Conquer Club

Map is on the last page.

Territories: 48

An interesting point of this map is that I have included Alaska with the USA. It will make the US harder to take.
To do:
Compass
Better mountain and river graphics somehow.

Help list:
* I know the labels are crowded in Central America and the Carribean. Please help me with any ideas to clear that up.

Great map idea. Does need some work but keep going.

Canada should be 6 or 7
USA should be 6 not 8
Central America should be 4
Pink should be called Rio Negro
For bonuses you should look at points of entry more than anything

I like the Alaska idea but am not to keen on the airport idea. I dont know if thats because its a little hard to grasp or because it seems weird. Maybe any airport can attack any other airport.

Good start,

I would firstly ditch the Airport idea. It seems to me as just a contrived way to have more territory connections.

It's a bit nonsensical, as IRL the aeroplanes could just attack anywhere.

I would also make the USA section bigger, and have it as a sort of Asia equivalent.

There's some good potential here.

I'm with Spockers on the airports. I'd much prefer sea routes over airports.

It's just me, but I'd really like to see this go in the direction of the New World. It would tie in well with having sea routes over airports as well.

Apart from that, you'll need to do something about the number of territories, 43 is a bad number. The visuals have a long way to go, but it seems that's already on you list of things to do. I'd start with some different textures for land and sea unless you have a specific reason for not doing so.

I look forward to seeing how this one progresses.

i agree forget aeroplanes and make a long connection from nuuk to south america, sorted

Okay, I will get rid of the airports.

Keyogi - Thanks for the positive feedback. You're saying 43 is a bad number because it's a prime number? How about 48 then? It's divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6.

The reason the land and sea is the same texture is because I was going for a map drawn on parchment feel. But I think I'll take your advice and change that.

Spockers - Will do.

KEYOGI wrote:There's some good potential here.

I'm with Spockers on the airports. I'd much prefer sea routes over airports.

I rather liked the airport idea because it's a very north south map. Air travel enables some links between the hemispheres.

If you go with sea routes instead of airports then the map becomes historical - a world before airplanes.

This may have implications on territory names and such.

Personally I'd go with sea routes and airports, but I'd reduce the number of airports.

I also agree with making North America larger as this will also increase number of territories you can add here. North America should be more difficult to hold/powerful than South America.

KEYOGI wrote:There's some good potential here.

I'm with Spockers on the airports. I'd much prefer sea routes over airports.

It's just me, but I'd really like to see this go in the direction of the New World. It would tie in well with having sea routes over airports as well.

Apart from that, you'll need to do something about the number of territories, 43 is a bad number. The visuals have a long way to go, but it seems that's already on you list of things to do. I'd start with some different textures for land and sea unless you have a specific reason for not doing so.

I look forward to seeing how this one progresses.

What about the Naval Bases in the Philippines map? What about the helipads in the King of the Mountains map?

Gilligan wrote:What about the Naval Bases in the Philippines map? What about the helipads in the King of the Mountains map?

What about them? Make your point.

Gilligan wrote:

KEYOGI wrote:There's some good potential here.

I'm with Spockers on the airports. I'd much prefer sea routes over airports.

It's just me, but I'd really like to see this go in the direction of the New World. It would tie in well with having sea routes over airports as well.

Apart from that, you'll need to do something about the number of territories, 43 is a bad number. The visuals have a long way to go, but it seems that's already on you list of things to do. I'd start with some different textures for land and sea unless you have a specific reason for not doing so.

I look forward to seeing how this one progresses.

What about the Naval Bases in the Philippines map? What about the helipads in the King of the Mountains map?

That's not how my airports worked before. Mine were set so that a territory with an airport could attack a territory next to an adjacent territory. The ones you mentioned are good, mine was confusiong.

Map updated, BTW.

why have you made greenland so small??

neoni wrote:why have you made greenland so small??

How is that any smaller than it usually is? Take a look at The Arctic Map and the North America Map. It actually seems to be bigger. However, I can make it bigger if wanted.

I don't like the idea of both the ports and the conenction lines.

How does one travel along the connection line if not by boat?

It makes no sense to have both and is confusing.

You should move the seaport from Mexico to Panama.

You should make it so that you can travel from any Pacific seaport to any other Pacific seaport, and from any Atlantic seaport to any other Atlantic seaport, but not from a Pacific seaport to an Atlantic seaport or vice-versa, with the exceptions being Panama and Argentina (which are both considered to be both Pacific AND Atlantic seaports simultaneously).

You should include a seaport in or near New England / New York to represent New York Harbor, the sub base in Groton CT, Newport News in Virginia and Boston Harbor.

You should also make the map look nicer.

Spockers wrote:I don't like the idea of both the ports and the conenction lines.

I have to agree here. Just pick one type and stick with that. My preference would be to keep the sea routes and lose the ports. I think it's a lot easier to quickly identify what territories can attack each other.

When can we expect a visual update?

CreepyUncleAndy wrote:
You should make it so that you can travel from any Pacific seaport to any other Pacific seaport, and from any Atlantic seaport to any other Atlantic seaport, but not from a Pacific seaport to an Atlantic seaport or vice-versa, with the exceptions being Panama and Argentina (which are both considered to be both Pacific AND Atlantic seaports simultaneously).

That is just far too confusing

KEYOGI wrote:

Spockers wrote:I don't like the idea of both the ports and the conenction lines.

I have to agree here. Just pick one type and stick with that. My preference would be to keep the sea routes and lose the ports. I think it's a lot easier to quickly identify what territories can attack each other.

When can we expect a visual update?

Right about...now. I changed some textures, dumped the ports, and added a key.

Can you post your updates in the thread as you go. It makes it a lot easier to follow its progression.

I'm not a fan of the new sea texture and there's still quite a lot of work to do on the visuals before you get this up to standard.

Alrighty. What do you think about this gradient then?

I like how it is coming along.
Your great lakes look a little odd. Try touching them up?

Cheers
Gozar

Gozar wrote:Try touching them up?

Goodness!

Also, mountains and rivers should be impassable, not unpassable.

I would get rid of at least one or two paths to the northern islands. If it's only going to be worth 2, then it should be easier to defend.

Also, US should be harder to defend from central america. - Perhaps split 'southwest states' into two?... or extent gulf states so it borders with Sierra Madre as well?

I think the link between Hawaii and Galapagos is unnecessary.



In regards to your poll:

Whilte lables are better, but I like neither texture, so i did not vote.

Your dark texture is too dark, but i like it slightly better than the other one.

Actually, I don't know how you even get away with calling them textures. There needs to be something better there.

Spockers wrote:I would get rid of at least one or two paths to the northern islands. If it's only going to be worth 2, then it should be easier to defend.

Also, US should be harder to defend from central america. - Perhaps split 'southwest states' into two?... or extent gulf states so it borders with Sierra Madre as well?

I think the link between Hawaii and Galapagos is unnecessary.

In regards to your poll:

Whilte lables are better, but I like neither texture, so i did not vote.

Your dark texture is too dark, but i like it slightly better than the other one.

Actually, I don't know how you even get away with calling them textures. There needs to be something better there.

I'll get rid of the Victoria-Ellesmere path then. And Hawaii-Galapagos as well it seems.

Yeah. The second one really is just a gradient. I'll see what I can come up with today.

CreepyUncleAndy wrote:Also, mountains and rivers should be impassable, not unpassable.

Oops. Thanks. Will change.

A few early observations.
1. All of your water internal to the land - lakes, rivers, etc. - look badly pixelated.
2. You have some problems with the names and army shadows overlapping or not fitting. (For the record, I prefer having the army shadow in the territory and the name outside, if necessary... see Gulf States for how not doing this causes problems.)
3. The borders in Central America are unclear, at best.