Conquer Club

Coleman wrote:I'm not a huge fan of it but I think it would look better on the water west of Georgia if it didn't happen on the boundary with the legend.

Yeah I could fix that if others like it. I think i'm going to just get rid of it though.

removed along the legend, and also I added labels to the seas.

I think you need to put a connection between Blaine and Aktau or something, because all you need is Kizyl-Kaya or Aktob to protect the whole bottom or top of the map.

Or is that already going to be implemented?

Join us as we spread the Foundry's good news to the world!

Post a description of your map at
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32474

Your name is too big.. but looking good so far.

I tried making a Caucasus map which would make much more sense - a more detailed map of an actual area of dispute - but nobody wanted to help me, so it ended up in the map ideas thread. I haven't heard of anyone fighting over the Caspian Sea, any time in history. Besides, the terr names and borders on this one make no sense whatsoever. Syria, north of the Caucasus? Blaine, what the hell is Blaine? I consider myself an expert on the Republic of Azerbaijan, visiting it at least once every year for the last decade and reading all there is to read about it, but I have never ever heard of Blaine. You could call it Arran, Albania, Shirvan, but Blaine? And the historical Azerbaijan is not west of that area, but south. In Iran, the 2 north-western provinces are still called like that (on my Caucasus map I call them after their capitols, Urmia and Tabriz, to avoid confusion with the Azerbaijan bonus continents). I could go on forever like this, but honestly, I get tired of uninformed cartographers venturing on their own ego projects producing inaccurate, senseless maps, instead of helping out people who do know what they are talking about, but do not have the skills or time to take a map through the foundry. Maybe it is time for me to retire from these forums, since the only thing I get from it is frustration at all the ignorance.

Sorry guys for my harsh words. I know you mean well, and I appreciate you efforts to expand the possibilities to play on different maps. I really do. I will just stick to playing them.

RjBeals wrote:Your name is too big.. but looking good so far.

I've honestly been waiting for someone to notice that. I originally put it that big to take up room because there was alot of extra space on the legend, now with it almost full i've just been procrastinating it due to laziness, I intend to get it small enough that my name at least fits one one line.

@Jasnostj, on my base map, which I'd show you but I've accidentally messed it up so much that it's not readable anymore there was a city right there named blaine. I looked at your Caucasus mountain thread and it had 15 different continents and all around didn't look very playable, I feel that this is a more playable map and if the geography suffers a little bit I'm fine with that to have a map that is able to play.

Skittles! wrote:I think you need to put a connection between Blaine and Aktau or something, because all you need is Kizyl-Kaya or Aktob to protect the whole bottom or top of the map.

Or is that already going to be implemented?

I knew I was going to have to put some attacking over the Caspian. While looking at the map after reading your suggestion(I forgot which names so I was just looking at best in general I decided on Blaine to Aktau, because it makes the 7 point and the 5 point continent more worthy of their big bonuses.

As of now the ripple thing is growing on me. I feel like it adds depth.

As of right now It's been downsized 2 territories to 40, and no other comments(oaktown said I provided no info.)

can you add what you did in the update please.

The outline of the Continents in the legend is starting to bug my eyes. Makes it look way bright and you can hardly read Turkmenistan cause it's so.. contrasting. Iran, Caucasia and Kazakhstan are like that too.

I noticed that Sverdlovak is touching the top of the map on the top of the S, d, l and k.

Unit_2 wrote:can you add what you did in the update please.

if the main things aren't apparent you're retarded.

Skittles! wrote:The outline of the Continents in the legend is starting to bug my eyes. Makes it look way bright and you can hardly read Turkmenistan cause it's so.. contrasting. Iran, Caucasia and Kazakhstan are like that too.

I noticed that Sverdlovak is touching the top of the map on the top of the S, d, l and k.

i've noticed that and reduced the opacity to try and help combat that, but I just can't find something that makes it completely readable without hurting the style I like.

I noticed you have two Blaine's

One in Turkey and one in Kazakhstan.

2 Arabia's too...

Skittles! wrote:I noticed you have two Blaine's

One in Turkey and one in Kazakhstan.

2 Arabia's too...

Right, I'm glad that's an easy fix. I copied and pasted the layers from turkey and Iraq so that I could just change the name.

*Presses easy button* fixed.

#1


I dedicate this update to skittles.

I got rid of the territory name repeating.

I tried to make the legend more readable without losing the style.

#2


Reduced the stroke on everything in the legend and I really like it.


so now we're faced with a decision #1 or #2

jasnostj wrote:I get tired of uninformed cartographers venturing on their own ego projects producing inaccurate, senseless maps, instead of helping out people who do know what they are talking about, but do not have the skills or time to take a map through the foundry. Maybe it is time for me to retire from these forums, since the only thing I get from it is frustration at all the ignorance.

Sorry guys for my harsh words. I know you mean well, and I appreciate you efforts to expand the possibilities to play on different maps. I really do. I will just stick to playing them.

I'm sure RK would fix the errors in geography at least in terms of names and possibly in terms of borders (if there are problems?).

Not every map will catch the people. Two people can make a map about the same area. One perfect in terms of geography and the other could be totally wrong. They will be drawn to the one with good gameplay and graphics (sometimes simplicity especially early on can be a big help). I don't remember your map so sorry I didn't comment on it.

Being mad at people for not knowing the right names and geography is silly. Not all people have access to updated and well done maps (insert Miss South Carolina joke). Providing your knowledge to the foundry would be a great asset so I hope you reconsider.

reverend_kyle wrote:

Unit_2 wrote:can you add what you did in the update please.

if the main things aren't apparent you're retarded.

well it also helps people who have just opened the thread for the first time in a while know what's happening.

I went back and read the thread to know how it progressed, but many people don't and even though we prefer people to do things the right way, we know this won't always happen.


On the map:

1. 2 is better by far, but Russia and Iran look almost the same on the legend. If you had no idea of geography, you couldn't tell which was Russia and which was Iran.

a. Maybe (just an idea) pull a Keyogi and place the names of the continents in the continent itself? I haven't really thought it through in terms of how everything above it would look or fit, but like I said it's an idea (probably not a good one).

b. Or, add a mini-map legend ala Great Lakes, Portugal, or South America

Edit: I guess they both have a bonus of 3 so maybe it's not important. blah.


2. You have a North South Problem. Not all the ocean/mountain passes have been done, but maybe it's time to talk about them. You've added one, but others to consider.

a. Syria (probably Krasnadar is better) to Armenia
b. Change Blaine to connect to K-K, and Aktau to connect to Kalmyk or Tambov
c. Maybe put a mountain pass


3. Nice simple map sir. I like it.

#2, definitely.

Maybe open some more sea routes, like maybe Syria (just noticed there are two of them too) to Armenia. And as edbeard suggested, Blaine to K-K andAktau to Kalmyk.. Or something. Just an idea to make it like less caught-in-a-trap type thing.

i see that Georgia doesn't have a white out line like the other names.

@edbeard I like your sea routes and will apply some changes there, but for clarification the style of the sea routes doesn't bother anyone visually does it?



@unit 2 that is on purpose, I haven't mentioned it, but neither has anyone else which suprises me. That is my old style for the names, I didn't much like it, but if others thought it looked better I kept it so that I wouldn't have to refigure out what I did there. It will be changed if this gets final forged or something resolves that etc..

What I did:
-added said sea routes
-changed name of second syria