Moderator: Cartographers

at last, we have a consensus! 2 positions per player gives 17 starting regions in 1v1, which is a good number. 5 troops apparently makes each power less vulnerable, especially with the increasing negative bonuses for holding more powers. as soon as a 1v1 game starts, however, player 1 may use his 6 troops per power to knock down his opponent's powers to 1 or 2 on each position. if this happens in the majority of 1v1 games during beta and this turns out to help player 1, then be ready for a call to change to 3 starting troops per power rather than 5.The Bison King wrote:Alright! hopefully these negative bonus penalties will sufficiently deture people from blitzing Europe and force them to calculate their moves in Africa. I'm still thinking that each European start postition should start with 5 troops though, unless there's a big opposition to that.
Hopefully with this addressed the GP stamp isn't too far off.

hooray!!!iancanton wrote:at last, we have a consensus! 2 positions per player gives 17 starting regions in 1v1, which is a good number. 5 troops apparently makes each power less vulnerable, especially with the increasing negative bonuses for holding more powers. as soon as a 1v1 game starts, however, player 1 may use his 6 troops per power to knock down his opponent's powers to 1 or 2 on each position. if this happens in the majority of 1v1 games during beta and this turns out to help player 1, then be ready for a call to change to 3 starting troops per power rather than 5.The Bison King wrote:Alright! hopefully these negative bonus penalties will sufficiently deture people from blitzing Europe and force them to calculate their moves in Africa. I'm still thinking that each European start postition should start with 5 troops though, unless there's a big opposition to that.
Hopefully with this addressed the GP stamp isn't too far off.
ian.
I don't think it's too out of touch with the theme. Maybe I can make it more ornamental or something.I don't know, the lion seems a bit out of place. There's no context for it, it doesn't seem to match the overall theme of the map.
Like a chained lion, to represent the african spirit being held down by the Europeans?Since the map is about colonization, maybe something more in line with that theme would be better?
I don' like the pinned idea, but I do agree that they should flutter. I'm just not sure how to do it and have it look good (still recognizable at such a small scale). I'll find some way though.For graphical input... the flags. Make them flutter. I mean the flags on the map... you know what'd look nice? If you made them look like they're pinned on the map by small pins. Or like they were drawn as such...
Yeah those will be re-doneThe sea routes - they look a bit uneven. Isn't there a tool in photoshop for creating dashed lines?
I'll just make Ottoman darker to kill both birds with one stone.also looked at the map through CB filters, and the Ottoman empire and British East are much too similar. Also, the Ottoman is too similar to Arabia when viewed through CB filters. Maybe swap the colours of Ottoman & Germany, that would probably solve both issues.
Really? I'm not seeing that one, might be a monitor thing but I'll look into it.Also, Britain & France both look too different from the colour of their colonies...
What does this mean?Gillipig wrote:Madagascar doesn't look too good!


How about both a male and a female lion?RedBaron0 wrote:The lion... not to be a male chauvinist or anything, but could you go with the male lion, the addition of the mane would be much more appealing than the female lion. I think Gillipig may be referring to the color of Madagascar blending in with the ocean you may have to go with a deeper or lighter blue for the French possessions, or just find a way that Madagascar stands out a little better from the background ocean.
idk about the fluttering of the flags.... it'd look nice, as long as you make sure the flags aren't lost in the flutter. On a strategic type map(such as this) the flags would be rectangular as they already are.

What are you, four?The Bison King wrote:uhh... doing it?

natty dread wrote:What are you, four?The Bison King wrote:uhh... doing it?![]()
Seriously though, the position of the lions is kind of suggestive. You know what would be cool though? A lion chasing a gazelle, or a zebra... would fit the theme well.

Its just you because the male would actually have the females neck in his mouth holding her it hurts her because he has barbs on his you know what.The Bison King wrote:Um now that I step back and look at it does the positioning of the lions make it look like they are uhh... doing it? Does anyone else think that or is that just me and my pervy mind?
He can't possibly have sex with her if he's got both of his legs on her left side! It looks like he's about to do it but not that he's doing it. Do you get what i meanThe Bison King wrote:Um now that I step back and look at it does the positioning of the lions make it look like they are uhh... doing it? Does anyone else think that or is that just me and my pervy mind?

I think animals read better in profile. Especially when they're locked in action poses.natty dread wrote:Hm, the angle is a bit odd... the lion would look better from a front-view angle.
Maybe something like this?

natty dread wrote:Really? No offense, but in your last version, there's really no sense of movement... it looks too static.

