Periodic Table of the Elements Map, UPDATE p17
Moderator: Cartographers
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
We want it to look like trash!!!!!!!!!!!!! We're working on layout. When we get that straight we'll make it look good.
btw, I don't have a choice, but to use paint, so for development its going to be done in paint, once I get it togther wca is goig to make it look good.
btw, I don't have a choice, but to use paint, so for development its going to be done in paint, once I get it togther wca is goig to make it look good.
Last edited by sfhbballnut on Sun Nov 12, 2006 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
- wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:
sfh is getting the basics done (continents, countries, boundaries, etc) with MS paint. when he is done with that, i am going to use his image as a guide (not as the actual picture) and i am going to make it look really good with Corel Painter Essentials 2.
and guys, cowshrptrn's picture is not going to be used. if you read his posts, he said that was just his idea for teh continent layout, not for the map. the final image will not be that badly done. you guys need to remember that we are doing this in two parts:
1. playability (continents, borders, etc)
the map we use to plan playability is going to be bad, because we don't need to have it look much like the final map, since it is just for planning. when you are looking at one of our playability maps, ignore how crappy it looks and just take it from a gameplay point of view (strategy, continent design).
2. Final map: the final map will look good. it will be the one that is finally submitted as a map. the playability map is just going to be a guide so we can plan out how the final map will look.
from now on, sfh and I will write either PLAYABILITY or FINAL at the top of our images. if it says PLAYABILITY, you can comment on the layout of the continents and boundries, not the look of it. If it says FINAL, it will be the map that i am working on making look good so we can submit it. for the final map, you can comment on how it looks and how to make it look better (not how it plays).
and guys, cowshrptrn's picture is not going to be used. if you read his posts, he said that was just his idea for teh continent layout, not for the map. the final image will not be that badly done. you guys need to remember that we are doing this in two parts:
1. playability (continents, borders, etc)
the map we use to plan playability is going to be bad, because we don't need to have it look much like the final map, since it is just for planning. when you are looking at one of our playability maps, ignore how crappy it looks and just take it from a gameplay point of view (strategy, continent design).
2. Final map: the final map will look good. it will be the one that is finally submitted as a map. the playability map is just going to be a guide so we can plan out how the final map will look.
from now on, sfh and I will write either PLAYABILITY or FINAL at the top of our images. if it says PLAYABILITY, you can comment on the layout of the continents and boundries, not the look of it. If it says FINAL, it will be the map that i am working on making look good so we can submit it. for the final map, you can comment on how it looks and how to make it look better (not how it plays).

Marvaddin wrote:cowshrptrn wrote:
^^ >>>>> Trash can
I dont want to be rude, but again I will suggest: please drop the idea, you guys are miraculously making it worse each update.
For now, I will no more comment, at least until I see something its worthy to comment.
Just to mention: I was also talking about playability, and specially when I said its getting worse each update.

- wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:
Marvaddin wrote:Marvaddin wrote:cowshrptrn wrote:
^^ >>>>> Trash can
I dont want to be rude, but again I will suggest: please drop the idea, you guys are miraculously making it worse each update.
For now, I will no more comment, at least until I see something its worthy to comment.
Just to mention: I was also talking about playability, and specially when I said its getting worse each update.
and we arent using that picture. he is not working on this map with us. that was the way he wanted the map to be, not the way it will be when it is done. instead of constantly telling us that this map is bad, could you tell us why it is bad so we can make it better?

-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
Playability Update
I've added several more borders and altered the continents, I think this one is a lot more play able, if I am seriously misguided let me know, but I hhave no intentions of stopping work on this
Hey updated this, clearer borders, fixed the large continent problem
I've added several more borders and altered the continents, I think this one is a lot more play able, if I am seriously misguided let me know, but I hhave no intentions of stopping work on this
Hey updated this, clearer borders, fixed the large continent problem
Last edited by sfhbballnut on Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
Alkali Metals 7 territories 3 borders
Alkali Earth Metals 6 territories 4 borders
First Transition Metals 11 territories 5 borders
Second Transition Metals 10 territories 6 borders
Third Transition Metals (light yellow) 9 territories 5 borders
Fourth Transition Metals (light green) 8 territories 5 borders
Other Metals (light purple) 7 territories 4 borders
Metalloids, for lack of a better name at present(orange) 9 territories 6 borders
Non Metals (red brown) 7 territories 3 borders
Unnamed (pink) 7 territories 4 borders
The right half is a little rough and I’m trying to find a solution suggestions?
Noble Gases 7 territories 1-2 boundaries
First Lanthanide Series and Actinide Series 14 territories 3 borders
Second Lanthanide Series and Actinide Series 16 territories 3 border
Are these last to a bit large? Need to be broken up more?
Also considering changing the farthest right orange territory to the red-brown
What do you think? Where can it be better?
Alkali Earth Metals 6 territories 4 borders
First Transition Metals 11 territories 5 borders
Second Transition Metals 10 territories 6 borders
Third Transition Metals (light yellow) 9 territories 5 borders
Fourth Transition Metals (light green) 8 territories 5 borders
Other Metals (light purple) 7 territories 4 borders
Metalloids, for lack of a better name at present(orange) 9 territories 6 borders
Non Metals (red brown) 7 territories 3 borders
Unnamed (pink) 7 territories 4 borders
The right half is a little rough and I’m trying to find a solution suggestions?
Noble Gases 7 territories 1-2 boundaries
First Lanthanide Series and Actinide Series 14 territories 3 borders
Second Lanthanide Series and Actinide Series 16 territories 3 border
Are these last to a bit large? Need to be broken up more?
Also considering changing the farthest right orange territory to the red-brown
What do you think? Where can it be better?
- wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:
- cowshrptrn
- Posts: 838
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 1:15 pm
- Location: wouldn't YOU like to know....
- campsoup1988
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:35 am
- Location: Planet X
- Contact:
- wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:
the borders are just in there to make it more playable. with the continents, we are trying to have some resembelance to the actual sections of the periodic table (except for the really big ones). if you are good at chemistry, do you know a way we could divide up the transition metals and the lanthanide/actinoid elements in a way that makes sense chemically? (sfh and i are learning chemistry in high school right now, so we dont know everything)

- wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:
- cowshrptrn
- Posts: 838
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 1:15 pm
- Location: wouldn't YOU like to know....
-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
I HATE the idea, I shouldnt give any tip, but...
Again, dont you realize how ridiculous is remove Ac and La from the main table? Can you show me a table like that? And add all those lines for what? Leave Ac and La were they used to be, and just connect Ac to Th. And add more connections between the main table and both series, because I already saw bottlenecks in maps, but nothing like this one.
And you can think about reduce some borders. Some areas have too many. How about something different, like continents with territories not directly connected or something? This way its just, JUST a boring blocky map... ah, forgot, boring blocky large map. Use creativity, create something new. Maybe supercontinents for non-metals, transition metals, etc... lets have something new. And H should belong to any area. but maybe it could have a "bridge" to O, or N, huh?
Only to mention, your continents design seems totally arbitrary: you have real chemical groups, like noble gases, and alkali, but is that light green area anything real?
And dont say me its my last chance to complain about anything. Looks like you forget there is a final forge.
Again, dont you realize how ridiculous is remove Ac and La from the main table? Can you show me a table like that? And add all those lines for what? Leave Ac and La were they used to be, and just connect Ac to Th. And add more connections between the main table and both series, because I already saw bottlenecks in maps, but nothing like this one.
And you can think about reduce some borders. Some areas have too many. How about something different, like continents with territories not directly connected or something? This way its just, JUST a boring blocky map... ah, forgot, boring blocky large map. Use creativity, create something new. Maybe supercontinents for non-metals, transition metals, etc... lets have something new. And H should belong to any area. but maybe it could have a "bridge" to O, or N, huh?
Only to mention, your continents design seems totally arbitrary: you have real chemical groups, like noble gases, and alkali, but is that light green area anything real?
And dont say me its my last chance to complain about anything. Looks like you forget there is a final forge.

-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
- DublinDoogey
- Posts: 329
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:03 pm
- Location: Wisconsin
Marv, maybe Periodic Tables are different in Brazil, but in the States they're almost always shown with the series removed. I don't say this to be USA-centric, but following that pattern also works well for creating the map because it allows for a more "classic rectangular" shape, which I've learned, and believe that maps should shoot for.
-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
-
sfhbballnut
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:01 pm
- cowshrptrn
- Posts: 838
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 1:15 pm
- Location: wouldn't YOU like to know....
- wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:


