Moderator: Cartographers
KEYOGI wrote:There's some good potential here.
I'm with Spockers on the airports. I'd much prefer sea routes over airports.
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.
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?
neoni wrote:why have you made greenland so small??
Spockers wrote:I don't like the idea of both the ports and the conenction lines.
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).
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?
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.
CreepyUncleAndy wrote:Also, mountains and rivers should be impassable, not unpassable.
Return to Melting Pot: Map Ideas
Users browsing this forum: No registered users