High Seas [Quenched]

by **gimil** on Sun Feb 03, 2008 8:45 am

"to the south sea" and "to the scotia sea" could use something to show there a connection rather than looking similar to terr names. my suggestion would be a thinner font, something less bold, maybe in italics

by **benny profane** on Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:12 pm

this looks great!
can't wait until the graphics catch up with the border and images.

the border highlight sounds good, maybe even just make it thicker and bolder.

by **iancanton** on Tue Feb 05, 2008 8:35 pm

lacadive sea ought to be laccadive sea.

http://www.laccadive.in/

is there such a thing as the philippine sea? south china sea is much better known and the area is very well-defined, bounded by china to the north, the philippines to the east, viet nam and malaysia to the west and malaysia to the south.

http://vm.nthu.edu.tw/southsea/english.index1.htm

timor sea doesn't go north of the equator (that part belongs to south china sea).

it'll be interesting to see how u colour the map!

ian.

by **AndyDufresne** on Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:04 am

I think this map may be one of my favorite maps to look at...I get the feel like it was pulled out from an old archive somewhere and we're using it for World Domination.

--Andy

by **oaktown** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:07 am

No big changes... I just wanted to get this started again, now that I've had a bit more time to devote to CC. Calculated bonuses for the regions, and made an inset map that I like better than the old one.

Next on my to do list: play with the overall look of the main map, and make some borders more clear.

by **edbeard** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:38 pm

where on the map do you plan to 'name' the continents?

by **jako** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:50 pm

edbeard wrote:where on the map do you plan to 'name' the continents?

i dont think he needs to now that he has added the glowing borders to separate the different continents.

by **edbeard** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:05 pm

jako wrote:
edbeard wrote:where on the map do you plan to 'name' the continents?

i dont think he needs to now that he has added the glowing borders to separate the different continents.

I think you have to have names for your continents (and show them to us on the map not just in the XML). Tell them the name of the area they are holding. every map has this.

by **Sir. Ricco** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:31 pm

I like it. this might be the first one to make it through to the Final. :lol:

by **oaktown** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:24 pm

edbeard wrote:where on the map do you plan to 'name' the continents?

I was wondering how many versions I could produce before somebody called me on this!

I still intend on considerably changing up the look of the playing area, but i haven't been able to settle on a look. Eventually I could run the region name under the other elements - like I've done in Berlin.

The alternative is, of course, no region titles. Other maps haven't done this, but it's not like it would matter much. Over the course of the game as long as you know where the region is and what bonus you stand to pick up by holding it, who gives a damn what it's called really.

The regions will be:
North Atlantic
South Atlantic
Indian Ocean
Arctic Ocean
North Pacific
South Pacific
and I honestly don't know what to call the small region around and including the Med... "The Seas" ?

But honestly, what does the player gain by knowing this?

by **Unit_2** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:26 pm

How about adding some lakes, like the great lakes and stuff so you can cross the conts.?

by **oaktown** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:38 pm

Unit_2 wrote:How about adding some lakes, like the great lakes and stuff so you can cross the conts.?

Well, if you were a 19th century sailor you couldn't actually cross continents via the great lakes... nor can you do it now.

I have been toying with adding a few rivers to bring the territory count up to closer to 50 - the rivers wouldn't be a part of bonuses, but would make it more challenging to hold a bonus - since each river would border only one ocean/sea territory, they would be like de-facto parts of the regions.

I'd be looking at having the Nile feed into Med, Amazon into Equatorial Current, Mississippi into Caribbean, The Yellow or Yang Tze into S. China Sea, Indus into Arabian Sea, and maybe the Niger into the Gulf of Guinea? That's be 48 terits. ??

by **edbeard** on Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:48 pm

RE: the continent labels

I've noticed it for a while but it just felt like the right time to do it.

I just wonder what type of precedent it sets. If it happens then other mapmakers will have an excuse not to do it on their maps. And, no offense to anyone out there, I suspect this will happen quite a bit.

Do you think it would look horrible if there was a 'Middle East' type of labeling?

by **lozzini** on Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:18 am

i think 'holding all rivers' shopuld have a bonus if you do make the rivers

by **Skittles!** on Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:21 am

If you want a river for Australia, you could do the "Darling-Murray River" that connects to Great Australia Bight, if I remember correctly.

by **FreeMan10** on Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:38 am

Do the two northern seas wrap around the globe to connect on the back side?

(Sorry, don't remember the names, and the pic doesn't show in the topic review.)

by **benny profane** on Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:42 am

FreeMan10 wrote:Do the two northern seas wrap around the globe to connect on the back side?

(Sorry, don't remember the names, and the pic doesn't show in the topic review.)

if you mean Baffin Bay and Chukchi Sea, i think the ice cap prevents a connection.

by **Ogrecrusher** on Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:48 am

FreeMan10 wrote:
Do the two northern seas wrap around the globe to connect on the back side?

(Sorry, don't remember the names, and the pic doesn't show in the topic review.)

if you mean Baffin Bay and Chukchi Sea, i think the ice cap prevents a connection.

Not anymore! The Northwest Passage opened this year I believe ;D

by **oaktown** on Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:11 am

benny profane wrote:
FreeMan10 wrote:Do the two northern seas wrap around the globe to connect on the back side?

(Sorry, don't remember the names, and the pic doesn't show in the topic review.)

if you mean Baffin Bay and Chukchi Sea, i think the ice cap prevents a connection.

Right, no 19th century connection. I can make that more clear.

If this were a contemporary map, there'd be almost no ice cap at all - just swimming polar bears.

by **FreeMan10** on Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:28 am

benny profane wrote:if you mean Baffin Bay and Chukchi Sea, i think the ice cap prevents a connection.

Yup, those are the ones I meant. It doesn't seem that they connect, and there's no "To..." text, like there is at the Antarctic, but I thought I'd ask. May want to make that a bit more clear.

I'm liking the look of this map!

by **InkL0sed** on Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:21 pm

You could add in the Eerie Canal to connect to the Great Lakes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erie_Canal

by **oaktown** on Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:45 am

some little things:
• added region names, with the exception of the seas - not sure what to call it, or where to fit it in. Great Seas? Inner Seas? Or just the Seas?
• color changes.
• added army circles, since it can't hurt given the new colors... already noticed I forgot at least three. :roll:

• probably some other things I've forgotten.

by **Incandenza** on Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:17 am

Lurves me the graphics on this one, oaktown.

However, the graphics set up a couple of internal contradictions with the map, especially in keeping with the whole "keep it 19th century" concept.

The first problem I have is that there was no Suez Canal back then, and thus no Med-Red connection. Oddly enough, this could work in your favor. Conceptually the three Great Seas (which I think would work fine as a continent name) are all part of the same trading axis, especially given the age of empires that this map suggests. So you could keep Red as part of the continent, but cut off the connection and make the continent non-contiguous (and prolly bump the bonus up one), nicely simulating the whole "shit, we have to sail around half the goddamn world to get these trinkets from genoa to djibouti."

Also the borders are perhaps too crisp for a period map. More to the point, Antarctica is waaaay too crisp. Seems like a perfect point to indulge in some creative license and have either a large "here be dragons" bit (perhaps a bit too old-timey for this map), or an speculative blob labeled Terra Australis (given the fact that the continent was still largely unmapped as late as the mid 20th century).

Sorry, this is me in "pain-in-the-ass historical stickler" mode, which I'm sure you'll remember from berlin.

(of course, if it's an abject choice between gameplay and historical authenticity, I'll always opt for the former, but I think that creative solutions can be found, especially this early in a map's development, that satisfy both)

Speaking of pure gameplay, I don't recall how the previous mapmaker used the 'doldrums' concept, but if we're talking 19th century here, the doldrums could be used as unpassables, given that the doldrums are areas of weak, intermittent winds notorious for impeding the progress of sailors. I noticed that you abandoned the concept early on, but to be honest I think you might have given it short shrift.

by **edbeard** on Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:30 am

I like pretty much all the changes you've made.

The only thing that I have a problem with is the land itself. For some reason, I feel like the land is sticking out too much. That's the part that jumps out to my eye instead of the ocean.

by **gimil** on Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:13 am

edbeard wrote:I like pretty much all the changes you've made.

The only thing that I have a problem with is the land itself. For some reason, I feel like the land is sticking out too much. That's the part that jumps out to my eye instead of the ocean.

I dont think this will be a problem once numbers are placed on the map, theres also not much i feel can be done.

High Seas [Quenched]

Who is online