Concise description: Reinforcement issue in USA New England (BETA): Drop down reinforcement menu has Bennington instead of Rutland (which is on the map).
Specifics/what happened: I had 4 men on Rutland and wanted to move 3 men to another territory. Rutland was not on the list, but Bennington was. Bennington in real life is located in southern Vermont, the same area as Rutland. So, I selected Bennington from the drop down reinforcement menu, and it moved men from Rutland on the map.
This will improve the following aspects of the site: Because it will have the correct territory in the reinforcement drop down menu. This will obviously alleviate confusion.
Last edited by AzureX on Tue Feb 24, 2009 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Concise description: Reinforcement issue in USA New England (BETA): Drop down reinforcement menu has Bennington instead of Rutland (which is on the map).
Specifics/what happened: I had 4 men on Rutland and wanted to move 3 men to another territory. Rutland was not on the list, but Bennington was. Bennington in real life is located in southern Vermont, the same area as Rutland. So, I selected Bennington from the drop down reinforcement menu, and it moved men from Rutland on the map.
This will improve the following aspects of the site: Because it will have the correct territory in the reinforcement drop down menu. This will obviously alleviate confusion.
WM, nice job on these. I've gotten at least 5 games in on each of them and think they've got a reasonable game play. I do laugh at all the people saying things like "this should be renamed Plains" or things like that but overall they're an enjoyable set.
yeti_c wrote:Congrats WM - I know it's a bit late - but I've not had the chance to say it.
C.
Thanks yeti.
Everyone, are the fixes above good? If so, then I will PM lack the changes.
WM
Great job WM! Thanks for listening and making some awesome maps! Vermont is a great place and I love seeing it accurately portrayed Keep of the good work man!
However, In the west there is a geographical mistake in the West. Crescent City does not connect to the "i5" or Redding. Arcata (7 miles north of Eureka), where I happen to live, does via 299.
Crescent city connects however to Grants Pass via 199.
However, In the west there is a geographical mistake in the West. Crescent City does not connect to the "i5" or Redding. Arcata (7 miles north of Eureka), where I happen to live, does via 299.
Crescent city connects however to Grants Pass via 199.
perrbear
Well technically it does by way of Arcata. I know it is not drawn 100% correct. But I stated before these maps would not be 100% correct as far as exact road location and looks. Not all cities on every road are labeled and not all possible roads between cities are placed. This was designed purely to ensure better gameplay.
However, In the west there is a geographical mistake in the West. Crescent City does not connect to the "i5" or Redding. Arcata (7 miles north of Eureka), where I happen to live, does via 299.
Crescent city connects however to Grants Pass via 199.
perrbear
Well technically it does by way of Arcata. I know it is not drawn 100% correct. But I stated before these maps would not be 100% correct as far as exact road location and looks. Not all cities on every road are labeled and not all possible roads between cities are placed. This was designed purely to ensure better gameplay.
My suggestion doesn't change the play of the map, which I have Ifound solid thus far. If Crescent City was simply replaced with Arcata it would make the map more accurate geographically as well. Crescent City connects to 5 but in Grants Pass Oregon via a beautiful but simultaneously horrible road - 199. Then From Grants Pass Redding is 3 hours south. Or one could drive 1.5 hours south to Arcata then go from there to Redding. Either direction from Crescent City you have to change major highways to get to 5. And both ways it is painful.
Redding is 2+ hours East of Arcata via 299. If you were to swap then names === though the location of Crescent city is correct... It would make the roads more accurate.
Finally, Crescent City is very small. Arcata has twice the number of people and if you were to put Eureka (Arcata's neighbor to the south) that has even more people. Crescent City is isolated and a bit out in nowhere land.
perrbear wrote:My suggestion doesn't change the play of the map, which I have Ifound solid thus far. If Crescent City was simply replaced with Arcata it would make the map more accurate geographically as well.
This might be a little late, but do you think you could darken the moose heads on Minnesota (Great Lakes)? I had a hard time seeing them, and maybe even the snowflakes on Colorado (Rockies).
If only every mapmaker was this fast...