Moderator: Cartographers
Kaplowitz wrote:
Were those divisions of Ukraine good or should they be changed?
Western Russia a good name?
mibi wrote:It took nine versions to get to this point? You have a map that is thoroughly lacking in any sense of direction or purpose and should more likely see use on the place mats of your local greasy spoon with a box of broken crayons, then any gaming site.
The continents are myopic, the territories are lackadaisical, and the colors suffer from an iron deficiency. This whole exercise is a slithering feat of malnourishment. And to top it all off, you have post humorously christen it "2.0" as if there were actually some resemblance to the living work of which you take inspiration from and nothing more.
If I were you, I would take this project and put it in a lock box, put the lock box on a shelf, close the closet door, and proceed to torch the entire neighborhood lest no future civilization should exhume this cartographic carcass and pass judgment upon mankind.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
DiM wrote:54% support in the poll is a clear indication the idea is bad. yes it sounds strange but that's how it works considering the fact many people come and vote yes just for the sake of voting. heck i've seen maps with 80% support that got abandoned.
plus as gimil said the map has had a lot of updates and yet nothing changed. please take on something interesting. you have the skill to do it.
hulmey wrote:DiM wrote:54% support in the poll is a clear indication the idea is bad. yes it sounds strange but that's how it works considering the fact many people come and vote yes just for the sake of voting. heck i've seen maps with 80% support that got abandoned.
plus as gimil said the map has had a lot of updates and yet nothing changed. please take on something interesting. you have the skill to do it.
i agree that this map is in no way needed due to it being so similar to classic an world 2.1. However, maybe you could add some kind of theme to it! After all there are 3 AoM's out there. Why cant there be 3 classics?
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
gimil wrote:hulmey wrote:DiM wrote:54% support in the poll is a clear indication the idea is bad. yes it sounds strange but that's how it works considering the fact many people come and vote yes just for the sake of voting. heck i've seen maps with 80% support that got abandoned.
plus as gimil said the map has had a lot of updates and yet nothing changed. please take on something interesting. you have the skill to do it.
i agree that this map is in no way needed due to it being so similar to classic an world 2.1. However, maybe you could add some kind of theme to it! After all there are 3 AoM's out there. Why cant there be 3 classics?
Hm, there only 1 AoM
Kaplowitz wrote:I made it similar because i wanted it to be an 8 player version of Classic.
DiM: 54% means nothing. It all has to do with the number of people who voted "yes". The "no"s dont count other than the fact that they are not "yes"s.
And waht do you mean by the never changing gfx? I made a huge gfx change and then there were no more comments. Is there something i missed?
and there is only 1 AoM.
natty_dread wrote:I was wrong
Mr. Squirrel wrote:I don't know what you guys are talking about. I would rather play on a challenging well thought out map that was full of bland colors and lines than a boring map with great graphics. I think the map is looking good. If it was quenched right now, I'd still play on it. I always thought that we needed an expanded classic map, but World 2.1 was just too large for me, the games took forever. I really hope this map continues.
pepperonibread wrote:Kaplowitz wrote:
Were those divisions of Ukraine good or should they be changed?
Western Russia a good name?
Um... I'm pretty sure Bolivia is in South America
Were you thinking "Baltics"?
Return to Melting Pot: Map Ideas
Users browsing this forum: No registered users