Sired's Map project - Updated- 4/16 - files available see first post

It might be kind of cool to draw mountains on the map instead of just having a shaded area that says Impassable.
This is an example of what I mean on this game although I think you could do a better job;
http://gamersalliance.com/risk-the-lord-of-the-rings/

@siredblood:

1. Rivers - Now personally I think that they will add a lot of character to the map, but naturally, at the maps view point, you wouldn’t actually see them, so the scale would be off, little lines of rivers, would actually be 10s of miles wide lol… but like I said, I think it would be nice.

Rivers do not matter all that much to me. They may add cool landmark recognition, but I am not sure what else. Do you plan on showing major rivers where victory cities are located? Or if a river was a focal point of an important battle? Or will you use rivers as partial borders of territories? There are a lot of potential rivers to include, even in neutral countries, if any of those reasons are used. How large does the river have to be for inclusion?

@siredblood:

2. Capitals - Im thinking of maybe a Flag to represent the capitols, rather then just the basic roundel that’s on everything. If not a flag, maybe a larger roundel? Something to show its different. (even though we all know already, but still)

Something to make them stand out more would be nice. I always like the original Europe and Pacific that had larger roundels for the capitals (however those were also the only roundels on the board). I am not entirely sure if it would go with your theme for the board, but I have always thought it would be cool to do a riff on the larger roundel idea which would involve making it sort of fade out at the extents. I am not sure how to describe this accurately, though it would definitely look best with Japan’s rising sun emblem.

@siredblood:

3. Terrain land marks (with or without labels) such as the Ardennes. (there wont be many) Again, like the rivers, they wouldn’t be seen at the maps view point, but might make a more cool map…. and maybe not.

My stance here is similar to rivers above, but a little more skeptical. What would qualify? Can you give any examples beyond the Ardennes? I just see landmarks, particularly if they are unlabeled and/or have no significance attached to them to be clutter on the map and potentially confusing for some people. Again, that’s my opinion, but I would reconsider if there was a little more definition on what may be involved.

I have to say, that I’m all for little details/gimmicks like rivers, mountain ranges, rainforests, deserts and stuff.

But it has to be subtle. It shouldn’t interfere with the game you are playing. There should be an emphasis on the borders (the most important task of the map), the original control markers and the ipc values. In short the three things that are used during actual gameplay.

The other things should only come to your mind when you are looking closely. This would give some kind of novelty on the territory you just conquered/looking at.

I don’t know about the size you have in mind, but I think even on the standard map size rivers like the nile, amazonas or even the rhine and elbe wouldn’t look out of place/dimensions. Everyone knows this is not a satellite image.

Some kind of additional inspiration from the global war game. I think they did quite a good job with rivers and mountains (and they even got antartica ;) ):

• https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kltI_BlxKeQ/VjBcCxUtDZI/AAAAAAAAAeQ/SyPLJVbpovs/s1600/1936%2BRdeuced%2Bcopy.jpg

• http://www.globalwargame.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/IMG_7791.jpg

I don’t have any idea about victory cities.

not to totally bandwagon, but I actually love the terrain features of the Global '36 map. as far as the victory cities go, I know traditionally they are simply starred or bullet pointed, if you really like an artsy feel, maybe do a silhouette of a major landmark behind the name on the map?

As much as I love the graphics on the HBG 36 map, I would like Siredblood to make his different…. and if that means no terrain features, than I’m more than fine with that. However… Siredblood should accept the challenge of making a map in his own style no matter how different… that will look just as good as the HBG style of the 36 map, and if it looks better… than how lucky would we all be.

@Young:

As much as I love the graphics on the HBG 36 map, I would like Siredblood to make his different…. and if that means no terrain features, than I’m more than fine with that. However… Siredblood should accept the challenge of making a map in his own style no matter how different… that will look just as good as the HBG style of the 36 map, and if it looks better… than how lucky would we all be.

Truth.

let’s not let this get buried.

The ocean is so rich and saturated. I do kinda like it. Have you experimented with blending ocean colors based on latitude? Maybe not the overall open-ocean color, but definitely the colors surrounding continents and islands. Such that the equatorial/tropical islands have that electric blue-turquoise softening and the look gets colder or deeper blue as you move to more northern and southern latitudes? Not sure exactly how to describe what I am thinking.

The capital theme looks great! Really fits the style of the board. I am interested to see the other ones. You don’t think the transparency will be lost in printing do you? Or would you think it depends more on the quality of the print job?

Have you tried making the land borders similar thickness or style to the sea zone borders? I am thinking it may make the transition between sea to land more seamless and the land border more visible. I have no idea if that would actually make it better or not.

I like the ocean graphics, I like the land graphics I don’t like the huge roundel for the capitals. It’s too big for my liking. YG 1940 map at later versions had the capitals stand out by increasing the size of the rounder just by a bit like double.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37919.0

I love the shallow illuminated shores surrounding land masses, however, I’m not sure how I feel about the double lined SZ borders, and I think the large capital or VC icons are unnecessary given the very small role VCs have in the game. The colors look fantastic.

I have to say, that I really like the capital roundels…  :-D

The land colors are also really nice. So much better than the OOB map. I’m looking forward to see what you’ve made out of the other parts of the world.

The water colors are hard to judge from the small patch but look really promising.

@Young:

let’s not let this get buried.

Well that’s a problem with the Customizations Forum… there are so many pinned subjects on the first page that there’s only 5 spots for ‘new’ posts on the first page at all.  I don’t think any other forum has so many pinned subjects… maybe there should be a “best of Customizations” forum to put all those pinned ones so a new post doesn’t get “buried” after only 4 or 5 new posts elsewhere?

This is incredible. I love the new approach to making capital territories stand out more.

Have you given any thought to adding new territories? I really do like the thought to add the Azores and Canaries, but I’d love to see other additions as well. Perhaps dividing Indochina into Cochinchina and Tonkin? Also dividing Thailand into Isan and Isthmus of Kra?