Q-Bam Historical Map Thread

I've got a new map in progress and want some feedback. I'm trying out something new with rebels, giving them fuzzy borders by outlining the area with a 50-point opacity drop each layer. On one hand, I think it kind of illustrates rebel areas of control being-ill defined decently, but on the other hand, it kinda looks antialiased and jpegy which I think sort of gives the map a "dirty" quality.

unknown.png
It looks like it could be ok but I'd like to see it in the context of the larger map
 
I've got a new map in progress and want some feedback. I'm trying out something new with rebels, giving them fuzzy borders by outlining the area with a 50-point opacity drop each layer. On one hand, I think it kind of illustrates rebel areas of control being-ill defined decently, but on the other hand, it kinda looks antialiased and jpegy which I think sort of gives the map a "dirty" quality.

unknown.png
It's nice, but maybe not so much for "rebels." Maybe like tribes that could be considered vassals or stuff with undefined borders.
 
That feels good for finished timeline maps, but for maps designed to be easily editable it causes issues. A transition of striped or dotted areas would be more sensible for that, though simply using a border colour which is defined as being undefined is the current standard and works fine.
 
What method are you using to produce both effects?

For the first one it’s just reducing the opacity of one of the colors by 50 in Paint.NET, and then drawing each around a base shape, either inside or outside it, until there’s about 4. For the second, I took those same 4 layers, made them all a third color, then used the paint bucket tool with the horizontal lines fill with the rebel and country colors as my primary and secondary.
 
For the first one it’s just reducing the opacity of one of the colors by 50 in Paint.NET, and then drawing each around a base shape, either inside or outside it, until there’s about 4. For the second, I took those same 4 layers, made them all a third color, then used the paint bucket tool with the horizontal lines fill with the rebel and country colors as my primary and secondary.
Thank you, I was hoping you had come up with an easier way. BTW I prefer the original
 
unknown.png


How's this?
I've got a new map in progress and want some feedback. I'm trying out something new with rebels, giving them fuzzy borders by outlining the area with a 50-point opacity drop each layer. On one hand, I think it kind of illustrates rebel areas of control being-ill defined decently, but on the other hand, it kinda looks antialiased and jpegy which I think sort of gives the map a "dirty" quality.

unknown.png
I like the first one better personally. I know you don't do it that often, but if you wanted to, you could use it to show de-jure and de-facto controlled lands, or ill defined areas in general with no settled border
 
unknown.png


and here's what that rebel experimentation was for, the world on January 2, 1903. The day that Kane Tanaka, the recently-deceased (RIP) second-oldest person in history was born.
 
unknown.png


and here's what that rebel experimentation was for, the world on January 2, 1903. The day that Kane Tanaka, the recently-deceased (RIP) second-oldest person in history was born.
Like the addition of the Ugandan box in the Indian Ocean.
However, I still think the old version of rebel activity looks better although neither shows up the Kenyan rebels very well;-

6Z2sRNa.png
 
@Crazy Boris , I'm sorry but there's a mistake in your map. Chile never controlled nor claimed all of the Puna de Atacama. The country claimed that it owned a part of it after the War of the Pacific, but the frontier was not clear and the claims themselves might even have not been defined in general; because they were not in specific.

It was never fully controlled by Chile at any point either.
 
@Crazy Boris , I'm sorry but there's a mistake in your map. Chile never controlled nor claimed all of the Puna de Atacama. The country claimed that it owned a part of it after the War of the Pacific, but the frontier was not clear and the claims themselves might even have not been defined in general; because they were not in specific.

It was never fully controlled by Chile at any point either.

I know it was complicated, claims/control usually is, I actually had it shown as Argentine at first but changed it based on this as described on Wikipedia for the dispute

  • On May 19, 1891, the Matta-Reyes Protocol was signed between Chile and Bolivia. It recognised the Bolivian territories occupied by Chile since the War of the Pacific as ceded to Chile, including those in the Puna de Atacama, in exchange of defaulting some debts.
 
Like the addition of the Ugandan box in the Indian Ocean.
However, I still think the old version of rebel activity looks better although neither shows up the Kenyan rebels very well;-

6Z2sRNa.png
This seems like it will be a pain to edit/make oc maps of tho. QBam is meant to be simple, otherwise we would have already done so much more with the map.
 
Top