Moderator: Cartographers
Scott-Land wrote:Orange I kept at 2. Midway is already a defending territory to gain access to the north. Loop is another important territory for access in all directions. If a player held both of those territories, they would only need 1 more for a 3 bonus-- the territories in itself are rewarding enough imo without gaining an extra army.
Tisha wrote:I think I'd drop Midway down to 6.
iancanton wrote:Scott-Land wrote:Orange I kept at 2. Midway is already a defending territory to gain access to the north. Loop is another important territory for access in all directions. If a player held both of those territories, they would only need 1 more for a 3 bonus-- the territories in itself are rewarding enough imo without gaining an extra army.
u've convinced me here!Tisha wrote:I think I'd drop Midway down to 6.
agreed. there are 4 large bonus zones: south side is the most difficult to hold, with 8 border regions for +8, and next is the loop, with 6 borders for +7; both o'hare, with 5 border regions and a corner location, and midway, with 4 borders, are visibly easier to hold than the loop.
assuming that u're happy to reduce the o'hare and midway bonuses to +6 (the map does play if they stay at +7, but the loop and south side become relatively unattractive), i think we're ready to polish the graphics in earnest.
ian.
the.killing.44 wrote:Very nice looking map, Scott, very clean and crisp graphics. Just a few lingering concerns (that Benn didn't get to, to an extent):
- The whole map is very … chaotic, but not insofar that it is that bad. I can, however, identify that the very dark and big trees are playing a big role in that, and that either lowering the opacity of them or adding a color overlay of light greenish (try #A0D578) at an opacity level of probably below 20, maybe under 15 would be a little nicer. Another thing could be experimenting with the layer style (Lighten, Screen—the lightening ones would be better).
- I have to disagree and say that grunge would have a negative affect on the map, and that the bevel looks very nice on the crisp, boxy map. However, if you took some Pattern Overlay at, again, less than 20% opacity, it could look somewhat nice. Think Vancouver—a crisp map, but one with a bit of texture on the playable areas.
- Do you have copyright permission on that subway image? Or is it in public domain?
- The light blue on Lake Michigan along the coast seems to have some discrepancy as it dies by "Loop."
- Just a small note: the font for "IMPASSABLE" is rather inconsistent and buggy…the sans serif look is nicer.
- It took me a while to spot the bridges to which Benn and Tisha were referring—swapping the prominence of them and the trees is what I'm talking about…
- You could scoot the large "Chicago" down a bit, then enlarge everything connected to the streetlight (including the streetlight itself), doing some good to the readability of that
- Quick note: though it's technically grammatically correct to say "El Train is elevated above all borders and passable," if you added an "is" before the "passable" too it would be just a bit easier to understand
Stamp very soon
Scott-Land wrote:cairnswk wrote:6. The text "Rail Station attacks adjacent stations & territory in which they occupy"....do you mean "territories which they occupy?
The problem may lie in [ territory in which they occupy ]. I believe your reason would be valid if it were plural [ Rail Stations attack adjacent stations.... & territories in which they occupy ] but it's singular. I was speaking about each one separately. If I were to change they to it... it would satisfy it grammatically ? Rail Station attacks adjacent stations and territory in which it occupies.
Any English Lit majors out there ? I certainly wasn't one.
iancanton wrote:Scott-Land wrote:cairnswk wrote:6. The text "Rail Station attacks adjacent stations & territory in which they occupy"....do you mean "territories which they occupy?
The problem may lie in [ territory in which they occupy ]. I believe your reason would be valid if it were plural [ Rail Stations attack adjacent stations.... & territories in which they occupy ] but it's singular. I was speaking about each one separately. If I were to change they to it... it would satisfy it grammatically ? Rail Station attacks adjacent stations and territory in which it occupies.
Any English Lit majors out there ? I certainly wasn't one.
i'm not one! however, perhaps region that surrounds it sounds a bit less awkward than territory in which it occupies. also, to be consistent with the terminology used in the instructions, replace bonus regions in the legend with bonus zones.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?m ... tructions1
ian.
MrBenn wrote:I've said before that the graphics on this map are pretty darn good, and that you're in the realm of minor adjustments now.
Here are my observations:
1. On the legend, you have the Loop bonus box followed by the El Train / Rail Line Bonus Boxes. Part of me thinks it might make more sense to switch the two smaller boxes to the left, so that it makes a bit more logical sense reading from left-to-right.
2. On a similar vein, the order of bonuses on the legend doesn't seem to be in the best order.. I can see it's vaguely North-to-South, but I think it would be better if you had this order from top-to-bottom: O'Hare, North Side, Near West, River West, The Loop, Midway, Far South, South Side, SouthEast Side.
3. The white square train stations could do with an outer edge that is the same colour as the rail line, to help tie those elements of the map together
4. Are there blue bridges in Chicago? If not, any chance you could make them slightly darker / more grey?
5. Speaking of blue, a trick of the eye makes the blue train line look like it could be a river in places - can you make it a shade darker at all?
6. The texture to the map (the rounded bevel) looks very slightly out of place. Have you tried using some sort of grunge overlay instead (you could try a google image search for "grunge textures", or have a look for something on http://www.deviantart.com)
The first three points I've mentioned are the only things that I can see that are likely to have any real impact - the final thre points I've raised are a lot more subjective.
The image I'm looking at is 629x600 pixels - For your next update, can we also have a look at the large map too?
Keep up the good work - the light at the end of the tunnel is not that far away now
Scott-Land wrote:I think I've hit all your points and mostly the others as well. I haven't updated the large one and don't plan on it until I can get affirmation on the small one. I've done it several times in the past only to have it scratched along with my time that I put into updating it. I did however fix the small dimensions to 630x600.
The jury's still out on the one liner describing the terr rail bonus-- once I hear back I'll update it as well.
Scott-Land wrote:I've already said in my post I will deal with the one liner later-- so unless you have something to add to the map GRAPHICALLY, thanks for your input Ender.
ender516 wrote:Scott-Land wrote:I've already said in my post I will deal with the one liner later-- so unless you have something to add to the map GRAPHICALLY, thanks for your input Ender.
Sorry, I guess I misunderstood who you were waiting to hear from. Graphically, this map is great: the glowing territories over the dark background give it a feeling of being under streetlights at night. Very distinctive.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users