Classic map

by **The_Devil** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:21 pm

I don't intend for this to be produced, so this isn't in the map fundry, but i just want to know...is this classic map better than the one we have now?

by **mibi** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:23 pm

woah... the sea is a winamp visualization.

no it is not better, the current classic map is just fine, except for the colors.

by **ClessAlvein** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:29 pm

Plus, Scandinavia is a bit messed up. And North America is far too bloated.

by **The_Devil** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:30 pm

oh..I see

by **Molacole** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:31 pm

that map would get ripped a new asshole in the foundry

by **The_Devil** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:35 pm

Molacole wrote:that map would get ripped a new asshole in the foundry

errm...whats that supposed to mean?

by **happy2seeyou** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:36 pm

Molacole wrote:that map would get ripped a new asshole in the foundry

Ouch Molacole. :lol:

True, but Ouch.

by **The_Devil** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:37 pm

ClessAlvein wrote:Plus, Scandinavia is a bit messed up. And North America is far too bloated.

If you check a rectangular map...then N america is just like that

by **The_Devil** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:42 pm

Can someone move this into the map fundry? i think it would be better there. Errm...sorry if this is troublesome...

by **ClessAlvein** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:42 pm

No, it wouldn't be. You've artificially stretched Greenland by what appears to be a factor of more than 2. If you're going to do that, you have to stretch southern Australia as well. Here's what a real rectangular projection of the globe looks like:

Edit: Not to sound mean, but this map will not get quenched. The current map is fine, and much better than your current version.

by **Stopper** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:42 pm

ClessAlvein wrote:Plus, Scandinavia is a bit messed up. And North America is far too bloated.

It's because this map is more like the Mercator map than the Classic map is.

The Classic map looks more like the Peters Projection map, which has all countries shown at more-or-less their relative land areas.

The Mercator map exaggerates the sizes of the Northern Hemisphere countries, and understates the sizes of the Southern Hemisphere countries. So India looks like it's the same size as Scandinavia, when really it's much bigger.

EDIT: Fastposted, and by a much better answer. Never mind.

by **The_Devil** on Tue May 01, 2007 4:46 pm

ClessAlvein wrote:No, it wouldn't be. You've artificially stretched Greenland by what appears to be a factor of more than 2. If you're going to do that, you have to stretch southern Australia as well. Here's what a real rectangular projection of the globe looks like:

Edit: Not to sound mean, but this map will not get quenched. The current map is fine, and much better than your current version.

Its acutally bent backwards at the top and bottom...and besides i did strech S america (you don't see it because i don't have antartica)

by **freezie** on Tue May 01, 2007 5:10 pm

The background is WAY too distracting.

by **Incandenza** on Tue May 01, 2007 6:24 pm

It's hideous, but at least it shows the attack route between great britain and scandanavia... :lol:

by **Whiteberry** on Tue May 01, 2007 8:34 pm

I would love to see numbers in bold print so that it's easier to tell what color a certain country is. Sometimes it's very difficult to tell the difference between yellow and white or between pink and red. If the numbers on all maps were larger or bolder, this problem would be solved. Also, sometimes I have to get close to my monitor to read the number of blue armies. I can tell when a country is blue, but I have to look at the screen close to read the number of armies. Does anyone else have this problem?