Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
    • CommentAuthorSkidAce
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    Which of these maps do you prefer?
    • CommentAuthorSkidAce
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    Well let me change the format...
    • CommentAuthorSkidAce
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    First
      Landfall Overview CCPlus 01b.jpg
    • CommentAuthorSkidAce
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    Second
      Landfall Overview FR 01 v04b.jpg
    • CommentAuthorHadrianVI
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    The first one.
    The perspective on the second one does not seem to fit very well.
    • CommentAuthorthehawk
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    I also prefer the first one. It reminds me of the old Forgotten Realms maps that are some of my favorites.
    • CommentAuthorCalibre
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    First one :)

    I like that style. What is it?

    Cal
    • CommentAuthorGathar
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    The second one. I really like those mountains, the fact that they clearly are top-down make them look like a much more accurate map than the first map, which looks more like a drawing. In both maps, though, I think the mountain range is very wide and is missing a global structure. But I think that in the second one, it would be easier to increase the size of a kind of spine in the middle of the range that would give it the structure it lacks, then using another, softer, colour for the foothills, for a less abrupt transition.
    •  
      CommentAuthorQuenten
    • CommentTime5 days ago
     
    I vote number 1
    •  
      CommentAuthorMonsen
    • CommentTime4 days ago
     
    For this map, I like the coloration of the mountains in 1, but the actual mountains from the second one.
    • CommentAuthorLoopysue
    • CommentTime4 days ago
     
    I agree with Monsen, only I think its because the forest is more top-down than ISO. If the forest was ISO like the mountains, then I would probably prefer the first one.
    • CommentAuthorSkidAce
    • CommentTime4 days ago
     
    Good feedback folks. Thank you.

    I want to use the second one, because of the mountain detail and the top down.

    But the colors of the mountains and size are slightly off so far.

    Calibre, the first map includes;

    Trees: Annual Fantasy Worlds (fill).
    Hills: (eastern edge past mountains) Annual Fantasy Worlds(fill).
    Hills: (central area) Annual Jonathan Roberts (fill)
    Hills in Swamp and the brown ones to the west) Annual Fantasy Worlds (vari-color hill symbols)
    Mountains: Annual Jonathan Roberts (fill)
    • CommentAuthorScottA
    • CommentTime4 days ago
     
    Much prefer the first one.
    • CommentAuthorSkidAce
    • CommentTime1 day ago
     
    I think i am going to have to move away from top down. I like topdown because it bugs me that features on mountains are "always" on the south face, for example. Or if you have tall mountains, you lost half the terrain of the country behind it.

    I feel topdown worked well for my continent map, but for kingdom maps making those mountain ranges look right is a LOT of work.
      Alyndrica Overview.PNG