The second one is better.

The second one is better.

Fine, then I will use that one.

By the way, thx for everyones support.

Man. I would love to play those maps.

Already pending public this week.
After two times of trying to make it public,
I guess bonuses are big enough now for the map to fulfill the requirements(Thu).
Apparantly it will just need some time.

Edited 7/11/2015 06:56:21

I got this message...

This map, Metreoque London-Moskva version 2.0 develop dupo-doubled, doesn't seem to meet all of the requirements. [...]It must be possible to determine all territory connections just by looking at the map. This isn't possible on this map for two reasons:

1. A player can't tell where each sub-region exists within the main region just by looking. You should be able to easily correct this by drawing lines/arrows, or just writing the names of each sub-region on the main map.
2. Territories that are split: Imagine a player is looking at the bottom half of Elets-Don. They would have no way of telling that it also connects to Kasimov-Oka, since they don't even come close to touching. Split territories should be split into two seperate territories, or the map must be changed to show that they're one territory.

I'm surprised (not sure what's the problem with 1.) also I've never read in the wiki that splitted territories aren't possible...

I can see splitted territories in other maps however (https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=8210068)

There's a way to join two territories, but i'm not sure what it is, look on this map at the borders on Berlin: https://www.warlight.net/Play?PreviewMap=45901

Just a small thing I realised is that Klosterneuburg is actually not a part of Vienna...

Thx that's ok.
The reason for excluding Klosterneuburg is because it's a former district like Fiumicino(Rome).

Also,
maybe I should just retry with the map like it is, if splitted territories seem to be usually common ..?

Edited 7/18/2015 02:06:44

What is the starting lvl to play this one at because there are some good maps but most players who would like to play those maps do not have enough lvl to play them.

The automatic setting was 46,
but I wanted to leave it simply at lvl 1 for now.

That's a wonderful map. Is it published or not?

If not, I have a suggestion (which you probably don't want to hear considering all the work you've done, but anyway): on the left side of the map there is a grid (columns of 3, rows of 6) of superbonuses (such as GreatBritainAndIsles). The bonuses are confusing the way they are displayed now. For example, Poland bonus is in row 3 (grid south), but SouthernVisegard bonus is in row 1 (grid north) even though Poland is north of Southern Visegard.

So my suggestion is to make a outline of the primary map, shrink it down, and place it around the grid of superbonuses, then rearrange the superbonuses so that the correspond correctly with where they are in actuality. That makes for quick navigation. You could also put spaces between the words (i.e. GreatBritainAndIsles should be Great Britain And Isles).

Edited 7/18/2015 09:05:44

I think I get the first point now, you have to know which city fits in which place, if you have space left I suggest putting the name of the city on the main map, or maybe a number and then also put the same number at the city map.

I think I get the first point now, you have to know which city fits in which place, if you have space left I suggest putting the name of the city on the main map, or maybe a number and then also put the same number at the city map.

Ah, ok that makes more sense - I will fix this...

That makes for quick navigation...

Their are arranged after geographic coordinates of their centres (longitudes from west to east).
Making this superbonus locator is a good solution but unfortunuatly the map is maximum sized.
The spaceless words thing is a stopgap because for some reasons for example Crown_Dependencies lead to a missing bonus link :/

I guess I have an idea for indicating split territories...

Edited 7/18/2015 10:32:05

I think to solve the bonus link space problem, try this:

Go to Warlight:

Design Maps -> Manage This Map -> Edit Selected Version -> Bonuses Window -> Edit (the GreatBritainAndIsles bonus)

Once you're there, simply use the spacebar to put spaces between the words. Don't use the underscore symbol ("_"). This should solve that problem.

On your primary map document (Inkscape), the bonuslink should be BonusLink_GreatBritainAndIsles and you should add the new bonuslink in Warlight as Great Britain And Isles. No underscores.

Edited 7/18/2015 19:56:26

2. Territories that are split: Imagine a player is looking at the bottom half of Elets-Don. They would have no way of telling that it also connects to Kasimov-Oka, since they don't even come close to touching. Split territories should be split into two seperate territories, or the map must be changed to show that they're one territory.

Just curious, why is Elets-Don even a single territory? Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems really counter-intuitive to me.

Note that Fizzer didn't say split territories are prohibited, just that players should be able to easily see they belong together. For instance, in the case of multiple islands together being a single territory, this is commonly done by drawing dashed lines between (or, for a larger group, around) them.
While this trick won't work in your particular case, I hope now you understand what the issue is exactly.

In the similar case of Carnobyl'skaja, you might want to consider removing the "corridors" of the other territories between the three pieces of Carnobyl'skaja and make it a single, contiguous area. Also, consider getting rid of the enclave of Mogilev. (Fortunately, neither of those modifications would change which territories actually connect to which neighbours.)
While I appreciate many map makers take great pride in the accuracy of their maps, please consider this: you're making a map to play WL on; you're not making a map for geography class... If accuracy gets in the way of playability, wouldn't it make more sense to sacrifice a little accuracy (and maintain ease-of-play), instead of rigidly adhering to accuracy (at the cost of people having to play the map a few times before they even know how it works)?

I like playing beautiful maps, but not when I have to double-check for weird connections, multi-part territories and/or non-contiguous bonuses (to name a few of my personal dislikes) on every single turn.

Hope this helps,
Rob