- Mark as unread from here
- Posted: 9 years ago
-
Post #16
Well, I wasn't submitting this map as a candidate for the site. I was asked for an example of what I made for LandGrab, and that's what I made for LandGrab. The problems you have with the map here wouldn't necessarily be a problem there and are desired by some. It's not like I can't change my approach to meet the tastes of this site. When I argued for bigger maps earlier, that didn't mean I wanted them to have the mountains that I do or four corners.
Also, on LG, if you right-click a territory, it will tell you the name and the value of the continent it is in. You don't have to scroll per se. The chart you mentioned is meant to show who owns which continent. Some maps have some of this information drawn into the image, but no, it's not a requirement there. The understanding is that, if you play enough, then you will just memorize it anyway. It's not like it would be hard to include a table for continent bonuses, though, for maps here.
So yeah, tell me what some of the standards are here, but don't feel the need to put my map on trial. I could already tell that, stylistically, it doesn't really go with this site.
Also, on LG, if you right-click a territory, it will tell you the name and the value of the continent it is in. You don't have to scroll per se. The chart you mentioned is meant to show who owns which continent. Some maps have some of this information drawn into the image, but no, it's not a requirement there. The understanding is that, if you play enough, then you will just memorize it anyway. It's not like it would be hard to include a table for continent bonuses, though, for maps here.
So yeah, tell me what some of the standards are here, but don't feel the need to put my map on trial. I could already tell that, stylistically, it doesn't really go with this site.