Realm of Honored Players

it bothers me that the 3 oregons are not identical. That might not be possible given how they have to fit together but if you want them to be more similar then you can separate the best oregon into it's own layer then duplicated the layer and then go to layers -> rotate/zoom to rotate and move it into place. then modify it so they fit.

Be careful with colors when you redo it. i can see several spots that are missing color. zoom in and scan the whole map to spot them.

oregons?

[IMG]http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/3553/honormapregionterr.jpg[/IMG] Uploaded with ImageShack.us][/url]

Ok the text was done by Fendi.

This map is to give honor to the players that have gave so much to this site now and in the past...If I forgot somebody I am sorry!

Each players color that they use the most in game play is the regions color...as close as I can get them to what they use the most and each region is the shape of the state or country they live at.

So now what do you think of it?

i'll have to comment on the looks tomorrow but I do have a quick question. How did you decide which names to use for the territories? You haven't met some of them and a couple of them i haven't heard of.

Wow Thorpe, that map really shaped up, the graphics look nice. It's nice that regions are named after the top players. That way I can finally own them during a match! 

If you go to the members 4myGod have played and some of the others we have heard of ...they have played in the past a lot of games so I tried to get the ones that have more than the ones we have heard of and they would be up in their rank if they were still playing.
That is why I put them on the map cause they played a lot on very few maps and kept the site alive.

I just thought they needed to be on the map cause of their commitment.

i know your not going to like this post since you put so much work into this version but the map won't get even better unless I say it.

i was hoping that the border would have been replaced in this new version. it looks like computer graphics from 1995 which are characterized by low color count and lack of anti-aliasing. Also it's not centered correctly. there are 1.5 black squares on the left and only 1 on the right.

the ocean and colors are good.

But there is an issue with some aspects of the map being blurry and others ultra sharp and not anti-aliased. Specifically there is a texture layer that puts speckles all over the map that is too sharp in comparison to the rest of the texture. Maybe try blur 1 and then photo -> sharpen to give it some anti-aliasing. Or just remove the layer. That layer has the same 1995 graphics as the border - no anti-aliasing. Did you make that layer in your old computer program?

The white around the land looks fine and somewhat realistic if you just look at it and ignore the land. The problem is that it is too sharp in contrast to the blurry forests on the land. so either the white needs some blur or the forests need to be sharper.

I am not a fan of mountains with a top down perspective for risk maps. it is too hard to tell that they are impassibles. Mountains for risk maps should look as though you are viewing them at a distance from an airplane and not look as they would from a satellite. The mountains on the new United States map are a good example of a perspective that works best for risk maps. I assume that you followed a tutorial on the cartographers guild to make them in gimp. I have to say that I don't like any of the mountains that i have seen on any of the dozens of maps on other sites that i have seen use this method.

LOL....and this was almost all done in gimp and no 1995 program...LOL

Keep your comments coming Vexer...I do like them, even if I don't agree!

I will look at it closer to see what you are talking about cause you do have the "EYE".

And I am still smiling!
  Might not like it but ...like it to be the best it can be.

As for the mountains...mmm...I think you just have a problem with them...

Anybody else think the mountains should be like the USA Map? To me I do not like any mountains that look like the USA mountains cause they look like a cartoon and not real mountains, make a peak..color and blur...that is how mountains were made on maps in the Middle Ages.

Well, the USA map for example fives me a feeling that im not looking from completely top down, but just a little bit 3D-ish.
Your mountains are really very top-down. Also im not completely sure if the mountains bordering Votazap actually are mountains
(They could be planes like the one in Lucide.)

Your map is really middle age style, so you shouldnt do them like they are on the USA map though. Still, lowering the camera's angle might be nice.


Also, the green forests on yellow and orange have a very big contrast. Especially on Thaithai isle they are very, well, sharp.

But still, i really like the idea of this map, i think the gameplay would be nice, though im not very good at deciding that.
Would love to play it.

And, im on it

Thorpe, you think the mountains on the NEW United States map look like a cartoon? If you are talking about the old USA map then yes those mountains are terrible. But i was talking about the mountains on the new US map. And the reason why those mountains work better for a RISK map is because they are slightly unrealistic. It is harder to distinguish realistic mountains as impassibles. I really would like to make it a requirement that we have no top-down mountains on our maps.

I'm not the only one saying this. Matty agreed. They need to be at an angle and 3Dish. A similiar example is the great wall of china pntbttr did. if it was a top-down perspective you wouldn't be able to tell what it is.

If you want top down perspective mountains then they have to be subtle and only part of the texture. But if you want them as impassables then they need to look 3D. Like Matty said the mountains bordering the Votazap region are hard to distinguish. We have the same problem with the mountains on Africa 1890 and Glanru is going to fix them.

I spent a lot of time and looks at 100's of risk maps from around the web before deciding on the style for the NEW united states map. I really think they are the only kind of mountains that work for a risk map. By 'style' i mean the 3D perspective. you can make your mountains the same color and texture as they are now but adjust the shadowing to make them look 3D as if you are viewing them at a distance from a plane and not a top down perspective like a satellite view.

I am really sorry for not giving you this information before hand. I will put it into the updated guide when i find the time.

WOW! I didn't see this update yet! That is amazing! Really different from our other maps too! Great job Thorpe!

You have a much different style than any of the other map makers. I really like how you did it!

The only things you could improve are the mountains and the edges of the map (are they supposed to change in a ton of different places?)

[IMG]http://img803.imageshack.us/img803/5188/honormap1a1gimp2.jpg[/IMG] Uploaded with ImageShack.us][/url]
 

 Now I did the mountains...NOT FUN!..Looks easy but NOT!

I did the sea and land but I think I like the sharper edge before ...fits with the map...the sea was blurred and that I liked ..but to soften the edge to the sea ... "No"...I liked the crisper, sharp edge ..but what do I know?

The texture was brought up to the year 2012..hehe It did look like it was done in 1995!

What now?

The mountains look great! Much more like the ones from USA map, but not too much alike.
Don't know if others think the same, but alot of mountains have two colours, both red and yellow for example. Maybe its more beautiful when you make them completely red (or yellow or blue)

Also your minimap is not updated (especially around Votazap)

And maybe the white line between 1771 and Glanru should be extended a little bit.

But again, i really like this map!

the impassible circle is very pixelated around the edges...try adding a border around it...like a black line