SpiffyJack

Just a thought... On a different scale, this little rail line works in 3 station areas, easy transport route.. All track is level. Food for thought.

@Broxzier .. You feel like completing the scenario with the stripped map? chose the options etc. from the builders ... get the game file extension so the park versions can be separated. I have a few ideas but i'm only going to use whats been agreed to prior to design. I agree with you, the map is done. elevators chair lifts mini trains monorails theme choices ride types stall types landscape types Lets at least lock the map where its at, Just the map with no recent station etc.... IMO.. no offence @Deurklink thanks

I am somewhat torn as to which direction to think on this decision. THIS IS ALL JUST MY OPINION... I do know I'm not feeling the idea of stations of any type built into the cliff areas as they will act like bottle necks for peeps and paths. The ease of using chairlifts is a plus, but perhaps only use for the flat lands to top of cliffs and maybe a series of elevators could work as well. If the transport rides operated as transport rides I would probably think differently. On the flip side I ask myself, why design a global transport system at this time? First focus should be from entry gates to central area. By the time that task has a direction, other concepts will be presented and the park will react at that time. If a builder wants to create an area far away, perhaps temporary transport can be used, but there will always be a path involved anyway to keep peeps happy. ATM that's all I have.

But you were correct.. (*chuckles to himself... the one time I upload the wrong file..lol . ) Once the scenario options are complete it, it can change to a game file but I'm not doing that part.

@Deurklink ... It didn't really matter But here is the matching file. Group Park 7.sc6

I was just thinking... All done. Group Park 7.sc6

CLAIMING SCENARIO!

Cool changes man! Keep in mind though (everybody) when modifying scenarios only use ONE file with NO incremental notations. ie: It will always be Group Park 7.sc6. When the build starts it will then use the incremental file structure. .01 .02 etc. I'm just enforcing Broxzier's structure FILE NAME CHANGE BELOW CURRENT GROUP PARK SCENARIO 7 Group Park 7.sc6

Yes

Group Park 7.sc6

This is a cool map. It's a big mother that's fur shur! LOTS OF POTENTIAL AWAITING YALL! UPDATED FILE BELOW! Group Park 7.sc6

CLAIMING SCENARIO!

Looks like @G_Force has joined the dark side, Welcome ... I've used that Technique for a while also but its not the cleanest look most the time

Welcome... lots of builders out here to answer any questions you may have... Have fun

@Broxzier Thanks for the file... the pic was deceiving prior to viewing the file up close...The cliffs are actually a great size, which was one the deceptions I was fighting with...... THIS IS BITCHEN MAN! Good Job! I vote to go official with this map. From this point on: My Suggestion: Anybody who wants to Terraform/add suggestions to the map prior to saving to SV6 format should still claim first. Lost work is best when avoided.

I like it.

This only represents the ease of changing...

I'm Just gonna put some visuals out there to gain input... Only for thoughts. 250x250 size Just as @Broxzier has shown, If a height map is used (and it will be i'm guessing), it would be best to hit the initial import on the first shot.

Here's an island for you

This is getting good... Lets see some sketches, easy peasy ... ALL cool ideas so far... photos work well for input...

of what what, whaaat. Attach sketches, pictures or whatever you need so we all know whats up... There are no bad ideas. NOTED: FENCED BORDER WITH NO EASEMENT ---- SpiffyJack

...I'd like to help with the MAP... A rolling wish list for MAP options we could all follow would be cool for an initial terraform: To keep the ideas easy to find, Quote and list. Map Size: 230x230 with (5)tile border easement for a 220x220 Minimum. Map Height 90 Max. Map Depth 15 Max. Hills, Canyons, Lakes, Rivers, Flat, Cliffs, Slopes...etc How much of what what, whaaat. Attach sketches, pictures or whatever you need so we all know whats up... There are no bad ideas.

Sounds like MAP TIME!

I'll be damned... it works good. I'd like to try this with multiple stations cross crossing

It's a good idea and some people may like it. (I'm going to guess that the background would rotate with the map? That would be mandatory.) I myself would never use it. Mostly because my park backgrounds have always been black (and yours should be too) not a dull grey, so it has simply never bothered me. Now, if this idea is stemming from wanting to have a cool screen shot of a full size view or even map edges, it will always be easier to modify the screen shot afterwards including completely masking the map edge VS. coding a background in my opinion.