Medieval Rus'

i thought the slanted look makes it look more like names on a real map :(

You could use coat of arms, crests, or flags for each of the regions on the minimap instead of the names and in your long list of extra bonuses you could simply reuse the symbols. It would make it easier to quickly identify the extra bonuses and if the symbols are small enough it would help declutter the minimap. You could remove the territory borders in the minimap to make it a bit cleaner. It's a lot easier to put names on a minimap when the actual map is smaller and has fewer regions. I still think you should decrease the number of territories and regions or at least add some impassibles to break things up a bit.

[quote=Dima]Okay. this is final version. chenged teutonic knight and few additional bonuses and added title. Adding rivers is possible, but i rly cant decide where and where to add bridges. Tell me, if bonuses are okay. I would like to proceed with naming the territories. cheers! [img]https://i.imgur.com/wsici1l.jpeg[/img][/quote] beauty is in the eye of the beholder lol. when i create my maps, i don't create them of how i want them to look. apparently my taste is cheesy lol. i follow the map guidelines as much as possible, and then draw things to the style of the usual critics, such as aero, psymon, naathim, matty, cireon and others that might take an interest. with the experience of 20+ maps now, i've saved A LOT of time predicting what a critique would be, (they would usually be the same from the same people). in the end my style is a collection of a bunch of these critics. nothing is more frustrating than to re-do stuff over and over, especially when first making a map. so with my feedback, while most of the critics aren't active i'll let you know that your map is only at the gameplay phase still. while the graphics will need an overhaul, according to map standards, and the typical critiques u might get from the art team. u can always get help with the art dept. i havent take an in-depth look at the map gameplay, but i know there is way too much text, the maps that aren't popular on the site are the confusing ones. things have to be kept as intuitive as possible. since it is at the gameplay stage, i wouldnt worry too much about the graphics, other than the layout of things (which i have mentioned before). u will also have to try your best not to get offended with feedback. most of the time it is right. most of my maps, have turned out way better from it than what i would have produced on my own instinct. be prepared for a long process. some maps take months, even years to finish, due to activity or interest. there is no promise that a map will get published on the site either. the roman empire map of mine you like, has taken years, due to lack of interest and no activity from head cartographers. i still won't know if it will ever get published. i think your theme has potential, as theme maps were the direction of (mia) head cartographer @@aeronautic . just chip away at it as a learning thing. as feedback comes in, assess and probably attempt to tackle the edit. @@aeronautic has been inactive for a long time now. I had a break from cartography at the same time, and only getting the urge to do stuff lately. while aero has been away, @@The_Bishop has somewhat acted as an authority on map creation. his critiques are helpful, and his strength is in gameplay. he hasn't logged in though for a month. i'm not the usual person to critique another mapmakers map, but since they are inactive, i guess im stepping up and we also have @@pntbttr one of our original map makers. i agree with what he has already mentioned, good luck

[quote=Dima]a stupid question, but....... .....how do i put the circles inside? do i need place the neutral, gray circles everywhere? right?[/quote] Crop the image with all the different color circles so you just have the grey one. Then copy and paste it as many times as needed and move each one to a territory. I find that it's best to put all of the territory circles on a single layer so that you can easily hide them if needed.

alright, done some rework today, mostly game-play wise and mini-map. gonna post updated version later. so if you intend to make more feedback, wait until i post the update. i also added two rivers.

The sweet spot for complexity in a map is what people can comfortably keep in their head and the complex region combination bonuses would immediately put me off this map, let alone trying to make it balanced. The map that comes closest to this level of complexity is [Eld World](https://dominating12.com/assets/img/maps/10.large.jpg) and it is among the site's least popular. I don't think you need the extra bonuses because if you hold that many regions already, a +1 suddenly becomes much less impactful. In [Atlantis](https://dominating12.com/assets/img/maps/76.large.jpg), which is still one of the more popular maps of the site, we did actually design super regions. Instead of giving you another bonus, we just limited geography so that if you hold all regions in a super region, it becomes very defensible and you free up troops to use elsewhere. Finally: one tip I've seen helps balancing maps a lot is trying to choose capitals. That typically starts revealing problems in the map layout early on.

Hello and thank you for replies, here is the latest update of the map: [img]https://i.imgur.com/9vmLUqY.jpeg[/img] [b]Changes[/b]: [b]Degrees[/b]: I have turned the map 90 degree, to get more space for mini map. Now the crimea points south, as Axobongo wished. Hoodlum likes the maps to be horizontal. I am okay with both. For me it was just important to ger more space. [b]ABS[/b]: And most importantly i have reworked the additional bonus system. Now there are in total 3 layers of bonuses, of which 2 are additional. I understand that some people are not fans of additional bonuses, but i would like to hold to it, even at the cost of the map being less popular. I like to test things and go new ways. After playing caped/fog games many times, I came to the conclusion, that additional bonuses would enrich games, at least the ones with this setting. Original risk didnt had the maps we currently have, such as italy and mediteranean, there were no rivers and mountains and there were to additional rules/game modes, such as same time or capped etc. These things came later and are now accepted and loved by some people. Capped, fog, same time, no cards, capitals, increasing cards, certain maps, all these things have their "fanbase" and certain people who like it/dislike it. I would never play increasing card games and if it were the only setting in risk, i wouldnt play risk. I also would never ever play on certain maps, such as classic map, avatar or any small maps. I like large maps, many players, fog and cap. So based on the fact that tastes are different and everybody got his/her preferences and that things change and develop, i would stick to the additional bonus system. For people playing only increasing card games, additional bonuses are useless, but for cap and no cards, they are an enrichment to the game. They enable more tactical choices and moves. And maybe some people who dont like it, will come to enjoy it, once they try it few times. But of course we can argue about the execution of the additional bonus system (ASS). I already listened to the feedback and removed the lengthy text. Instead i placed two additional simple graphics. [b]Minimap[/b]: The minimap in the middle looks a bit unclean. The final version would be more legible. Basicly, some regions, the ones with two colors, can give an additional bonus to two different parties. For example Edisan, Budjak, Poland, Pskov, Pereyaslavl and Moksha. [b]Names and circles[/b] I have added territory names along with circles, to see whether they will fit into a territory. Some territories needed to be expanded, such as the ones in kiev, chernigov and polotsk. The remaining territories will fit circles and names without problems - i have tested it. But i will add circles as the very last step. I have also tested multiple writing styles. I will decide which one to take later. The names are taken from all kind of maps of that time. I checked maps in every language i am trained. Names for Rus were easy to find. I mostly used russian sources. Names for qipchaqs were more difficult to find. I mixed the names from different time eras, so some of the names come from times of the nogai horde and crimean khanate. Regarding the teutonic knights: there were many names here, but i decided to take the german names, because the knights were of german culture, not of the local balto/slavic one. [b]Design[/b]: I have added some banners for fun, but i think they make the map look to crowded. I will remain them later i guess. [b]Borders[/b]: Some territory borders of wolga bulgars on the minimap are outdated. Ignore them. Only the bonus is important. [b]Rivers[/b]: I also added two rivers. They roughly resemble Dnepr and Wolga.

[b]Minimap[/b]: I also made the writings horizontal. [b]Bridges[/b]: Added some bridges. The small black lines.

note to myself: increase Pereyaslavl wrting on the minimap another thing: I never play capitals. can anyone tell me how/where position them? theposition of capitals depends on theamount of players. i checked iton mediteranean map and the positions of capitals seem to beimbalanced sometimes. At the same time you can have only 2 territories between a cap and in another case 4. Is it still ok? Another thing: I guess i will have to enlarge some of the territories, because they are too small and the circle & name, although fit into the territory, are ppaced a bit to tight and maybe ir doesnt look good. At the same time this happens in other maps, such as world expamded and australasia. I will need to do some testing here.

note to myself: remove one teritory from chernigov. circle and name dont fit.

smolensk, not chernigov

I'm kind of a ghost here, but sometimes I get back. Three levels of bonuses, plus the disputed areas on the second level - if I guess it right (it is not explained) - sounds really too much of a complexity. It might be cool but people will complain if they don't understand, so it must be done in a way that looks very clear. But, it will benefit game-play? Overall the map is nice, I like the historical subject. The making is quite good. North oriented version is much better in my opinion. Whatever the meaning of the black thick line, it looks too thick! Bridges aren't great, but perhaps they are just provisional...

[img]https://i.imgur.com/Flgec07.jpeg[/img]

i would say enough discussions for now! lets test the map!

[img]https://i.imgur.com/tZ4xQiu.jpeg[/img]