Parrhesia Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 A watermark means you cannot simply STEAL and USE it. The 'fadedness' means you cannot simply STEAL and USE it. It directly prevents one from doing so. HENCE, watermark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feaw Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 (edited) A watermark is usually some kind of symbol. usually usually And sorry, but I'm only studying the mountains on that map. I'll look to other maps for refs on anything else. Tisk, looks like someone hates that map. And a shame, becuase it's pretty incredible, imo and shit, dat watermark. Edited August 29, 2012 by Feawture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share Posted August 29, 2012 (edited) I never said I didn't like that map. -_- I think it's a good map too, just not exactly what I was going for. Also, bad wording, I should've said always. I've never actually seen a watermark that wasn't a symbol. Edited August 29, 2012 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feaw Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 You really don't get it, do you? Reffing a map doesn't mean your map will end up looking like it. Ref the parts of it. The way things flow and work, and then, when you've learned that, execute that on your own map to make it look good. It won't look like his map. That's what we are saying. We aren't saying "study his map so yours will look like it". ...I hope you understood that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrhesia Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Also, bad wording, I should've said always. I've never actually seen a watermark that wasn't a symbol. Well now you have! Brilliant! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT075 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 I think it's a good map too, just not exactly what I was going for. feaw already fielded this but this should not be an issue this is why we said "ref parts of it" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share Posted August 29, 2012 You really don't get it, do you? Reffing a map doesn't mean your map will end up looking like it. Ref the parts of it. The way things flow and work, and then, when you've learned that, execute that on your own map to make it look good. It won't look like his map. That's what we are saying. We aren't saying "study his map so yours will look like it". ...I hope you understood that... Of course I get it. I'm not stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freohr Datia Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 (edited) Of course I get it. I'm not stupid. Actually it kinda looks like you still don't. If you understood then you would agree to reference the path x3 I think the main point is to keep your idea and what you want the path to look like, but also make it look more natural the way it does in Feaw's KoT's map. Edited August 29, 2012 by Freohr Datia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feaw Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Actually it kinda looks like you still don't. If you understood then you would agree to reference the path x3 I think the main point is to keep your idea and what you want the path to look like, but also make it look more natural the way it does in Feaw's map. ^It's Kitty's/Eric's map, but yeah, what you all said is truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrhesia Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Of course I get it. I'm not stupid. You didn't understand that something stated several times to be a watermark that served the purpose of a watermark was a watermark. You obviously need your hand held throughout everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freohr Datia Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 ^It's Kitty's/Eric's map, but yeah, what you all said is truth. Oh heehee I got mixed up x3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share Posted August 29, 2012 Actually it kinda looks like you still don't. If you understood then you would agree to reference the path x3 I think the main point is to keep your idea and what you want the path to look like, but also make it look more natural the way it does in Feaw's map. Oh. Well they could've just said that in the first place. Sorry, my mistake. But that doesn't mean I'm an idiot or anything. Furetchen, please don't insult me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrhesia Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 ... We've pretty much been saying exactly that this entire time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freohr Datia Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 ... We've pretty much been saying exactly that this entire time. I think she just needed different wording =3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uguu Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Oh. Well they could've just said that in the first place. Sorry, my mistake. But that doesn't mean I'm an idiot or anything. Furetchen, please don't insult me. That is literally what referencing something is. Were you just going to outright copy the mountains from KoT's map? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Lord Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Ffs, do we have to go through this every time? Ana, I'm no mapper, but the map looks generally straight up and down. Don't be afraid to move some of the cliffs around so you can make the mountains look more natural, and paths solemn look that well maintained. Especially here. This is a mountain cliff path type thingy, right? I think that a mountain path such as this would not be quite so meticulously maintained. I think that the lighter grass might be better instead of the path, but again, I have no idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share Posted August 29, 2012 What Freohr said. I suck at interpreting some things, remember? Hikarasuman: Of course not, that would be stealing. Mercenary Lord: It's "straight up and down" because the map is longer than it is wide. Of course it's going to feel like that. Other than that, what you've said has already pretty much been said, but thanks. And no, my tileset doesn't have any mountain cliff paths. I think it might still be missing some though. I don't see very many wavy path tiles either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Lord Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Mercenary Lord: It's "straight up and down" because the map is longer than it is wide. Of course it's going to feel like that. Other than that, what you've said has already pretty much been said, but thanks. And no, my tileset doesn't have any mountain cliff paths. I think it might still be missing some though. I don't see very many wavy path tiles either. Lol what. Straight up and down I was referring to everything. The mountains are exactly vertical, the path is basically horizontal stripes of alternating path and cliff going up. Cliffs...these things. Each different level of cliff seems pretty much exactly the same as the one above/below it, like so: the three cliffs that start on the right look pretty much the same. Also when did I say anything about wavy path tiles? The map itself is supposed to be a mountain path, right? Mountain paths are generally abysmally maintained, at least back in the FE times. Right now, it looks like a brand new path with a few pieces washed away by some kind of freak flood... I digress, I'm not very good at explaining my thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share Posted August 29, 2012 (edited) They all look different to me, aside from the end pieces. Those are the only two end cliff tiles I have though. But I'll see what I can do. Oh, and someone else brought up wavy path tiles, my bad. Edited August 29, 2012 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercenary Lord Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 I don't mean the cliff tiles themselves, I mean the length of each cliff on the right, they're all the same. Only trying to help! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariobro3828 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 The cliffs look unnatural, as if they were shaped by someone. In FE, cliffs are not man-made elements, and shouldn't be made to look so straight forward. That's a general rule of thumb for mapping natural elements. Nature is chaotic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT075 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 a cliff does not go in a straight line like that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share Posted August 30, 2012 Actually, some cliffs are naturally straight. I've seen some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT075 Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) for that long? EDIT even so cliffs aren't going to be that uniform especially not on a mountain path Edited August 30, 2012 by CT075 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) Yup, way longer. Here's some pics. Cliff 1 Cliff 2 Cliff 3 I did change some of the cliffs on my map though. Edited August 30, 2012 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.