Italy

I thought the issue for most of people was to think that Ferrara and Verona are connected, not Mantova and Bologna. Really if you look carefully it's clear how things are but in the fastness of the game someone can miss the correct connection. Maybe we can try to adjust it, if your problem is Bologna I think it can be easy moved a bit to south. But the major issue I think is created by Mantova tag covering too much of the border with Verona... I suppose. Anyway I think Aero did a great job, this map has got so many territories in such little space (as you can see there is a lot of ocean/sea). Really at some point I wanted to give up and I thought it was not possible to fit all the elements, but finally he did it. However possibly there is still place for some improvements. Personally I think also some port-anchors can be made a bit more intuitive, especially from my experience sometimes people miss the ports in Sassari and Catanzaro.

Duly noted. I shall give it a few tweaks when I can.

I love this map. But I dislike the square nature: it's bad for gameplay as it doesn't fit on your screen. This probably doesn't matter much for consecutive games, or for long term games where you can just scroll as needed. But for sametime games where you need to be on the ball it makes it a bit tricky. It would also make the map prettier on all screens (I think - this of course being an entirely subjective point). Has it ever been considered to tweak the map to make it better fit a screen? My apologies if this has been considered in the past (I haven't read the thread) and disregarded.

The_Bishop and I designed the map rotated, not for aesthetics, but because Italia is such a long thin country that it caused too much scrolling when in its normal orientation. I can't remember the exact amount of vertical (y axis) pixels saved by this rotation, but I seem to remember something like 15%-20% The amount of territories that The_Bishop was striving for was 81, which dictated the scale of the map and the necessity of the islands for game-play. You'll notice that Italia became a benchmark for the least size that territories and borderlines could be before losing their intuitiveness, clarity, aesthetics & ability to house a Game Circle, which also has a knock-on effect on the territory labels. There is still a small graphic amendment required to resolve an intuitive issue at the bridge area, but it will have to wait for now. I don't think there is a way to reduce the vertical size of this map without deforming it. Therefore it will have to be regarded as a non-suitable map for ST games until we can develop another nice 81 territory map for you.

I like the rotation. I was thinking that if the rotation was increased by 15 to 20 degrees it would further decrease the y to x axis ratio (the top right legend might have to be moved to the bottom left if that was the case). But that might be an acceptable deviation from the north orientation for cartographers? Or we can continue scrolling. It is a gorgeous and fun to play map!

Rotating the map isn't as easy as it sounds, it's not like rotating a flat image, all the labels would have to be redone, as you say, the mini map legend would be off screen so would have to be moved. Besides all that, it still may not allow the image to sit inside a standard 768px monitor height. We tested the rotations extensively when we developed it and there was also the matter of aesthetics from a straight text on a rotated map issue, where when the rotation was increased, the effect of the rotated game board on a table was lost when the text remained straight (as it would have to be) and the image and the mini map text were offset past the point where the brain accepts that everything is rotated, causing a false effect. I can't justify redoing this map to make it fit a 768 height, it would be too much work for little gain. As I said we will try to develop another 81 territory map more suitable to Non Scrolling ST games. Thanks for bumping this thread anyway, it jolted me into doing the previously discussed graphics amendments. There were quite a lot of things that had to be done to make the bridge and connected territories more intuitive, but hopefully this update will have resolved that. I had to move quite a few labels around as well, to eradicate confusion of associated territories. If the labels and the bridge are now more intuitive in that area, I will of course adjust the game circle positions on the uploaded map to suit the new label positions. I made a new bridge with a more acute angle to ensure that there can be no confusion about its connections. I also made the Anchor Ports more prominent and I recoloured the yellow ports to make them stand out a tiny bit more. Most of the Anchors have been moved more over the sea, which should make them more noticeable?! [spoiler=Current Live Map for reference][img]https://dominating12.com/assets/img/maps/54.large.jpg[/img][/spoiler] [spoiler=Post Live edit 1][img]http://www.the-inkstore.co.uk/map_resources/Italia/Italy-edit1.jpg[/img][/spoiler]

Addition: As I remember from our rotation tests, further rotation also caused the map to look too much on it's side and too severe a rotation to keep the impression of a rotated game board on a table. It is currently rotated at 15 degrees and as I recall, 20 degrees was too much and still didn't come anywhere near reducing the vertical scrolling to zero.

wait let see Aero's first ...

Sorry Bishop, I already made the changes requested and pretty much put the anchors where you have proposed them anyway. I also made a new bridge and adjusted the labels. (See above)

Uhm ... maybe I have to tell you Aero I was tring to do it by myself ... Yes, TheMac, I tried and I know, it is a bit annoying in sametime games. Usually I play it in "smaller view" and reduce the browser zoom at 90% so that I can see the whole map. But in sametime games your "action bar" is almost always active, still covering a portion of the map. Now it is embarassing because I had to post something about the previous subject and delayed some days. But I don't want to skip this new subject, let me just go in chronological order. [spoiler=Current for reference][img]http://i1354.photobucket.com/albums/q700/Photo_Bishop/Italy%20Main%20Source%20copy_zpsxd5cwj0o.jpg[/img][/spoiler] What I propose for more intuitive and visible anchors is something like this: [spoiler=Small adjustements proposal][img]http://i1354.photobucket.com/albums/q700/Photo_Bishop/Italia-Anchors-05%20copy_zpsphp6rxzj.jpg[/img][/spoiler]And I have also moved some circles, especially around the bridge.

As I said, the changes I made were pretty much the same as yours, so we were on the same mind set. I also went further with the bridge and made a new one to get a better, more intuitive angle, so there can be no more confusion.

Oh yes it is not bad aero. The new bridge also. Well maybe we can discuss some details tomorrow bcoz now i'm too late.

I think then new version is better.

This could get quite confusing to viewers, so I must point out that Bishop & I didn't know that the other was working on a fix for the lack of intuitiveness in the bridge area and anchor positions. [b]Bishop[/b] has suggested fixes by moving some Labels to new positions, he has also moved some Anchors to make them easier to see. [b]aero[/b] has suggested pretty much the same Label & Anchor new positions, but has also made some graphic changes to incorporate a new bridge with a different angle. The yellow anchors have also been brightened to make them more noticeable. So that you can see the suggestions, I have placed the Current Map and both Suggestions for you to compare & analyse. Hopefully we have fixed all the concerns with this map and can refine (if required) any Label & Anchor positions to suit the map? [url=https://dominating12.com/assets/img/maps/54.large.jpg]Current Live Map for reference[/url] [url=http://www.the-inkstore.co.uk/map_resources/Italia/Italy-edit1.jpg]aeronautic's Post Live edit 1[/url] [url=http://i1354.photobucket.com/albums/q700/Photo_Bishop/Italia-Anchors-05%20copy_zpsphp6rxzj.jpg]The_Bishops's Small adjustments proposal[/url] [i]Take no notice of the blurring of the Labels, the map images are reduced to about 90% by the coding and are pending a fix. This does not affect the Game Image, but for now you will have to take my word for it that the full size image does not have the same blurring.[/i] [b]Edit by Matty:[/b] If you view this on a low resolution monitor (less then 1380 px wide or something) then it is a bit blurred indeed, rightclick and open as a new tab to see it in it's full glory. Don't take our word for it :)).

Lol I think it would have just been easier to adjust the course of the river south to the bologna border then back up to the padova line and angle the bridge across that way. And blah blah blah accuracy. It's a better solution. Both of the current propsoals the bridge is still difficult to see. Aero's fix for the bridge is better than Bishop's. Prefer Bishop's anchor placements. Glad to see you two perfecting this already really wonderful map!