Moderator: Cartographers
Wisse wrote:hmm i don't like the style of this map much but thats something you can't do anything about
Wisse wrote:the pictures of the soldiers, aircrafts etc. seems to be off the map, you could fix that by blurring the borders of those pictures
Wisse wrote:the arrows are not in the same style as the whole map (they don't look old etc.) also your legend borders doesn't look old, thats a bit strange
Simonov wrote:just one suggestion man - it would be good if when someone hold air port he can bombard and invade (via paratroopers from airfield) all the territories on the map, and if someone holds antiaircraft gun his territories can't be bombarded. sounds good?
Simonov wrote:ps why did you remove russian tank? could put few katyusha's in russian territories as a way to bombard but not to actually conquer other territories on the map...
Simonov wrote:just one suggestion man - it would be good if when someone hold air port he can bombard and invade (via paratroopers from airfield) all the territories on the map, and if someone holds antiaircraft gun his territories can't be bombarded. sounds good?
jako wrote:do read some of the posts before replying. there isnt that much yet, only 6 pags worth.
oaktown wrote:I liked the suggestion of giving the unit the power to bombard air units only, and the anti-aircraft gun image fit that role better than a tank. I liked the tank picture better, but whatever.
edbeard wrote:bombarding is the name of the type of attack. that has to be there. It means that you can attack it but not conquer. When you take it over, one neutral army is placed there instead of being able to move your own armies to it
DiM wrote:1. army numbers. where will you put them? this is the large version and already some territories have no place for army numbers. imagine the problem will be bigger for the small version.
DiM wrote:2. your sig. i like it and it's well designed. but to me it inspires a 60s happy american look. not a european bleak and sad look. but this is just my opinion people use the same sig regardless of the theme of the map so i guess it's ok.
DiM wrote:3. arrows are bad. they don't fit with the overall aspect
DiM wrote:4. bonuses are strange. and i'm saying strange because i don't want to say bad. there's a big imballance because you can hold 8 russian terits with just 2 borders marzahn and lichtenberg. with +5 and the aa gun the domination is rather easy.
DiM wrote:5. will you make the airports and borders neutral?
oaktown wrote:DiM wrote:1. army numbers. where will you put them? this is the large version and already some territories have no place for army numbers. imagine the problem will be bigger for the small version.
Yep, this will be a problem, but one I can tackle. As I update I'll be doing so with the army counts and the small map in mind, but my concentration has been on the playability and the overall style.
oaktown wrote:DiM wrote:2. your sig. i like it and it's well designed. but to me it inspires a 60s happy american look. not a european bleak and sad look. but this is just my opinion people use the same sig regardless of the theme of the map so i guess it's ok.
At least it's the right decade!
oaktown wrote:DiM wrote:3. arrows are bad. they don't fit with the overall aspect
You're probably only the fifth person to point this out, and so I'll say yet again that the arrows are temporary until I come up with something I like. To quiet my critics new arrows will be the next thing on my to-do list.
oaktown wrote:DiM wrote:4. bonuses are strange. and i'm saying strange because i don't want to say bad. there's a big imballance because you can hold 8 russian terits with just 2 borders marzahn and lichtenberg. with +5 and the aa gun the domination is rather easy.
LOL! Everybody else says the bonuses are whack because whoever starts in the Russian sector is screwed. I've been saying all along that I think the Russian start is the best start on the map, yet everybody is pushing me to make Russia stronger. There will be a poll on this as soon as the old poll is removed.
[/quote]oaktown wrote:DiM wrote:5. will you make the airports and borders neutral?
Yes and no. See post #1.
DiM wrote:may i suggest the small map as your first priority?
it would be a waste of your time to finalize the large version and then discover you have to change everything to accommodate the small.
oaktown wrote:well, then i guess i'm the only one that sees the way this map goes seriously though. don't make a poll. people will look and see lots of terits so they'll ask for a huge bonus when in fact the russian sector is the greatest place to start. as i said you can get a +5 with just 2 borders plus you have the aa gun.
DiM wrote:5. will you make the airports and borders neutral? ...why not the borders? they offer a +2 and starting with 3 terits is not uncommon on a map this size. and if you make them neutral you'll have a map with 30 playing terits so it's still a great number (except for 4 player games)
qwert wrote:Protesting again-Its standard in CC become lower or what?
I must work wery hard and finishing 80-90% of map to get second stage!I must resolve to many things-Borders-Army numbers-Legend-colours-and been very long time in map idea.
These not good.
oaktown wrote:Wisse wrote:the arrows are not in the same style as the whole map (they don't look old etc.) also your legend borders doesn't look old, thats a bit strange
Tell me what you think of the legend now.
qwert wrote:Protesting again-Its standard in CC become lower or what?
I must work wery hard and finishing 80-90% of map to get second stage!I must resolve to many things-Borders-Army numbers-Legend-colours-and been very long time in map idea.
These not good.
Incandenza wrote:Actually, I take that back. Just a bit more harping: if the airfields are going to start neutral, than there needs to be a better reason for taking them than just a +1/per bonus, especially since one could go any kill the neutrals there, only to be bombarded by the russian artillery. So maybe have the airfields connect.
insomniacdude wrote:There are a lot of ways to go about this and I don't think any one way is the "best" way. You might want to put this to a poll.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users