,
Moderator: Cartographers

 sam_levi_11
				sam_levi_11
			



 
		

 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			sam_levi_11 wrote:i like the second, for me the conquest bit ruined the new lands map especially since they are so high- 6 neutral per terit.
 
 
 oaktown
				oaktown
			









 
		And thank you Multiplayertim for expressing the same concern that i had about Crete.


 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			 [/BigImg]
[/BigImg]

 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 oaktown
				oaktown
			









 
		by oaktown on Mon May 26, 2008 6:17 pm
not counting this post, 19 of the last 25 posts in this topic have been by you, qwert. Since I last checked in you've just been bumping. I find that troubling.

 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 BrianHoef
				BrianHoef
			 
		
 t-o-m
				t-o-m
			



















 
		
 Ruben Cassar
				Ruben Cassar
			














 
		And regarding the Crete and Cyrenacia issue, my recommendation would be to change the style of line which connects the two. The line you have now is used as an attack line in other contexts, and that could be confusing. Not crippling to gameplay, of course, but potentially confusing. Either don't connect the two at all and let the name "Creta et Cyrenacia" be the giveaway, or use a different style of line to connect them. At least you'll satisfy the crowd.
by t-o-m on Thu May 29, 2008 1:21 pm
the reason i havnt voted is because i really don't know what im voting for!
maybe if you posted it here like u did on the 1st page, you may get more votes?
maybe you could describe the difference more?
1. diference
how this might be better gameplay/more fair
2. difference 2
how this might improve gameplay/make it more fair
3. dif. 3
how this might....
see my point?
by Ruben Cassar on Thu May 29, 2008 2:10 pm
Qwert I like the subject matter of your map of course, but personally I really don't like the conquest approach you used for the map. Besides CC has been saturated with conquest style maps lately and the trend seems to indicate that more will be coming out.
I would prefer this to be a classic gameplay map. Something similar to what Guiscard was trying to do.
Keep in mind that this is only my very personal opinion. Good luck with the map.

 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			qwert wrote:Map tell you everything

 t-o-m
				t-o-m
			



















 
		but we cant see the whole map since you put it in a quote!


 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 Ruben Cassar
				Ruben Cassar
			














 
		by Ruben Cassar on Sat May 31, 2008 1:12 am
On a separate note...shouldn't you have some consistency with the "v" and "u"?
Either use always v instead of a u or vice versa. Some regions have a v while others have a u. I think I would stick with v.

 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			
 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			

 MrBenn
				MrBenn
			


















 
		by MrBenn on Mon Jun 02, 2008 1:52 am
Hi Qwert,
I haven't had enough time to look properly at the different gameplay options... I'll try and have a proper look at them during the week and get back to you
In the meatime, could you explain what you mean by the 3+3 in Italy on v1, and the 3+3+3 on Crete et Cre-whatever on v2??

 Qwert
				Qwert
			























 
			

 MrBenn
				MrBenn
			


















 
		Users browsing this forum: No registered users