South America

[quote=Matty]Some remarks from me: - Overall I like this map a lot. - It looks like a part of the Argentina region is not connected to the rest - is this on purpose? It makes holding one of those regions but not the other (Chile) quite hard gameplay wise. Probably this is because of realism, I don't know SA very well, sorry. I'm fine with whatever you choose, but it is a point to think about either way. - I feel the red port anchors are a bit too pixelly? Around their shadow/glow? - I don't like how the square border around the minimap feels. It feels unnecessary to the right, and it feels even weirder on the left/bottom. - Maybe opsition the passable/impassable legend elsewhere and remove the borders? - This might be solved by removing the borders around the minimap, but currently the minimap borders and the island borders look the same, even though the minimap is not playable, whereas the islands are. This would confuse me a bit if I was a new player. - I like the style of the map title, but it looks a bit pixxely too? Not sure if that's the right description really, it's not actually really pixellated, but ... it feels off somehow? - Overall the colour palette of the map is quite good, I like it. It all fits together and blends into one another quite well, without being too much of a difference. The outliers here are the very bright yellow region in the top, and the red region in the left. Maybe play a bit with these colours?[/quote] I'm glad to see interest from many on this map! :) @@Matty: Yes, a small part of Argentina is disconnected from the mainland (on purpose) and it reflects reality. We are discussing the subject a lil bit in a test game I'm in (there are 2 running games atm and 1 waiting for players). I see Argentina not much as a bonus region, but more like a transit or troop-deposit area; we can add one sea-route connection or even not, I'm open to both options. As it is now it's an interesting dead-end: there are 2 of them, the other one being Uruguay territory, almost surrounded by the river. I'm the guy who colored the black ports in red to make them more visible, I did it badly & quickly just for the purpose of testing the map, without caring about any pixelation. Proper graphic changes should be made by @@SethHrab which is the author of the map, and the guy who holds the file. He's a bit inactive atm, let's hope he can come back soon! Meanwhile collecting feedback and thoughts is worth. P.S. Someone mentioned (and I agree with) that the border between Guiana and Santarem is very short and hard to be seen, it's almost like a 4-corner border.

[spoiler=S.A. last SethHrab's version (with 97 territories)][img]https://i.imgur.com/k15G6o7.png[/img][/spoiler] [spoiler=S.A. Bishop's manipulation (with 99 territories)][img]https://i.ibb.co/Cs9RqFPJ/South-America-03.jpg[/img][/spoiler]

[spoiler] [img]https://i.imgur.com/GINcI0B.jpeg [/img][/spoiler] theoretically, i could redraw the map from scratch in a way that it doesnt look so bloated. i would simply turn it around the same way as the italy map is turned around. cuz we dont know whether seth will return. if so, what image size can i use? since its very large, would it be appropriate to make it more than 900 pix high? i would stick 1024 widh.

Yes, good idea for me, I like the perspective view! I like the perspective view, but all the game objects, like territory tags and anchors, should be vertically oriented (and equal in size); while other things not strictly related to the game, for exemple the ocean labels, may follow the map rotation and its perpective view. In other words: just like it is in the Italy map or The Philippines, follow those examples please. How many degrees you rotated it? Remember to add somewhere a compass pointing to the North. Even if this map has many territories, it's still better to stay in the reccommended 900 pixel height, or even less if you can. Please use the version with 99 territories, it's already implemented in the system and we have already played it a couple of times. Only the graphics need to be redone.

Let me simplify my comment: Go ahead please, that's interesting! A height of 900 pixels would be perfect, but 1000 or 1100 are fine too. Nur zu! Nur zu!

[quote=The_Bishop]Let me simplify my comment: Go ahead please, that's interesting! A height of 900 pixels would be perfect, but 1000 or 1100 are fine too. Nur zu! Nur zu![/quote] [url=]https://imgur.com/a/euLppfR[/url] okay, i started. i took 1100 high, to make sure names and circles fit well and dont look clutched.

[quote=Dima][quote=The_Bishop]Let me simplify my comment: Go ahead please, that's interesting! A height of 900 pixels would be perfect, but 1000 or 1100 are fine too. Nur zu! Nur zu![/quote] [url=]https://imgur.com/a/euLppfR[/url] okay, i started. i took 1100 high, to make sure names and circles fit well and dont look clutched.[/quote] [spoiler][img]https://i.imgur.com/gtXvMcX.jpeg [/img] [/spoiler] okay, thats it for today

i don't like the rotation. in my mind, i would have thought to rotate it the other way, but when i gave it a try it still looked weird. being from the southern hemisphere, i see this landmass all the time on news feeds, tv, playing against Argentina in Rugby, so that's why i might think it looks odd in rotation. the elongated width that sethrab did is more preferred, but i still dont like that either and had regretted mentioning that tbh lol. i think with south america i'd make the exception for it's natural shape. because of the large number of territories, it justifies that more than what my stance has been for other maps that were of small territory amounts. the reason Italy works with rotation, is because of how aero situated it with it's background. if you could pull off the same idea, that would work for sure. ([i]check spoiler[/i]) i really like everything else though, and feel excited for this map to work. we just need to make sure we have the basic dimensions sorted, so we can save some time. [spoiler=rotation perspective][img]https://i.imgur.com/Jemukmc.jpeg[/img][/spoiler]

Cool map!

[quote=Hoodlum]i don't like the rotation. in my mind, i would have thought to rotate it the other way, but when i gave it a try it still looked weird. being from the southern hemisphere, i see this landmass all the time on news feeds, tv, playing against Argentina in Rugby, so that's why i might think it looks odd in rotation. the elongated width that sethrab did is more preferred, but i still dont like that either and had regretted mentioning that tbh lol. i think with south america i'd make the exception for it's natural shape. because of the large number of territories, it justifies that more than what my stance has been for other maps that were of small territory amounts. the reason Italy works with rotation, is because of how aero situated it with it's background. if you could pull off the same idea, that would work for sure. ([i]check spoiler[/i]) i really like everything else though, and feel excited for this map to work. we just need to make sure we have the basic dimensions sorted, so we can save some time. [spoiler=rotation perspective][img]https://i.imgur.com/Jemukmc.jpeg[/img][/spoiler][/quote] hmmm, do you have this table as picture? I would add it. I will also check out some other table textures.

[spoiler][img]https://i.imgur.com/qe7Kw3P.jpeg [/img] [/spoiler] this is how i would arrange the remaining elements. the exact size of the elements, can be chanhed a bjt later, when i come into drawing them, but this is more or less the position i propose.

[quote=Dima][spoiler][img]https://i.imgur.com/qe7Kw3P.jpeg [/img] [/spoiler] this is how i would arrange the remaining elements. the exact size of the elements, can be chanhed a bjt later, when i come into drawing them, but this is more or less the position i propose. [/quote] works for me. i dunno if that's what we want to do collectively, have the same style as another map Italia., but i think something like this, honours the geography and that's important, especially since it's a continent. [b]yes. i do have the background desk texture![/b] created it. i just uploaded the italy map to chat gpt, and asked it to generate the table looking background. GPT AI is quite good for that kind of stuff. and can produce it in a minute. actually takes longer to upload it to an image site like imgur to display it. lol. it's super fast. AI is a game changer for cartography stuff, used in this way. i've uploaded the images it created. [spoiler=ocean texture GPT GB IRELAND][img]https://i.imgur.com/pD7O1cc.jpeg[/img][/spoiler] [spoiler=Desk Background Italy][img]https://i.imgur.com/sZZRiiS.jpeg[/img][/spoiler]

To be honest, I still prefer it north oriented.

I've been meaning to comment on this map for a long time, as it definitely has potential, even if several aspects of SethHrab's draft lacked quality in their execution. Now that we have a basic version of the map that isn't brutally pixelated/distorted, I can take it a lot more seriously. Personally, my vote would be against any north/south compression as this offends my geographic sensibilities ^^ and I'm sure lots of other people would agree. Like Hood said, doing it "Philippines" style would look weird as everyone is very familiar with South America's orientation and shape. I agree that rotating this map works well if done in "Italia" style, with a table background. With regards to rivers and bridges, I think SethHrab's version was lacking in thematic realism. When looking at a map that spans an entire continent, surely crossing a river shouldn't be too difficult? Of course, some rivers truly are impassable (like the Amazon, which has no bridges east of Manaus)... but in Seth's version there are bridges there! So where rivers are not truly impassable in real life, on the map they are impassable, but also where rivers are impossible to cross in real life, the map has bridges. Also, it looks like the rivers are misdrawn near the Rio Negro / Orinoco systems. Whoever takes on the task of doing this map needs to properly research these river systems in my opinion. [spoiler=Major South American Rivers][img]https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTvRUZa-zgapo2Zk5GhvwC5lKZS-2qjjVqllELtPstTBw&s=10[/img][/spoiler] I don't like the magnified Galapagos Islands or the magnified Falkland Islands. They are too insignificant on a continental scale to be given such prominence. The Galapagos Islands being handed 6 territories, and a +3 bonus in particular is thematically ridiculous in my opinion. At most, the Galapagos Islands should be represented as a single territory. With regards to the Falklands, while they are politically significant, again they are geographically tiny and should only be represented as a single territory. The only argument against this would be that they are technically not part of Argentina, so if they were a single territory, which region would they be attached to? For sure, the isthmus of Panama needs to be shown, even just as grey/unplayable area. And the ports need to be rethought in light of the oceanic divide. The Andes mountain range definitely needs including, and could possibly be extended further north if gameplay would benefit. I think the map has great potential. I like that all the regions are large and difficult to defend - most maps of this site have small, defensible regions. South America is very under-represented in our map portfolio so it's good to see this map sparking renewed interest. I also like the Tierra del Fuego separation from the rest of Argentina - it is true to geography and a nice little quirk :)

alright, spoke to chat gpt about the bridhes; i asked it to take all impassable ribers and amd rivers with bridges amd the location of the bridges: [spoiler]Hier ist meine vorherige Antwort auf Englisch, möglichst nah am Inhalt, ohne etwas inhaltlich zu verändern. I will go through this realistically from a geographic perspective, but also with game mechanics in mind (meaning: where rivers are real barriers and where they can realistically be crossed). South America is important because many large rivers have very few bridges, especially in the Amazon region. First I will explain things generally, and afterwards I will go specifically through the rivers on your map. 1. Rivers that are usually strong natural barriers These are often difficult to cross in reality and have very few bridges. Amazon River one of the widest rivers in the world often several kilometers wide very few bridges Bridges: near Manaus: Rio Negro Bridge (over the Rio Negro tributary) over the main Amazon River itself there are practically no major bridges in the central part ➡ For a game: Very strong barrier Rio Negro large tributary of the Amazon very wide Bridge: Manaus – Iranduba Bridge ➡ otherwise almost no crossings Madeira River very large Amazon tributary Bridges: at Porto Velho at Abunã ➡ otherwise many sections difficult to cross Tapajós very large river much rainforest Bridges: near Santarém some smaller road bridges ➡ usually a barrier Xingu very isolated almost no infrastructure ➡ almost no bridges 2. Rivers with many crossings These are much easier to cross in reality. Paraná River highly industrialized region Bridges: Ciudad del Este – Foz do Iguaçu Rosario Buenos Aires region ➡ in a game rather a weak barrier Uruguay River several international bridges Cities: Paysandú Salto Fray Bentos São Francisco River important Brazilian river Bridges: Petrolina – Juazeiro Pirapora several others ➡ moderate obstacle 3. Andean Rivers (Peru / Bolivia) Ucayali Marañón These form the upper Amazon basin. ➡ few bridges ➡ difficult to access regions 4. Specifically for your map I will go through the rivers you drew. Orinoco Bridges: Ciudad Bolívar Ciudad Guayana ➡ otherwise difficult to cross Magdalena Bridges at: Barranquilla Magdalena region of Colombia ➡ relatively passable Japurá ➡ practically no important bridges Juruá ➡ no major bridges Purus ➡ very isolated ➡ practically no bridges Guaporé border river between Brazil and Bolivia ➡ few crossings Paraguay River Bridges at: Asunción Concepción Formosa Tocantins Bridges at: Marabá Palmas Araguaia Bridges at: Araguaína Xambioá Rio Grande (Brazil) many bridges in the south ➡ easy to cross 5. For your game (map design recommendation) If you use rivers as borders / obstacles: Very strong barriers Amazon Rio Negro Madeira Purus Juruá Japurá Xingu Medium barriers Orinoco São Francisco Tocantins Paraguay Weak barriers Paraná Uruguay Rio Grande Magdalena 6. One important thing about your map Some rivers are strategically very well drawn, for example: Madeira Tapajós Paraguay Paraná These are actually major historical transport routes. [/spoiler] super imposed rivers from virtuositys picture: [spoiler][img]https://i.imgur.com/dq0GukV.jpeg [/img] [/spoiler] i will also add the mountains, simply didnt came to it so far. and i think virtuositys points aboit the islamds make sense. either add them to one of the exosting regions or make them additional bonus for the nearby regions. this could solve the problem with falcland islands not being part of argentina, cuz now they will be simply neutral and give+1 if you hold these islands and one region nearby.