Periodic Table of the Elements Map, UPDATE p17

[wcaclimbing]

Ok...I don't like the background beeing 2 different colors.

Is the second column ( looks like pink ) even listed in the bonuses?

The background isnt 2 different colors. its blue, just light at the top to fading dark in the bottom.


For the Pink, I dont know what happened. I must have accidentally gotten rid of teh words. Ill fix that in the next update

[freezie]

Ok...I don't like the background beeing 2 different colors.

Is the second column ( looks like pink ) even listed in the bonuses?

The background isnt 2 different colors. its blue, just light at the top to fading dark in the bottom.

Exactly. 2 different colors. Blue and lighter blue.

Just like your light red and red are 2 colors.

[wcaclimbing]

Exactly. 2 different colors. Blue and lighter blue.

what should i change about it?

[freezie]

To be completly honest, have a background that would fit the theme.

Not too busy, but something that would stick the theme of chemestry.


Or make it single-colored. But that wouldn't look any better.

[freezie]

Another thing. Specify if diagonals attacks are allowed or not. This map is kinda really confusing for those.

[sfhbballnut]

definatly not, that'd be stupid

[Ruben Cassar]

What's wrong with the foundry lately? Honestly this map has no appeal. It's just a bunch of coloured boxes connected together (once again)!

I think you should let this map be and perhaps try to make a geographical map which is bound to be more interesting.

[freezie]

What's wrong with the foundry lately? Honestly this map has no appeal. It's just a bunch of coloured boxes connected together (once again)!

I think you should let this map be and perhaps try to make a geographical map which is bound to be more interesting.

And because I don't want to have any more4 geo maps, I will go and say they have no appeal and downgrade these mapmakers.

Have you even taken chemestry classes? You should know that the periodic table of elements is that, boxes. And this map is starting, the appeal has yet to come.

Instead, try to make a suggestion to make it better, at least don't post to destroy the map cause you dont like it.

[Jafnhár]

The background is awful and I dislike the black boxes everywhere, you need to make them more in accordance to the background.

Having some borders between the elements not crossable is okay, but you should have some reason it (other than a better gameplay). For instance, nonmetals could not being able to attack metals - or something in that direction. Some creativity is needed.

Don't just divide the elements randomly into groups, the way it is done now is awful. Elements are systematically divided (metalloids, noble gases, actinides are examples). The bonuses could resemble these groups - you cannot simply call them purple, orange, red etc.

Use the empty space for each elements for something other than army circles. The actual name of every element would be nice and even a small picture under the army circle. Nobody wants to play on a map where the only territories are Sg, Fr, Uub, Mn ... you get my point.

Avoid creating fictional elements just to eliminate neutral territories. Really, I'd rather play with twenty neutral territories than to play on a map with the territories Risk and Conquerclub (pff).

Lastly, get a proper graphics program and stop using MS Paint. I admit that experts can do a lot of stuff with paint but you guys are, apparently, not one of them.

[freezie]

The background is awful and I dislike the black boxes everywhere, you need to make them more in accordance to the background.

Having some borders between the elements not crossable is okay, but you should have some reason it (other than a better gameplay). For instance, nonmetals could not being able to attacks metal - or something in that direction. Some creativity is needed.

Don't just divide the elements randomly into groups, the way it is done now is awful. Elements are systematically divided (metalloids, noble gases, actinides are examples). The bonuses could resemble these groups - you cannot simply call them purple, orange, red etc.

Use the empty space for each elements for something other than army circles. The actual name of every element would be nice and even a small picture under the army circle. Nobody wants to play on a map where the only territories are Sg, Fr, Uub, Mn ... you get my point.

Avoid creating fictional elements just to eliminate neutral territories. Really, I'd rather play with twenty neutral territories than to play on a map with the territories Risk and Conquerclub (pff).

Lastly, get a proper graphics program and stop using MS Paint. I admit that experts can do a lot of stuff with paint but you guys are, apparently, not one of them.

Agreed. Very thought of.

Instead...I prefer having 2 fictional elements rather than playing with neutrals. Not like every of the elements in the table actually exist. Some are human maded..

[Ruben Cassar]

What's wrong with the foundry lately? Honestly this map has no appeal. It's just a bunch of coloured boxes connected together (once again)!

I think you should let this map be and perhaps try to make a geographical map which is bound to be more interesting.

And because I don't want to have any more4 geo maps, I will go and say they have no appeal and downgrade these mapmakers.

Have you even taken chemestry classes? You should know that the periodic table of elements is that, boxes. And this map is starting, the appeal has yet to come.

Instead, try to make a suggestion to make it better, at least don't post to destroy the map cause you dont like it.

Exactly. The periodic table is made of boxes and it's not good for making a decent interesting CC map. I am not offending the map maker or anything, I just think that this map has no appeal, especially when compared to some of the top notch maps that the foundry has produced lately. I have nothing constructive to say about it because I don't think it has any potential...

[ParadiceCity9]

is pink a bonus?

[wcaclimbing]

Is Pink a bonus??

Yes, pink is a bonus. I somehow messed up the image and deleted the text. im gonna fix it soon.

The background is awful and I dislike the black boxes everywhere, you need to make them more in accordance to the background.

What colors should they be instead?

Having some borders between the elements not crossable is okay, but you should have some reason it (other than a better gameplay). For instance, nonmetals could not being able to attacks metal - or something in that direction. Some creativity is needed.

Mostly, the way i tried it (which didnt work to well) was to make less borders on the left (those are most reactive) and most borders on teh right (becuase they are least reactive). im gonna try to re-do a few borders to emphasize this.

Don't just divide the elements randomly into groups, the way it is done now is awful. Elements are systematically divided (metalloids, noble gases, actinides are examples). The bonuses could resemble these groups - you cannot simply call them purple, orange, red etc.

I'm gonna give them their correct names. I was just using the colors to get the bonuses set how they should be.

Use the empty space for each elements for something other than army circles. The actual name of every element would be nice and even a small picture under the army circle. Nobody wants to play on a map where the only territories are Sg, Fr, Uub, Mn ... you get my point.

We can't fit each element name into the boxes. some of the names are way too long (Mendellevium, Ununoctium, etc.)

The way the names will work in the code will be something like "Fr (87 Francium). so you can use either the symbol, the number, or the name.

And pictures in each box wouldnt work, either. that would be 120 pictures and it would take way too long to do, and wouldn't look good.

Avoid creating fictional elements just to eliminate neutral territories. Really, I'd rather play with twenty neutral territories than to play on a map with the territories Risk and Conquerclub (pff).

We had a long discussion about this in a previous thread, and the general consensus was to include the two extra territories, even if they arent realistic. eliminating the neutral territories was much more popular.

Lastly, get a proper graphics program and stop using MS Paint. I admit that experts can do a lot of stuff with paint but you guys are, apparently, not one of them.

Im using Corel Painter Essentials 2, not MS paint.
Is that a problem?

---------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your imput, and I will be including your suggestions (along with others in this thread) in my next update for this map.

---------------------------------------------------

[skillzthatkillz]

I think u should reverse the colors. make passable lines white and impassable lines black. It's easier to see.

[Jafnhár]

Im using Corel Painter Essentials 2, not MS paint.
Is that a problem?

Forgive me for thinking you were using Paint, but the map looks exactly like it was done in that particular program. That being said, why bother using good programs when you don't know how to use them?

What colors should they be instead?

I don't have to suggest what colour you use in your background to criticize the current one, especially since about every other background would be better than the current one. However, here's one suggestion: you could use a colourfied picture of a laboratory for the background.

[If I were to paint pictures on the map] that would be 120 pictures and it would take way too long to do

Are you serious? Do you realize how much work it usually takes to create a map? Actually, with the map-making skills you have showed so far I doubt it would look good. The fact that it would take too long time is, however, the worst reason a cartographer can possibly use under any circumstances.

We had a long discussion about this in a previous thread, and the general consensus was to include the two extra territories, even if they arent realistic. eliminating the neutral territories was much more popular.

The map looks currently like a very short amount of time has been used to paint it. Therefore, I doubt that you have had a long discussion about any part of the map. However, if you want to make fictional territories, for god's sake name them something else than "conquerclub" and "risk". Even "riskorium" would be better.

We can't fit each element name into the boxes. some of the names are way too long (Mendellevium, Ununoctium, etc.)

You, as a cartographer, are supposed to find some clever way to fit them in or distinguish them in some other way. When I conquer gold, I want to know that I conquered gold, not just some aq. I don't care if it is written when I conquer the country, it has to be on the map. If that is in now way possible, this map will - simply enough - be a failure.

[sfhbballnut]

there's no reason to go after the cartographer, comment on what could be improved and leave his skills to be seen

Why does aevert territory need to have a name? there are maps the simply have A1, A2, A3, ...etc, each territory in this is unique, and the continents will all have names shortly

[Jafnhár]

there's no reason to go after the cartographer, comment on what could be improved and leave his skills to be seen

I barely want to dignify this comment with a response, I'm trying to help you two by helpful comments but this is the response I get from you; That I'm attacking you! Perhaps I should just leave this project alone.

Why does [every] territory need to have a name?

[sfhbballnut]

you know what i meant, but i'll spell it out for you, why do we have to have names, full words in each territory, or any for that matter? The abbriviations have worked before (chinese checkers, king of mountains).

We appreciate the input, you seem to know what you're doing, but there is no reason to go after him about his skills as an image maker

and we've been discussing this for months, and it took almost two weeks to get the image together

[wcaclimbing]

If I tried to add every name into the map, it could only be done with the smallest size font that is still legible, like this:

words that small would be more of a mess and would be very hard to read (but thats just in my opinion. If you think words that small would work, please tell me otherwise.)

I will try different backgrounds, and I will post the best one i find.

[Jafnhár]

you know what i meant, but i'll spell it out for you, why do we have to have names, full words in each territory, or any for that matter? The abbriviations have worked before (chinese checkers, king of mountains).

We appreciate the input, you seem to know what you're doing, but there is no reason to go after him about his skills as an image maker

and we've been discussing this for months, and it took almost two weeks to get the image together

No, I did not know what you meant. There are no abbreviations on the maps you mentioned, the territories there have no real names (unlike this map). Try out having the names, abbreviate the long ones and see how it looks. The map making business is supposed to take long time.

I have not attacked the other map-maker personally, only related to this map. Are you perhaps telling me that the skills of the map-maker are not related to his map?

I have said all my thoughts about this current version and, honestly, I don't expect it ever to be finished unless with very radical changes.

What's wrong with the foundry lately? Honestly this map has no appeal. It's just a bunch of coloured boxes connected together (once again)!

I think you should let this map be and perhaps try to make a geographical map which is bound to be more interesting.

[Jonny_Bacardi]

well, i like the map, its big, roomy, will be great for battles and such, lots of fun to play on

Keep goin you two, don't let em tell you that your map sucks

[jnd94]

one comment - its pretty hard to see the borders in the lime green/yellow area of the table because its white. Maybe you can change the colors so that there is no confusion?

[wcaclimbing]

one comment - its pretty hard to see the borders in the lime green/yellow area of the table because its white. Maybe you can change the colors so that there is no confusion?

any suggestions for borders? We have been trying, but we cant come up with any decent border design that will work with the entire map.

[jnd94]

one comment - its pretty hard to see the borders in the lime green/yellow area of the table because its white. Maybe you can change the colors so that there is no confusion?

any suggestions for borders? We have been trying, but we cant come up with any decent border design that will work with the entire map.

maybe sumthing to do with elements? I know that there isnt much space for extravagant borders, but I was thinking maybe just a different color line or somthing.

[freezie]

Green bubbles? Maybe a liquid, whatever substance it is, like if some students spilled some on the map?