FreeMan10 wrote:I'd venture that the extra 31 px will make this small map more readable. However, I think it'll be OK at the 600 px size - especially with BoB. It is more crowded, but since I think you'd be crazy to play w/o BoB, I say smaller is fine.
yeti_c wrote:BTW - it's 21px -> Cairns made a typo above...
yeti_c wrote:PS I agree though - it is quite a busy map - and some of the rails really aren't improved with the loss of clarity...
Gimil, at the time this map was started on 21 sep last year, there was no need to gain oversize permission because maps were allowed to go to that limit if they were going to need the extra 21 px width becauiise of their size and continent capacity.
At the time of my being a CA, we went through the exercise of downsizing most maps; most of my maps were downsized to the required 600px, however, this one was not put opn the list because of the largeness of the map and the extra space that is needed for the eye.
Lackattack did make a comment in the downsizing exercise, to the extent that it would be a shame to downsize maps like World 2.1 because they look great and need that extra space.
So to answer your question, i don't beleive i ever gained full permission to do this because at the time the extra 21 px were allowed. Andy may be aware of this map situation, if he is not, then i seek permission now....after the map is finished. I will say, that at this point in time, if i have to re-size this small version, i will be most disappointed.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
cairnswk wrote:Version 30
The title has been completely re-worked posing as a metal boards accross iron work with four rivets.
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... E_V30S.jpg
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s282 ... E_V30L.jpg
So, to recap, these are the size limits we will be enforcing:
Small map: height=600 pixels, width=630 pixels
Large map: height=800 pixels, width=840 pixels (800 pixels recommended)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users