North America

I agree with Spymoon, when I said reduce the big mountain by 10-20%.... I meant in size, not opacity. LOL


Also, 1 more tip, don't use the same 2 mountains next to each other, they will be noticed by all.

Hood's like the Oprah of mountains!

You get a mountain! And you get a mountain! And you get a mountain!!

Really digging it! Looks awesome!

You've left out... 4? Tiny island nations though (however, since they're all overseas protectorates/dependencies, it's allowable).

The only real thing, and I'll mention this again, just in case it got missed. Still think it would make more sense to include Minnesota and Iowa with the Great Lakes region rather than the Plains. A 5 border/6 territory region just seems pretty rough. However, if you did do that there would be 5 4/4 regions all in the same map area.

Oh! And I'd recommend changing your abbreviations (which are technically correct) to postal codes. You currently have N.Y., La., Mich and Pa. (as well as NW for the Canadian territory) That just LOOKS a little disjointed. I think NY, LA, MI, and PA look much more coherent and streamlined. As well as taking some of the crowding out of some of the smaller territories.

Ok. think i addressed all the feedback
Psymon mountain edits..lol aero i did thought you meant reduce the darkness.

Naathim. I usually wait for a second comment from you before doing anything lol. Especially if they are big edits, Usually you request the biggest edits..and then sometimes you change your mind about it lol. I've learnt to
save previous versions incase

Thanks Hammer, I thought I had Quebec range right, good to get some local knowledge. Neat thing about these mountains is they just blend with whatever background even in the ocean! An easy shift

Funny you say that Matty. I thought...heck why not do South America..just so I can use these mountains again!

Bonus changed due to Great Lake expansion.

On other risk variants, I liked playing on this map. Will be interesting how it goes with our capital mode.

South America sounds good too Hoodlum... You know what comes after that don't you ...the 2 together for a huge map...The Americas...just sayin

I like the new lakes distribution. It's different to the one of the United States map, which is nice for me.

Aaaaw! You replaced that beautiful mountain with a different one.
To resize a layer (Photoshop only, may be the same in PDN) use Edit, Transform, Scale.

The problem with too many of the same mountains near each other is, it's noticeable that the mountains are duplicated.
What I usually do is use 6 or 7 mountains and use a variety of Scaled sizes, Overlap positions and Layer orders to make it look like they are all different.
Just like snowflakes, from one perspective they all look the same, but they are all unique.

Bwahahaha! Fair enough! In my defence, sometimes you can't see all the aspects of a change will cause until it's actually don't and laid out in front of you

Or at least I can't! Like in this one, now it's very obvious that you don't need to restrict movement between Iowa and the rest of its new region with that river. I'd cut it back so at least Iowa and Wisconsin are touching. I'd think you might try to have Iowa and Illinois touching as well, but that might trim the river back too much where it would look a little goofy. That area's a major bottleneck. You needed it before because of Iowa, not so much now, I'd say open it up a little. At least Iowa/Wisconsin.

Well, maybe we don't need that river branch at all...

Standard complains about NY... it looks like N   Y

Just like to say: amazing work on the colour scheme. It may be worth getting some information about how colour blind people look at it, but it is still very clear, despite being geographically related

@aero I put a smaller version of that mountain, so it's back..

@naathim river edit

@Psymon NY fix   

Looking better all the time.

@Cireon, always thinking of everyone... rightly so!

I find it difficult to understand what a colour-blind person might see on a map, so I use a Grey Scale version, which usually tells me the pitfalls.
In this case the centre regions might be a bit confusing for the colour-blind.
Because adding a different colour / tone might spoil the aesthetics for non-colour-blind people, I would suggest making a thicker line for the Region Borders.

There are some websites/programs that allow you to see how a colourblind would see any image you upload.

See http://www.color-blindness.com/coblis-color-blindness-simulator/

The Region Border at Minnesota / Dakota, has a Gaussian Blur... it actually looks better than the others under Greyscale, so perhaps use a 0.3 Gaussian Blur on the rest of the Region Borders?

I like these mountains now!