MAPS: Request map makers for help

[randowe]

In the southern half of the map the terrain is mostly woods, swamps and tundra. In the north large areas are covered with hilly and rocky terrain, with just gras and lichen, but only very few trees in the valleys or no trees at all. There are also thousands of small lakes, especially in the north between the rocks.

First picture shows a historic photo of Polyarny. You can see the rocky terrain. Second photo shows Polyarny submarine base with rocky terrain and few trees near the water.

[sympatyk]

Thanks for the clarification

It's just a consideration ...
If someone has to finish this map - is a classic map expected? ...
I miss the components - swamps, hills, rough ...
I personally would do my style ...
.... but, does anyone need this map?

[randowe]

I don't think anybody needs this map at the moment. I just wanted to share the files because i will abandon the Murmansk map.
If i ever need a 3K arctic map i would enlarge my Arhangelsk map, which is much easier

[randowe]

I think it is better to continue in this thread as the other one for the announcements of finished/uploaded maps.

Then i have everything correct with the railways and the ferry stations (port hex)

And left current map as 'modern' version

Sorry, i don't understand which map you refer too? The SSI map no. 41 with the bridges?

Moreover, there is also the "Caucasus" map (3850x2700)

Wow, that is an impressive map!

I have planned to do a Caucasus map too. It will show the western half of your map. I have planned to do some other Russia/Ukraine maps (all with the size of 3150x3000):

- Nikopol Winter (Nikopol Bridghead Winter 43/44)
- Belgorod/ Prokhorovka
- Sevastopol
- Vyazma (use the autumn grafics of the current Vyazma map buth with the same scale (~2km/hex) than my other maps, current map has a gigantic scale)
- Moskov Winter
- Stalingrad Winter
- Stalingrad (small scale, bug version of 274)

Tatar Wall on my 'Dzhankoy ' map

I always thought there was a Tatar Trench at Perekop Isthmus and a Tatar Wall from Volga (Stalingrad) to Don. But yeah, sources...

I guess you build campaigns with all your maps?

[MaXX_Oltt]

I think it is better to continue in this thread as the other one for the announcements of finished/uploaded maps.

Sure!!!

Sorry, i don't understand which map you refer too? The SSI map no. 41 with the bridges?

No, I thought that you talk about your latest map. ))

Wow, that is an impressive map!

Oh, it was uneasy...))

Nikopol Winter (Nikopol Bridghead Winter 43/44)

Great!
I have planned some maps too.
More or less finished (except ones that i announced earlier) оr in process are
Baranovichi
Bobruisk
Brest
Fastov winter - it looks 100% complete - but i don't remember when and how i did it
Dvinsk - one of my first map, so maybe I have to do some changes
Gomel
Gorodok (winter) or Gorodok-Nevel-Vitebsk area
Pskov
Luga
Smolensk
and Siauliai - I was working on it lately, but then it tired me and I switched to Constanta and Vulcanesti, which somehow turned out very easily ...

I always thought there was a Tatar Trench at Perekop Isthmus and a Tatar Wall from Volga (Stalingrad) to Don. But yeah, sources...

Of course trench or ditch - Yesterday I read about the encirclement of the 18th Army in September 1941 and Tatarsky Wall appeared there - so I got it mixed up. And it seems that Tatar things are everywhere - Cremea, Ukraine, Stalingrad...

I guess you build campaigns with all your maps?

so to speak - there are some ideas.
Maybe 11th armee campaign or based on its path. Not fully historical correct
I got 2 first scenarios with my new maps - it begins with soviet landing at Sulina and other points on Danube river.
Then in case of BV player goes to fantastic scenario Raid To Constanta - combine naval and airborne assault - and its impossible because very soon reinforcements from KG "Konstantza" arrives - and there are lot of them 226, 372 IDs from HoH Kdo 'Rumanian', elements of ID.46, ID.50,ID.72 from 11A, some elements from 5A (ID.242, IR(mot.) "Seydlitz', IR (mot.) "Lutziow").
So the soviet player must pull back or his forces will be trapped.
Scenario #3 i still did not make, but as I think it will be attack of I SS Armee-Korps (SS Pz "Tannenberg", SS PzD 'Der Fuhrer', SS Kav.Div.1) supported with XIV AK (242, 244 ID, Kav.Div.2) towards the river Kohylnck (???) - it uses map Vulcanesti
Then maybe a breakthrough from the pocket - map 371 "Bessarabia'....

And what's next - I don't know yet

It all depends on which book on the history of war falls into the hands and inspires me

[randowe]

No, I thought that you talk about your latest map. ))

Yes, i was talking about my map. I was under the impression (when looking at the german map in your link and my maps) that the railroads, were correct. Also where the railroads meet the ferry stations north of Rynok. Maybe just a misunderstanding.

Baranovichi
[...]
and Siauliai

Ok cool. Will have a look on them all

And it seems that Tatar things are everywhere - Cremea, Ukraine, Stalingrad...

I always wonder how the Tatar walls and ditches could survive hundreds of years without beeing washed away by rain. And i wonder if it was possible to stop a large force of horsemen with such walls and ditches But i guess that is not important for nowadays Open General.

I got 2 first scenarios with my new maps - it begins with soviet landing at Sulina and other points on Danube river.

Very interesting. At one point i wanted to make a large Danube Delta map but i just don't have the time. We can not have it all
[EDIT: Now i see your maps and actually we can have it all. 1556 is the map! But is the mapx file missing?]

"Raid To Constanta" sounds great too. I like naval landings Do you use your own efile?

[MaXX_Oltt]

Missing???? Are you sure???? I sent it...Please tell me if smth wrong with files

Do you use your own efile?

Yes. I use my own.It based on von Adler file, but i've made some more or less serious changes.
First i wanted re-arrange the units in strict order Here's a german section, and first go infantry, then tanks, all inalphabetical order, here's a soviet, but not like now when everything mixed up .
And then it started - I added lots of trucks (gather them from all e-files), then i looked at artillery, add some new units or re-worked them.
I tried to make a new class of unit called 'support'. It includes medium mortars, light MGs and some guns like soviet PP-27 and german leIG18, siG.33. It has fire range=2 and 'mechanized' attribute. Controversial idea - but I liked it
Recon - yes, we have armoured cars, in recon class, but it's not enough So i added "aufkl. inf" units who use bicycles and "Pz.Aufkl. Inf' - these ones use Sdkfz 251/10 or 251/9/10/11 as organic transport

In some scenarios I try to use 'supply column' units. With supply rules it represents more realistic supply system, But I'm not sure yet will I use them for all the time. AI can't see that its non-combat unit and sent them to attack.
Some changes were made in Soviet infantry - for example the so-called '41a Rifle 04/600' infantry is the weakiest soviet infantry - and it represent the actual situations when in September 1941 new TOE for soviet Rifle Division were announced, with very low ant-tank capabilities.

In fact i focused mostly on German and Soviets units.
And of course the e-file is far from being ready. I finished only the soviet, romanian, german, hungarian section

-------------------------------
UPD - if you want I can re-work "Constnta Raid' for AK-efile (or any other else) and send it to you. Or both of 2 scenarios, so you can play a mini-campaign. There are no special units, only the MGs and minethowers lose the ability to move and fire...

[randowe]

Missing???? Are you sure???? I sent it...Please tell me if smth wrong with files

The 1566 mapx file is missing at mapfinder. There is only the mapx file for Constanta 1565.

I like your 1566 Vulcanesti map I once had planed a Romanian campaign and the player should get the 10th Infantry Divison which was deployed between Galati and Tulcea. They then would capture Ismail move northwards beyond the lakes and then turn to the east towards Tatarbunary.
With the new map it would be possible to create such a scenario.

The optional supply rules you have mentioned are interesting but i never used them myself or played a campaign using them. I hope to use them one day in the future. Maybe for a hard german eastern front campaign. I even added a Munitionspanzer unit to the efile to go along the supply rules.

[MaXX_Oltt]

The 1566 mapx file is missing at mapfinder.

Hmmm, sad but true. And i dunno why 'cause I've opened mail and I've got all the files as attached and sent. Anyway I sent the map again.

By the way,how do you managed with rivers? For any other elements of map, I've got a file called 'Template' where I keep the cities, fields, airfields, woods etc.
But working with rivers I had to open the existed map, select and copy the fragment of the river I like, paste it in my file and then often use "wrap' instrument to distort it and fit to needed shape or direction.
And it's the most boring part of map-making.

[LuisGuzman]

Sorry, my fault, I added a whitespace in the mapx filename in the MapFinder database. Now it's fixed

[Ale]

but i never used them myself or played a campaign using them

you haven't played any camp with supply, because there is none i believe anyway... since i did some tests few years ago (for own interest, not "official") with supply units and no supply via map (i.e. all hex types except cities and ports set to 0%) where player would depend only on supply trucks (eventually planes) for getting ammo and fuel - while it was long ago and i something maybe changed plus i do not use game as much as you so i rarely comment - Maxx there is right about biggest problem with such solutions being AI... if it cannot use it properly all is in vain and already limited AI in old game is further handicapped, certainly something nobody wants. So only testing and looking at AI behavior (which surely would crate problems for it in big scenarios) is answer, for average player while it feels different is not so problematic nor hard to implement and be used by player... on topic i'll give you guys interesting historical cut about it - Japanese game Daisenryaku ww2 (i even talked about it in pub and there is link to emulated version on site Randowe knows)) used exactly such mechanics in "Sega-mega" game from 1991 creators of PG based (and copied a lot from) their game on i.e. supply units/trucks plus supply only in cities, so i had idea to try to look how would lets say basic old blitz camp look with them. but haven't touch anything for years but if anyone ever tries mind the AI again, good hint by Maxx... (if that's is what you meant by supply rules or i'm missing something which is not strange as i'm not big user now)

strangely enough, PG with 3 parts and other fasmous SSI games abandoned it in all versions dispite being something present in older game from Japan.... maybe because of same problems or due to desire to exclude "war micromenagement and logistics" and make games more faster paced or due to limitations in old games AI... nowadays newer games of similar style brought back some supply rules in and encirclement effects - but yes it is much easier post 2015 with AI and programming and allegedly smarter generations of us westerners (i don't believe it looking at TV but that's other topic not about OG....)) more like Japanese were once have fun whatever, again maybe something i miss about "supply rules" you both mention... what i can say for sure is that my time is very limited, ww2 interests not enough for having efile etc. etc. but if camp is ever made, i'd try.

[randowe]

By the way,how do you managed with rivers? For any other elements of map, I've got a file called 'Template' where I keep the cities, fields, airfields, woods etc.
But working with rivers I had to open the existed map, select and copy the fragment of the river I like, paste it in my file and then often use "wrap' instrument to distort it and fit to needed shape or direction.
And it's the most boring part of map-making.

I either cut out the parts of a river i need from the png map files or i take rivers or parts of rivers from the river layers in my photoshop map files.
For example for the Stalingrad map i used rivers or parts of rivers from my maps Nikolaev, Melitopol, Beryansk, Taganrog and the Perekop Isthmus map for some shorlines and lakes.
For big rivers i cut a river in two parts and increase the width.
For lakes i either copy existing lakes from the aforementioned maps or i create new lakes from cut out river parts.
I always try to avoid the use of any "rotate", "wrap" or "resize" or any other tool as it will decrease the quality. But yeah, sometimes i have to use these tools.

Like you, i have some collections of cut out cities, woods, trees, fields,... but nowadays i directly copy everything from the layers of the photoshop files of my finished maps, which have the same style than the map i am working on.
If you scroll down the thread with the clean background files you will find one of my collections. It's the city collection i created long time ago. But as i have said, i rarely use it nowadays.

[MaXX_Oltt]

I either cut out the parts of a river i need from the png map files or i take rivers or parts of rivers from the river layers in my photoshop map files.
For example for the Stalingrad map i used rivers or parts of rivers from my maps Nikolaev, Melitopol, Beryansk, Taganrog and the Perekop Isthmus map for some shorlines and lakes.
For big rivers i cut a river in two parts and increase the width.
For lakes i either copy existing lakes from the aforementioned maps or i create new lakes from cut out river parts.

It's the way I always do We use the same methods. For very small rivers or streams I use "brush" tool and then do "blur"/

try to avoid the use of any "rotate", "wrap" or "resize" or any other tool as it will decrease the quality.

Quite right! I use "wrap" with rivers and any other graphic objects, except rails very very accurate. Only for small changes. Exception as I said - the rails, but after wrapping I use "sharpen" tool.

Naming layers also helps a lot. Especially when dealing with cities. Now, when, as I see, the number of cities and villages on the map came up, and often exceeded 100 - the system when the layer with the city has its own name (for example, I placed the village of Pupkino on the map, I immediately named the layer with it by the same name - Pupkino ) saves time.
And when I already start assigning names to city hexes in the editor, I do not need to puzzle over what kind of village it is. In general, now I do this: when the map is ready, I make all layers with cities invisible, except for the first 10-15-20, save, load the map into the editor, assign the properties of the city and the name of the city there.
Then again in Photoshop, turn off the visible cities, and make the next 10-20 layers visible, and again into the editor. It's just that it's easier for me to work with a small group of objects. Okay, when there is a large city - there are only a few of them, and when it comes to countless villages and towns - there you can get confused where which of them is.
Well, but I think this is common truth ...))))

If you scroll down the thread with the clean background files you will find one of my collections. It's the city collection i created long time ago.

I'll look now and maybe I'll take something to me

[randowe]

Naming layers also helps a lot. Especially when dealing with cities. Now, when, as I see, the number of cities and villages on the map came up, and often exceeded 100 - the system when the layer with the city has its own name (for example, I placed the village of Pupkino on the map, I immediately named the layer with it by the same name - Pupkino ) saves time.
And when I already start assigning names to city hexes in the editor, I do not need to puzzle over what kind of village it is. In general, now I do this: when the map is ready, I make all layers with cities invisible, except for the first 10-15-20, save, load the map into the editor, assign the properties of the city and the name of the city there.
Then again in Photoshop, turn off the visible cities, and make the next 10-20 layers visible, and again into the editor. It's just that it's easier for me to work with a small group of objects. Okay, when there is a large city - there are only a few of them, and when it comes to countless villages and towns - there you can get confused where which of them is.
Well, but I think this is common truth ...))))

Very interesting

Nowadays i try to reduce the number of layers as much as possible. For example for the Stalingrad map i have around 20 layers of overlapping city parts for Stalingrad in one folder. But all other villages and cities are in one and the same layer.
Same with the rivers. All rivers and lakes are in the same layer. Only if there are overlapping swamps or something under or above the rivers i have them in a seperate layer. Roads, railroads and bridges are also each in seperate layers.
Then there are layers for the map file i use and the hex grid.
(I usualy use scanned US army paper maps. This is how it looks (i posted few days ago) viewtopic.php?p=11980#p11980)
Other layers for hill/mountains, coastlines, etc. when needed.

With the last bunch of maps i also started to work on the mapx file simultaneously. So i often have the map file open in photoshop, the mapx file in suite and firefox with openstreetmap.com. Then i save the map after i added a bunch of cites/villages and instantly add the names in suite. Then go back to work in photoshop. I have the feeling that i can work much more effective like this.

[sympatyk]

Hello Clemens -> there is one more man -> he can talk about the map technique ... and he is on the classic side ...
Together, you can create an archive for your game components -> layers of cities, rivers, tracks, forests ...
I, too, used to put houses on separate layers -> you can easily exceed 400 layers ..
Now, I do it successively -> I arrange a dozen houses -> if it is good, I merge into one layer

[MaXX_Oltt]

Nowadays i try to reduce the number of layers as much as possible. For example for the Stalingrad map i have around 20 layers of overlapping city parts for Stalingrad in one folder. But all other villages and cities are in one and the same layer.

I think that there is no universal solution. About a year ago I use 10-20 layers, all cities in one layer, all rivers in one layer etc. But then I turn to work with 'layer group'. At the end I usually merge 'unnamed' layers - swamps, woods, roads, rails and leave unmerged only cities and rivers

With the last bunch of maps i also started to work on the mapx file simultaneously. So i often have the map file open in photoshop, the mapx file in suite and firefox with openstreetmap.com. Then i save the map after i added a bunch of cites/villages and instantly add the names in suite. Then go back to work in photoshop. I have the feeling that i can work much more effective like this.

Good idea indeed!

layers for the map file i use and the hex grid.

Hex Grid? And where can I get it ?? Is it here on the site?

I usualy use scanned US army paper maps. This is how it looks (i posted few days ago) viewtopic.php?p=11980#p11980)

Beautiful map! And the 'shore line' - oh,no!! I think it took a lot of work.
US army paper maps - well, well, well - i really like the quality! Thanks!

[randowe]

Hex Grid? And where can I get it ?? Is it here on the site?

I prepared it myself from a SUITE screenshot, then enlarged it in photoshop. I uploaded it now and added the link to the backgrounds thread. You'll find it there now: viewtopic.php?p=9429#p9429 This time i was to dump to create a transparent file because every time after testing upload/download from picture hosting site the file was not transparent anymore. Anyway, after you have downloaded it, load it to Photoshop and select pink color with magic wand tool and remove all the pink at once.

US army paper maps - well, well, well - i really like the quality! Thanks!

I usually download the maps from the University of Texas https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe.html
Just a few weeks ago a message appeared, telling the map site will not be updated anymore, but it is still possible to download the maps.

[MaXX_Oltt]

Thanks a lot for the grid! I just didn't notice it at the first time)))

I prepared it myself from a SUITE screenshot, then enlarged it in photoshop.

LOL! That's what I've tried to do once, but I didn't like the final result and I delete it. So big thanks again.And for the link too...))
And one question - don't you remember what was the scale of original map you used working on your 1075 Rostov map??? It looks like 1:3km, but I'm not sure.

[LuisGuzman]

But you can also generate a grid from Suite
Click "Tools" and then "Create Grid template..."

[randowe]

But you can also generate a grid from Suite
Click "Tools" and then "Create Grid template..."

Thanks Luis I remembered there was this option in Suite but i couldn't find it anymore I was looking at mapx editor

[randowe]

And one question - don't you remember what was the scale of original map you used working on your 1075 Rostov map??? It looks like 1:3km, but I'm not sure.

I can take a look into the photoshop file. Map 1075 is a enlarged version of map 347, so the scale was determind by the latter map.
The scale is 2,5km/width of a hex.

[sympatyk]

But you can also generate a grid from Suite
Click "Tools" and then "Create Grid template..."

I also did not see this option in the Suite ...
...
Personally, I have been using a hex mesh generated directly from Gimp for many years
It is much more convenient - it is always adapted to the size of the image -> generating a mesh greater than 5000x5000 is not a problem
I will show you how to do it - I will record a movie - and I will make English subtitles ..
... it will take a while ..

[LuisGuzman]

Personally, I have been using a hex mesh generated directly from Gimp for many years
It is much more convenient - it is always adapted to the size of the image -> generating a mesh greater than 5000x5000 is not a problem
I will show you how to do it - I will record a movie - and I will make English subtitles ..
... it will take a while ..

[randowe]

This option is also available in photoshop. You can create seamless pattern tiles by selecting the designated area -> edit menu -> define pattern -> name pattern. Then you can choose the pattern from the list of patterns (there are also standart patterns available) to color the whole layer/picture or what you want, etc.
While the pattern option certainly is more elaborate i always was too lazy to create the tile (probably only take seconds) and used the hex grid i posted above because i had created this for the first map i made in 2017 and then never changed the method

[sympatyk]

I made the pattern and I use it to generate a hex mesh
You can see it here -> please be understanding and patient

viewtopic.php?f=67&t=437&p=12081#p12081

[randowe]

If everything is layered --> the work itself needs more time to decide - what setting to choose (several settings seem good) --> then decide whether a little more contrast, color, etc.
Since there are no exactly the same maps --> converting each one, it's decisions again (despite using the same procedures - different color saturation will result - different distribution of white saturation after conversion)
I sent Alberisch a message - when he answers, not necessarily soon
Yes, if you can, we move this conversation to the topic of maps

If there are too many layers, you can merge some layers or reduce the whole file to just one layer.
When i was new to map making i had a lot of layers. I mean, really a lot. But nowadays i try to keep things simple and work with much less layers. Especially on the bigger maps.

[sympatyk]

The number of layers will change during work --> they can be grouped, merged, but most importantly, signed.

And returning to our conversation about converting maps to the winter version, you can determine the features that should be pursued --> e.g. you indicated gray roads
You could also specify - how much color and how dark the forest should be...

[randowe]

Maybe the forests could be a bit darker. What do you think?
Once thing why summer/winter conversions are tricky, in this case the swamps and rough arctic terrain is lost.

[sympatyk]

Forests are a separate layer and can have any shade (lighter - darker)
When it comes to swamps, you can give them a distinctive shade...
Generally, I approach winter maps in this way --> winter (especially in the east) = snow (white color)
Snow first covers open spaces, swamps, meadows, clearings, and rough terrain. Snow also covers such places and blurs the boundaries between individual areas ...
In your e-file - custom = snow?

[randowe]

In your e-file - custom = snow?

No, i don't use the custom terrain.

[sympatyk]

As I wrote, swamps can be distinguished by color and so I did --> you can of course do it differently --> and again the decision --> each person may like something different ...



For summer classic maps, the drawing of the swamp has been fixed/determined/adopted --> and for winter classic maps - can it be indicated?

When converting the summer - winter map --> should you check mapx?
Looking at the drawing, some swamp hexes - I would read (from the drawing) as, for example, lakes

Middle drawing in full

https://drive.google.com/file/d/14ulCl4 ... sp=sharing

[randowe]

Please do as you like, it is your map

[sympatyk]

Your map --> my summer-winter conversion --> you are the father of this map
Who do I talk to about maps - do you see anyone else here?
Maybe you also want to do summer - winter conversions?

[randowe]

No, i don't plan to do summer - winter conversions. I just think that a converted winter map does not look as good as a regular winter map. There will be always something lost. Be it quality or graphics. I just think it can't be done.

Also, winter maps play not a important role for me. It is nice to have a winter scenario every now and then, just for the look of it (the snowy landscape).
That's why there are only 5 winter maps and 70 summer maps in my "holy grail collection of 3K maps":

[randowe]

So here is the plan: Additionally to the maps i want to create for a grand allied campaign (and which i mentioned in my efile thread), there are some other 3K maps that i want to finish or create out of enlarged old maps of mine. One map, Taganrog and Rostov, was halfway done and i finaly want to finish it. Then there are some other old maps of mine like the December 2017 map of Caithness, Scotland, which i want to enlarge. Or the map i am currently working on, Northern Crimea. I will use my older Perekop Isthmus map, cut it in the west and add to the east, so the whole north of Crimea with the Istmus and the eastern railroad and road connections can be on the map.
The northern Black Sea area will then be one of the other areas that is covered best with 3K maps (see picture below). Together the Black Sea and Mediterranean will have around 30 maps and are the best covered area in the world
I hope to finish everything and finaly retire from map making by the end of the year. After that i want to concentrate on campaigns

Please note, this map is not true to scale or 100% correct but it gives a general impression:

[sympatyk]

Good luck

[none]

Hi everybody.

Is there any bigger map of Kursk I might have missed?

I only ones I know of are the small #271 and the even smaller #231, and I definitely don't see how I can squeeze one and a half million troops in that!...

Kursk being a rather important battle, has anybody per chance made an adult sized map of it?
(It's not like it's a very difficult map to make either, just vast plains with some towns and roads... )

[sympatyk]

Are you thinking of a map according to this drawing?



Area 300x400 km?
There is no such map - due to the area ...

It's not like it's a very difficult map to make either, just vast plains with some towns and roads...

easy for you? --> are you going to use real terrain and scale?
I'm asking out of curiosity...

[none]

Are you thinking of a map according to this drawing?

Obviously of a smaller area!

But still big enough so your long range artillery doesn't reach all the way over to Kursk city right from the start...

The biggest issue with map #271 is that in reality the places where the combats took place are AFAIK north and south of it, and so mostly cut off.

What I'm looking for is a map much like #271, but with more area above and below. Could be of a smaller (map-)scale too, I don't plan on staging street fights inside Kursk. It only needs to be one hex big, just big enough to place a VH. It will be a "kill all enemies" type victory anyway.

easy for you? --> are you going to use real terrain and scale?

I wasn't planning on making one, but I might if there is no other option.

Anyway, to get back to your question, no, neither real scale nor real terrain: There is AFAIK not much of tactical interest besides a couple rivers there.
I'd probably just take #271 and add terrain north and south to reach a height of 5k, while pushing the width to 3k (it's 2k square right now). Or maybe go for the 5k square? It depends, I'd need to check the real world map and the exact description of the battle to see if there is something worthwhile to include.

Anyway, for the time being I've started working on the other branch of that campaign, so it's not extremely urgent, it will become so in a week...

[randowe]

Can sombody please help and extract a high res picture from this pdf map of khalchin gol?
https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/jog/ru ... ngolia.pdf
Nothing i try works.

[sympatyk]

This can be used to magnify 4x
- download the pdf file to your computer
- open in GIMP (Photoshop)
- set the resolution to 400,000 px/in when loading



- will open an image of 11680x8853 px
- save to png(jpg)

I can send it to you - but how?
png = 120 MB
jpg = 11 MB

[randowe]

I didn't know i could simply open the file with photoshop It works, many thanks!!

[randowe]

As i wrote before, i am working on a new Vyazma map with the map 741 by Andrey Zorin as resource.
In the original map the roads (apart from the highway) are brown so i think the designer maybe wanted to show the Rasputitsa.
I want to stay close to the original and paint brown roads. What do you think how this looks when tire tracks are visible like in the picture?

[Dimitris GR]

I like it

[sympatyk]

You make the road on a new layer, right?

A good idea for local/field roads to be drawn as wheel tracks
It's similar to a track, only not as regular, especially on bends
A terrain layer should remain in the space between the wheels.. this is just my suggestion (variable terrain layer - wider, narrower)

I like this idea

[randowe]

Thanks guys, i will do it like shown in the picture

You make the road on a new layer, right?

Yes, there are several layers in one map file. One layer each for

- map resource (scanned paper map etc.)
- hex grid
- trees and woods
- cities
- bridges
- roads
- railroads
- rivers
- fields
- background

It depends on the map if i need additional layers for things like a coastline, mountains or swamps for example. When i was new to map making i was working with many many layers but nowadays i generally try to keep the number of different layers as small as possible.

A terrain layer should remain in the space between the wheels.. this is just my suggestion (variable terrain layer - wider, narrower)

Sorry, i don't understand this. Which layer do you mean?

[sympatyk]

Sorry, i don't understand this. Which layer do you mean?

I was talking about real terrain
Between the right and left wheels (their tracks) - are you planning semi-transparency so that e.g. grass (background layer) is visible

Will you draw (the road) manually or using some template, brush ..? --> some automation?

[randowe]

Sorry, i don't understand this. Which layer do you mean?

I was talking about real terrain
Between the right and left wheels (their tracks) - are you planning semi-transparency so that e.g. grass (background layer) is visible

Will you draw (the road) manually or using some template, brush ..? --> some automation?

The muddy roads i will draw by hand using a standard 1-pixel brush with smooth edges. I have not tested transparency for the mud roads yet but i don't think i will use it.
The test roads in the picture look okay as they are and i plan to do it like this. Of course i have to see how it looks when the map is more covered with cities, woods etc.
But work is very slow and i am still doing the rivers (i only work on the map when there is something in TV and i watch TV very rarely, so i do not work on the map often )

Usually when i create the roads i just copy the needed parts from my other map files, but i never used muddy roads, so i have to paint them all new.

[randowe]

Another hypothetical question (for now ):
If one were to make a map of the southwestern Kursk Oblast / Seym River, which map style would you prefer?
Please point me to the maps, that have a fitting style for this region in your opinion. Tell me the map numbers please.

[sympatyk]

I am not authoritative - I would use my style ..

I think a combination of two backgrounds --> would be good


and