Ruben Cassar wrote:Sorry but I do not agree with your reasoning. If there was a problem with the visuals of older maps it does not mean that this has to be replicated in this one right?
The problem is not about using every pixel. Just look at the images you posted. Classic Art or Mongol Empire for example while not being much larger than your small version (but they are larger which makes a difference) use simpler graphics which make reading the map easier as they are clearer and cleaner. You will notice this even more once you add army numbers.
I really don't see what you mean here Ruben. The new Midgard map is easily the easiest to read for me. It is the one with the least amount of contrast ans the colors are much easier on the eyes. The font is much easier to read than most of the other maps her as well. Ans the "88" are not hard to read. I already posted them and the foundry made suggestions on moving them to make sure they are readable.
Ruben Cassar wrote:What is the problem with increasing the size of the map? It's not a big deal so why are you so reluctant to do this change? I always use the small size for every map and that works fine. Should I have to switch to and fro setting whenever I play this map?
Here is the problem. You are the only one that really seems to want an increase in size. And the big deal is that I will need to redraw EVERY pixel of this map. The borders, the mountains, the textures, the dragons, the bridges, the lakes, everything. If I don't it will get fuzzy and blurry. I don't see the reason to redraw and entire map (that is seen to be fine by almost everyone) for one person who wants it bigger.I could make the small map larger and keep the large where it is but then they will be too close and then that might not be acceptable from a foundry map process.
Right now the
large is 700 x 400
small is 560 x 320
so to keep with the map making rules, the large map must be 9% greater than the small map (but should try to be at leat 33%)
Right now the large is 25% larger
If i increase the small size to 630 x 360 the large is then 11% bigger than the small and the small is bigger itself with the need to redo the large map.
Ruben Cassar wrote:I don't see the point of asking people to come over here and comment when their views are not considered.
Please don't feel that I am ignoring yor views. There is a big difference between not considering and not implementing. I have heard your request, I have given examples of why it is not needed (compared to other maps and looking at Midgard itself) and I feel that the maps stands well.
There have been other suggestions to change other things during the jury session. I have not implemented them all because all fo them do not make the map better. All options are weighed against the benefits and then the ones that really need to be done are. I updated the bridges, the lake by topaz was completely redone, some of the names were adjusted and the 88 were adjusted as well.