Middengeard

I like the look. Far better than the blue.

Like I said, I am not an expert, I used three different maps or so to figure these things out myself. Looking again and remembering the map from Battle of Middle-Earth (you also play some sort of Risk there), Isengard is being approached from the south (from inside the Gap of Rohan) instead of the east or west.

Thanks for looking into it though and like you said: it is not possible to make it perfect because the geography and territory boundaries are a bit off. I once made a territory/region split together with Matty on Middle-Earth based on the geography while also taking gameplay into account, but that was a whole different map (and we discarded it because of copyright).

One more question: can Lune Valley attack Forlindon, because if not then you have a dead end of two territories which I don't really like, especially because there is already another (Harlond, Harlindon).

Region bonuses I suggest (based on region bonus = number of territories/3 + number of territories to defend/2.5 from Vexer)
Eriador - 4
Arnor - 6 or 7
Rhûn - 2 or 3
Rohan - 4
Lorien/Moria - 2 or 3
Mirkwood - 4
Rhovanion - 2 or 3

I suggest making Lorien/Moria 3 and Rhûn and Rhovanion 2. They all have 4 territories and 3 to defend, but making them all the same would give too many of the same bonuses I think. Lorien/Moria kinda lies in a choke point so I think that would be worth the extra point. I think that for a similar reason Arnor could be made 7, because you take in half of the East-West connections so you will be under attack a lot. Giving a slightly higher bonus might mean that people actually go for it

Hmmz, Im not completely sure about Isengard anymore, but I believe when Gandalf and Theoden went to isengard they crossed the river Isen. They defenitely crossed the ford. So I think Isengard should be at the west side of the mountains.


I don't think the lorien,eregion,moria,gf region should be split in two, especially because eregion was also occupied by elves (a long long time ago ), so it should be together with Lorien.

I absolutely love the colour it has now - awesome job Thorpe!!!


I think the bonus of the golden wood and the small Rhovanion should be 2, as it has 3 borders and 4 territories - same as the Rhun region.

The golden wood region is not the best region to have, as it's centered in the middle, but its not worth 3 I think.



The todo's for this map now mainly consist of the shoreline (its too pixelated, and rather grey instead of black (aka very dark grey) compared to other lines) and text I think (if everyone else likes the new regions and stuff).

An example on the "grey vs black": At the bottom right of Harlindon you see the black line from the river transfering into a grey line from the shore.
An example on the pixelated: zoom in at the extending part at the left of Forodwaith, and you will see the sharp pixelated shoreline, while you see a blurry (as in, not sharp - you are zoomed in remember?) line around Angmar.



Edit: after reading Cireon's post I realise this:
Both Rhun and Rhovanion have one territory (that is also a border) that can reach all other territories in the region - making sure you can put lots of troops there and less on all other borders.
That makes the regions really attractive - and then they are also in hidden corners of the map.
Lorien has none of them, so maybe 3 would be a good bonus after all.
I also agree with the 7 on Arnor, and am still doubting about the Eriador bonus.

When I did the calculation the number for Eriador was around 3.8 I think, so that is why I rounded up to 4, but as it has many dead ends, it could also go with a 3, though it will not be much of an attractive region then and I think there needs to be at least one at that side of the map

http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/1651/24su.jpg

Did I fix it Matty?  Do that eye thing that you do!

I cannot do that from my tablet, but I can say that the arnor bonus is hardly visible, as it coincides with the territory lines.
Also, rhovanion has 2 borders, and a bonus of 3
The 2 far away from the Rhun
(all about minimap)

Apparently, I don't have the correct "eye" for maps.

I like this one best:
http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/6655/acchor.jpg

i like that one thorpe.
ur doing great!

Whoops, I must have made a miscalculation there. Should be 2 then

The shore lines are alot better (they solved the last pixelated issue I think), but a bit black.

At some places I don't notice it at all, and at some places I do.
For example, the river at the left of the Gap of Rohan, and the border between the Gap of Rohan and Fangorn.
There you see that the river is really dark, where territory lines are alot lighter.


I really love the map as it is. Great job, now lets hope someone slays that copyright monster for us.

You have to have at least 32% change ...then no monster!

Funny how places look darker or perfect...and other places are lighter to you...when they are all the same contrast and darkness...how can that happen? Your eye going sideways? 

It is this "Map Curse"!!!!

But guess what... I see it also!  WIERD!

Its because I am in fact, just like most ppl around here, a human.

And when you see a grey line on a yellow background, it looks darker than the same grey line on a green background (for example).


So if you want perfect information about this, you'd have to try Fendi.

Sorry Thorpe but now I'm going to be a mean ol' witch.

- The mountains are good but they could use some work here and there. There is also a random line in one of the mountains in Garrogk (brown region) but it's not a big deal.

- I think it looks at least 100 times better after you reduced the glow but the map has a brownish tint over it that makes the colours appear a bit washed out, don't get me wrong, the brownish tint is good and it gives the map that extra feel but as I see it, the amount you have now is a bit too much.

- The rivers could use some more work, as Matty mentioned, some places appear pixelated. There are also lines that are thinner than others and bright spots here and there.

- The texture is very pixelated at some places, it is mostly visible in the brown region. Not sure what the cause is but maybe you could smooth it out a bit.

- As it has been mentioned before, the text can be better.

I can maybe help out a bit if you send me the map but it might take a while before I actually do any major work since I'm pretty busy right now.

This map has come a long way and it's only getting better and better, nice work. 

On the rivers ...I had a layer that was above the lines of the rivers...fixed.

Texture on the brown was because I had put in to much contrast on the texture layer...fixed.

Working on the river outline color...Matty

Tweaking those mountains again!

Looking at the map now for mistakes...we will see if I have the "eye" for it.

I really like to thank Matty and Cireon for their much needed inputs. For everybody else that made their inputs known, I could send you an extra 1,000 points.lol...really thank-you!

Comments help the maps to keep moving forward, which helps the site.

Labor of love.


Your Papa

yeah i see that random line... huh. lots of randomness in this map's history, like that random green mountain that once was. i can tell middlengeard will be a map, eventually.

YOU CAN DO IT THORPE!