DiM wrote:mountain issue has been raised before and has been dealt with a few times. if they still look bad tell me what exactly you want changed. saying they look like cryptonite isn't very helpful in identifying what exactly you don't like.
as for the beaches nobody has complained besides you so i'm gonna leave them like that if nobody else has any complaints.
If you can't spot the difference between crystal and vegetation, then i bring in to question your graphical ability.
Nobody else has complained about your beaches because they have neither my refined eye and attention to detail, nor my high standards. It's just like the emperors new clothes and you know it.
i want to know details. it looks bad because it is glossy, because it's clear cut because this because that. just saying it looks like a crystal without exactly pin pointing the problem and perhaps offering a solution.
as for your analogy if i remember the story all the people were pretending the clothes are great and said they have a keen eye and could see them. if you're saying that the problem of the beaches is like the king's new clothes it means in fact that is a bogus problem that does not exist but emphasizing on it and pretending only skilled viewers can see it makes gullible people (like teya) to pretend they do see the problem just to pass as a skilled critique.
so all in all beaches are fine and teya is phony
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Teya wrote:I have a problem with the beaches. They look too yellow. Beaches arent fluro yellow like yours are. Yours kind of look radioactive.
I also agree that the mountains need work. They dont blend with the rest of your map. The colour of your map is a pale greeny-brown. The colour of your mountains need to blend more with that colour. At least a gradual blend. At the moment, you have such different colours that it looks like they are just slapped on.
i was sure you'd be the next to say the beaches are wrong. i could have sworn it
thanks for the comment on the mountains though. now i understand what needs to be done.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
WidowMakers wrote:How is this? A Mountain and a beach to the east of the mountain.
gorgeous mountain WM, now if only i could figure how you made it to try and replicate the results.
as for the beach i'm not happy it looks more like a sand cloud than a beach too fuzzy and smudgy
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
DiM wrote:so all in all beaches are fine and teya is phony
So four people all agree that the beaches are bad but you think they're fine and single out a single member with an unpleasent remark.
If you want help from the community, it's best not to abuse them when they're giving you constructive feedback.
Try working with different levels of brush opacity and flow mixed with a bevel for good 3D mountains. It might take a while to get the desired effect, but WM shows what can be done.
I agree with others on various points, the off-coloured beaches, flat and unrealistic casltes. The water is nice, but it's more something I would expect from a swimming pool, not a rivers/lake system.
DiM wrote:so all in all beaches are fine and teya is phony
So four people all agree that the beaches are bad but you think they're fine and single out a single member with an unpleasent remark.
If you want help from the community, it's best not to abuse them when they're giving you constructive feedback.
Try working with different levels of brush opacity and flow mixed with a bevel for good 3D mountains. It might take a while to get the desired effect, but WM shows what can be done.
I agree with others on various points, the off-coloured beaches, flat and unrealistic casltes. The water is nice, but it's more something I would expect from a swimming pool, not a rivers/lake system.
1. it was a joke as you can see from the smiley in that post.
2. please don't quote out of context. that specific quote you posted was related to the analogy spockers made. please read before you accuse me of something i did not do. i was not rude to teya, on the contrary, i even said thakns for the comment on the mountains.
3. i don't see those 4 people you say commented about the beaches. 1 was spockers then came teya. then wm proposed a alternative mountain and beach (not saying he likes or dislikes) then they commented on wm's beach. so just 2 people possibly 3 if you judge wm's proposed beach as a testimony that he doesn't like mine.
4. why isn't this in the main foundry. you keep ignoring that subject and i don't like it.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Spockers wrote:It should not be in the main forum until you can show it can work on a smaller scale.
If you can't do this, then it won't work and no point going on.
there's absolutely no rule saying a map has to be a certain size before it is moved to main.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
DiM wrote:why isn't this in the main foundry. you keep ignoring that subject and i don't like it.
Things are being discussed and sorted. Just be patient, there's no hurry.
actually i don't want to be patient. i'm tired of your attitude and your petty excuses for not moving this to the main foundry. so what if things are being discussed and sorted? this can't be done in the main foundry? this map has long passed the requirement for a move to the main foundry and each time me or other ask for it to be moved to main you keep coming with lame excuses.
please comment on this quote. i'm really really curious as to what your next excuse will be. next thing you'll probably tell me it's full moon and no threads are being moved under a full moon.
if you can't find a good reason then please move it. if you still don't move it then i'll once again ask you to leave your personal problems with me outside the forum. you got a problem tell me in a pm but don't abuse your powers.
DiM wrote:let's compare this map to the most recent idea that got moved to the main forum WWII WESTERN FRONT
gameplay the trilogy has a 100% complete gameplay. it has all the terits the borders and bonuses set. of course minor modifications will be done if considered necessary. western front has terits and borders but no bonuses. so not fully complete.
graphics both maps look far better than the required quality to get moved to main but still they need to suffer some modifications. it's worth mentioning that western front got moved to main before it had a legend (and a legend is required)
number of updates exactly 8 updates for each so they both meet the required number of updates.
user interest both maps have their fans and support as shown by the number of replies. so no problem here.
in conclusion. even though western front doesn't have bonuses and even though it did not have a graphically designed legend it got moved to the main foundry. on the other hand the trilogy seems to be subject to all kinds of motives to refuse it's movement. why? only keyogi knows.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Well, a good cartographer is patient. It's the nature of things here in the Map Foundry.
Things need to be discussed between myself and Andy. We're on opposite sides of the world, so it's not easy to arrange times to chat. Andy gave you the reason the map hasn't been moved. As gimil pointed out, I've been discussing the matter with him. It's a delicate situation we're in, so please, just be patient, there really is no hurry.
I'm not solely responsible for moving maps from forum to forum, I'm not about to go over Andy's head without discussing matters with him first.
I don't have personal problems with you DiM, I have problems with your attitude on a number of matters, but it's irrelevant.
I fail to see how not moving a thread is abuse of my powers.
a looooong pm for keyogi regarding the above post and a V9 for the others with the new mountains. they look better than before. still not the same quality as widow's but i'm getting there:
V9
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Kaplowitz wrote:The mts look too white, also the whole for the mines are now out of place.
too white meaning there's too much snow or meaning the overall aspect is too bright?
holes will be adjusted.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
V10
1. made the mountain darker
2. tweaked the beaches i hope they look better now
3. adjusted the holes
4. made the castles more 3d
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
the map name has been changed to Age of Realms - Chapter 1 - Age of Might
V11
1. changed name
2. replaced temple with sanctuary
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Spockers wrote:It should not be in the main forum until you can show it can work on a smaller scale.
If you can't do this, then it won't work and no point going on.
there's absolutely no rule saying a map has to be a certain size before it is moved to main.
Dim you have to get over this thing you have about "rules"
Whenever someone disagrees with you you go on about how there is no rule against it.
I never said anything about rules, I just said if you can't show that this can be done on a smaller scale, there is no point going to the main foundry.
Spockers wrote:It should not be in the main forum until you can show it can work on a smaller scale.
If you can't do this, then it won't work and no point going on.
there's absolutely no rule saying a map has to be a certain size before it is moved to main.
Dim you have to get over this thing you have about "rules"
Whenever someone disagrees with you you go on about how there is no rule against it.
I never said anything about rules, I just said if you can't show that this can be done on a smaller scale, there is no point going to the main foundry.
Now, wouldn't it be easier to just make the map smaller rather than argue the issue page after page? Photoshop has a zoom function, you can always use that if you need a closer look.
KEYOGI wrote:Now, wouldn't it be easier to just make the map smaller rather than argue the issue page after page? Photoshop has a zoom function, you can always use that if you need a closer look.
yes, but it will come out in better quality if he does it this way.
KEYOGI wrote:Now, wouldn't it be easier to just make the map smaller rather than argue the issue page after page? Photoshop has a zoom function, you can always use that if you need a closer look.
yes, but it will come out in better quality if he does it this way.
No it will not!
If he makes a 4000 x 4000 pixel image he still needs to make it smaller. An 800 x 800 pixel image is still just an 800 pixel image.
It is just a waste of time. First start with the small image. Make it work that way first. If you can prove a map will work on a small scale, that large one is easy. Just look at Rail USA. If I had started with a 1000 x1000 picture, it would have been easy to make.
I have had difficulties , however, with this smaller one. That is why I stopped work on the large version to make sure the small one works first (Thanks to CairnsWK for this piece of wisdom)
Bottom line. It is a waste of time, no matter if DiM likes it or not, to make a HUGE map only to scale it down and need to rework it all.
I don't think we can force DiM to do it your way. If DiM wants to do it this way, seeing as how it is still in Map Ideas. Then I think that's his right. I do agree with you though, that it would be a huge waste of time, but it is ultimately his time getting wasted with that effort.
i have already stated my opinion on the size matter. it will remain like this until the time has come to resize it. yes i know this can mean more work when doing the small version but again i have said before that i don't mind.
DiM wrote:i don't mind spending a little extra time fiddling with rearranging names and army shadows. it's worth doing when i know i have the benefit of working on a proper sized map for my monitor.
and regarding the size. i like working on bigger images because of the quality of the details. try doing a map on a 100*100px square and then resize it. it will be horrible.
then try doing the same map 4000*4000px and resize it will look gorgeous.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
