Moderator: Cartographers

I think I've lost the right psd file so I used a older version.iancanton wrote:democratic republic of congo's lost its coastline! can u put it back? the angola-congo border also needs to be removed from the xml.
ian.
What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.

I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear...koontz1973 wrote:What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.

Look at page 5, that version is the possible new small, is it good in that size for you?HardAttack wrote:One thing if easy to handle, can we resize the map to decrease the size down to % 80 or % 75 of the current size ? Asking this to have the map to fit in screen
Just going to post my new map in the drafting room. Did something similar in that one.thenobodies80 wrote:i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:
![]()

Maybe, it could have a little bit of connection with the land instead of a bridge... I have been confused by this multiple times while playing.DoomYoshi wrote:Hey all! Beautiful Map.
However, I am wondering if you can change the 'interterritory' bridges to a different graphic from the 'intraterritory bridges'. I know the map, but it still is difficult to see sometimes and might make the map more 'n00b-friendly'.
This could work nicely.thenobodies80 wrote:I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear...koontz1973 wrote:What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:
the rivers are usually impassables and when you see a river you automatically think that whatever is beyond is a different terit.thenobodies80 wrote:I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear...koontz1973 wrote:What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:
I feel like this is being ignored... DiM addressed it though.chapcrap wrote:Maybe, it could have a little bit of connection with the land instead of a bridge... I have been confused by this multiple times while playing.DoomYoshi wrote:Hey all! Beautiful Map.
However, I am wondering if you can change the 'interterritory' bridges to a different graphic from the 'intraterritory bridges'. I know the map, but it still is difficult to see sometimes and might make the map more 'n00b-friendly'.
That's the issue...DiM wrote:the rivers are usually impassables and when you see a river you automatically think that whatever is beyond is a different terit.
this means that some connections aren't visible at a glance.
eritrea to sudan or mozambique to swaziland.
obviously if you pay attention and take your time to study the borders it's all clear but i can see how confusion may appear in a fast paced speedgame.
This is great news!!thenobodies80 wrote:Not ignored, I'll fix it.
Yup bud, the smaller version in page 5 is pretty nice looking...thenobodies80 wrote:I think (hope) that with unclear he means un-common. The fact we didn't use colors on the land for continents...because a part for that I don't understand how a black line could be unclear...koontz1973 wrote:What is exactly unclear? Not had a problem myself.Finsfleet wrote:This map sucks. It is pretty, but borders are unclear. If it wasn`t for Bob, I would never know which teritory attacks which.Oh maybe the inner bridges...i think I'll leave bridges only for connections between different territories, for internal connections I'll do something like this:
Look at page 5, that version is the possible new small, is it good in that size for you?HardAttack wrote:One thing if easy to handle, can we resize the map to decrease the size down to % 80 or % 75 of the current size ? Asking this to have the map to fit in screen

Great job!! Apart from the fonts not being the same, the bridges are the only issue I have left.thenobodies80 wrote:The new images are in the OP, for now I've left the bridges....the option I've proposed above looks terrible on the map...I have to think a bit about it and find something that really works.
Btw, files sent to Lack!
tnb80...i'd still like to see this one happen...the title needs to move left by the same margin that is at the top.Debatable...I think the title is ok in the current positioncairnswk wrote:3. The title is too close to the right hand border, and doesn't have the same spacing that it has on the top side. I can appreciate that it is probably trying to be fit on the land mass there, but it simply looks odd to me.

I am so much happier. Evidence:thenobodies80 wrote:Will do cairnswk, will do. Just trying to get rid of some things on my to do list before to work again on the map.
Btw, are the new size better? Is people happier with this small version?