World Double

+1 to this.

Well, I suppose Cbt also agrees with his "hybrid" version, that actually is Matty's version with a small amendment. And others also expressed positive agreement, since I promote it to plan A. The graphic realization requires to modify a bit the space dedicated to minimap and title, but it doesn't seem such a great problem.


Let's critic it again please!

Soo yeah, I think the Ocean text shouldn't be upside down - no text is.

As for the ovarall feeling of the map, it's very, well, pale.

If someone can read this, maybe do the north map as ocean names, and the south map with basins / ridges labeled if you don't want to double up on the exact same ocean font which is why I presume south ocean names were flipped over.


EDIT:
More readable maps with trenches, fault zones, rises, basins, ridges, etc.
http://www.freeworldmaps.net/ocean/pacific/
Links to all oceans under the map.

The reason of upside down text is that it follows the other maps which are not north oriented, i.e. Italia and The Philippines. They have compass, sea names, coordinates and title having text which follows the orientation of the map. I believe all the elements that are not strictly related to the game can (optionally) have orientation. Territory labels and bonuses instead are forced to stay vertical, otherwise you get crazy reading them.

Anyway ocean names can be rotated if you think it looks better. Probably they also need to be reduced in size to make the map less busy. Adding the ocean ridges doesn't seem to go in the same direction though, and also I would have some problems in the middle of the map to put the ridges of both worlds all together.

I think it might be better to have a connection line between Middle East and Argentina rather than India and Argentina. Not a huge issue and I apologize if it's been suggested and dismissed.

Other than that I like WD-10.

• Turned ocean names verically
• Given brighter colours where the land was too pale
• Added ocean ridges from satellite image. I had to cut it somewhere due the double nature of the map.
• Modified connection Argentina--India to Argentina--Middle_East

I'm not sure if these ridges are an improvement, especially not with the nescessary cut.

Also not a huge fan of the texture, how do others think of it?

I think it's an interesting and unique idea, but it doesn't fit very well with the rest of the map.

In general I think I would prefer if the style of the map stayed closer to that of the other World maps. Each of them has a very recognisable style, but they're still very distinguishable on first glance.

The ocean floor ridges overcomplicate the aesthetics of the map and the joint line even more so.

If I could suggest something to make your job easier? Although Pastel Like, I like the land colours, especially after you brightened them, but to make them look distinctive and easy on the eyes, you need to make the oceans darker.

Your ocean layer will be below the land & text layers so the following procedure will work well.
Find a nice texture for the oceans (not water, it's too cheesy) and overlay a Colour Adjustment layer to find the best colour and tone that you find the most aesthetic.
Look at some other maps for ideas of sea textures.
If you are struggling to find a texture suitable, let me know and I'll make a few and post them here for you to choose from?

I don't disagree with Aero often, but I think he's dead wrong here. I think this looks awesome. I love the real world texture of the ocean. Maybe subdue it a touch so the connection lines stand out more. But it's pretty awesome looking to me.

I for one also like the looks of the new ocean (maybe should be subtler). But, what's that line and why is there, and don't like those letters that can't be read.

I don't think that the oceans have the right label (I would put none, actually) and SA needs a color replacement. The texture is not the best I'd say too.

Weird to see how Kamchatka appears there, next to Alaska, and the St. Lawrence Islands are visible and have land texture in some of your layers. Either paint them or remove them.

I also think it looks awesome and gives a touch of realisticism to the map. Probably it stands out too much and ocean texture now looks more visible than land texture. Before eliminating the satelite image for ever (since it has been a great job to adapt it to the map) I would make another test, reducing the opacity and trying to eliminate the cutting line in some way.

Anybody noticed that Ceylon Island (Sri Lanka) is missing? It is surely large enough to stay on the map, so I'm going to add it. It will take a bit of time redoing land layers and border layers.

Plus, I am thinking that Nunavut it wasn't a bad idea to solve the Greenland problem, or optionally also Buffin Island.

EDIT@Psymon: Chukotka Peninsula actually is very next to Alaska, you see it there because the image is enlarged and contains "more than one world"... I don't know how to explain it.

Yes, I know, but again, I would just remove it.

Ok, got it, I removing Siberian land in the up-left corner and Alaska land (St. Lawrence) in the up-right corner.