Crazy Idea? - Using Small/Large Maps Differently

[dolomite13]

So currently I have a bunch of maps in the melting pot where I am formulating ideas. While pondering on one of those ideas I decided that the map didn't need to be larger then the "small" map size. This meant I only had to do one image that would suffice for both sizes.

This then gave me an idea.

What if both map images were of the small size and they both depicted different maps. This is where it sort of gets mind bending. Both maps would have the same connection routes because that would be necessary. However both could show different bonus structures.

Think of a map of the united states based on politics where one side is a senate race and large map you would see a map of the united states divided presidential political boundaries, red vs blue states. Both maps would play the same but you would get bonuses based on both maps.

I know that you could probably accomplish the same thing by using icons on the main map etc... however this is just a rudimentary example... I can imagine that this idea could be used to show a map of say the 1700's vs current day. You could even go so far as to change the graphics and rotate or invert the alternate map to allow for a completely different perspective.

I can imagine the map would need a really prominent entry in the key that stated you needed to view both map sizes as additional information was available on the other map etc.

Anyway I was just wondering what foundry leaders thought about this before I tried to do some sort of proposal.

Everyone's opinion is welcome.

=D13=

SMALL


LARGE

[koontz1973]

Would not work. What would you call the regions? Both maps need to have the same names. Bonuses, again woulod not work as both maps need to have the same bonuses or how would the xml hand them out? And as most people would never bother switching maps (something never done before) a lot of games would end in chaos. But I do like the idea. I know it was tried before, but you could do this like four corners. 3/4 small maps the same covering the same thing but one one map only.

[dolomite13]

Would not work. What would you call the regions? Both maps need to have the same names. Bonuses, again would not work as both maps need to have the same bonuses or how would the xml hand them out? And as most people would never bother switching maps (something never done before) a lot of games would end in chaos. But I do like the idea. I know it was tried before, but you could do this like four corners. 3/4 small maps the same covering the same thing but one one map only.

Actually the maps would have the same names. Lets take the political map example the territories are the same. And regardless of what map you look at you would get both bonuses ... lets say the senate race gave +1 for every 3 states in general. And on the presidential map you got +10 for every red state and +10 for every blue state sort of like continents. The two images would only be for reference. If you did something weird like a city map and a subway map you could easily name the locations after stations that would transfer between both above and below ground. I know most people wouldn't switch maps (although I do constantly) but as they read the key they would see that they are being told to do so and eventually maybe after a few losses they would catch on. Anyway it's just a thought and I think that it could work given the right map theme. My examples above are just samples off the top of my head.

I have often thought that on maps that don't exceed the small size you could use the second map as extra map instructions or info on strategy or story etc. I still believe that we should be able to have a 3rd image that's for additional map strategy and story or be able to add that into to the xml and display it below the map. But that's for another post.

=D13=

[koontz1973]

I still believe that we should be able to have a 3rd image that's for additional map strategy and story or be able to add that into to the xml and display it below the map. But that's for another post.

More work for map makers.

But I do like it as an idea but I would not want a third image to become the norm. We already get problems with two images.

[dolomite13]

I still believe that we should be able to have a 3rd image that's for additional map strategy and story or be able to add that into to the xml and display it below the map. But that's for another post.

More work for map makers.

But I do like it as an idea but I would not want a third image to become the norm. We already get problems with two images.

It could be something that mapmakers could activate or not based on the xml. A link/button below the main map marked "Map Info" could hide/show that image or it could just as easily be text.

=D13=

[isaiah40]

It could be something that mapmakers could activate or not based on the xml. A link/button below the main map marked "Map Info" could hide/show that image or it could just as easily be text.

=D13=

Take a look in this thread where I suggested a new way to have the game page.