the latest version:

Image

I believe that it *might* be ready, and then I'll begin work on the xml.

From version one, i've added non-crossable boundries using the plethora of mountains and rivers available in North America. My goal with these is to create bonus areas that are obtainable, but a challenge to do so, in the middle of the map. Basically, becuase it's a larger map than what we've seen, it will be inevitable that some of the bonus areas are extremely difficult to hold.

I've also checked spelling, but it's possible that some mistakes have slipped through.

Anyway, lets discuss borders, bonuses and anything else!


That map looks cool. Along It makes it a challange to conquer all territorys its find to me.
Cadet rayjret
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 8:21 pm

Postby cramill on Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:45 am

DublinDoogey wrote:Image
...
As for my opinion, I think it is ready :)

No, this is the latest version.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class cramill
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 8:13 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Postby happysadfun on Fri Sep 01, 2006 6:04 pm

Nfld could be separate from Labrador and be connected to Nova Scotia... and S greenland to Nunavik...
ImageChildren, this is what happens to hockey players, druggies, and Hillary Clinton.

Rope. Tree. Hillary. Some assembly required.
User avatar
Cadet happysadfun
 
Posts: 1251
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:06 pm
Location: Haundin at DotSco, Being Sad that Mark Green Lost in Suburban Wisconsin

Postby gavin_sidhu on Fri Sep 01, 2006 9:54 pm

The circle in Mexico City really dominates that country. Maybe you could do something about it, because it is really hard to tell its borders.
Highest Score: 1843 Ranking (Australians): 3
User avatar
Lieutenant gavin_sidhu
 
Posts: 1428
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 6:16 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby Marvaddin on Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:51 am

Hard to tell its borders?? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
That was a good joke, gavin :lol:
Image
User avatar
Major Marvaddin
 
Posts: 2545
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Postby DublinDoogey on Sat Sep 02, 2006 5:42 pm

Large with numbers (was already given the thumbs up a few pages back):
Image

Small with numbers:

Image
User avatar
Private DublinDoogey
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:03 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby tomatoman25 on Sat Sep 02, 2006 7:35 pm

looks awesome to me! :) lets play!
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class tomatoman25
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:43 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby nascarfan38124 on Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:52 pm

on the small i think kansas looks horrible sepertated like that maybe you can move missouri and its army shadow up more and moves kansas and its army shadow alittle left and let it run into colorado and missouri a little more but otherwise i cant wait to play it
User avatar
Lieutenant nascarfan38124
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:20 pm
Location: SoCal

Postby gavin_sidhu on Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:12 pm

The small one looks terriblly crowded and confusing. Lucky im going to play with the large one. Can u change the connecting lines to anything other than your current black lines?
Highest Score: 1843 Ranking (Australians): 3
User avatar
Lieutenant gavin_sidhu
 
Posts: 1428
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 6:16 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby DublinDoogey on Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:12 pm

I could move missouri up, but then it'd be level with Nebraska.

I've tried tweaking it, i might be able to figure something out though, i'm gonna try a bit more
User avatar
Private DublinDoogey
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:03 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby AndyDufresne on Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:27 pm

Perhaps if you flip flop Missouri's name and shadow. Maybe that will allow enough space for Kansas on the small map.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Postby nascarfan38124 on Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:56 pm

i like what andy said better because then you can let missouri run into the river alittle then you can put kansas's army shadow maybe a little higher or lower then the boarder and you can make that run into the river a little and then you can put kansas in the opposite corner

edit: kind of how you have it set up in the large :wink:
User avatar
Lieutenant nascarfan38124
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:20 pm
Location: SoCal

Postby DublinDoogey on Sun Sep 03, 2006 5:32 pm

I changed Missouri to Illinois, because Illinois is shorter... I also changed the XML accordingly, however...

Error: Country Illinios appears in continent Central USA but does not have its own country entry

Error: Country Wisconsin has border Illinios that does not have its own country entry

Warning: Country Illinois does not appear in any continent

Warning: No other countries border on Illinois (it cannot be attacked)

Warning: Illinois has Wisconsin as a border, but not vice versa

Warning: Illinois has Michigan as a border, but not vice versa

Error: Country Michigan has border Illinios that does not have its own country entry

Summary: 4 warnings and 3 errors detected


then, from my xml...
<country>
<name>Illinois</name>
- <borders>
<border>Wisconsin</border>
<border>Michigan</border>
</borders>
- <coordinates>
<smallx> <smallx>322</smallx>
<smally>278</smally>

</smallx>
<smally></smally>
<largex> <largex>384</largex>
<largey>328</largey>
</largex>
<largey></largey>
</coordinates>
</country>


anybody see why it has errors?

As far as wisconsin and michigan go, they both have illinois also (ie, it can be attacked) and it is listed as a component in Central USA.

All I did was replace Missouri in the xml with Illinois. before there weren't any errors, now there are

new small image
Image
User avatar
Private DublinDoogey
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:03 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby tomatoman25 on Sun Sep 03, 2006 7:32 pm

be sure to change it on the big map as well
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class tomatoman25
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:43 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Postby nascarfan38124 on Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:10 pm

sorry i cant help you with the xml but maybe you can pm some one like jota

the change looks good

keep up the good work :wink:
User avatar
Lieutenant nascarfan38124
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:20 pm
Location: SoCal

PreviousNext

Return to The Atlas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users