This is the wrong tread... You should start a new one.
Here's the updated graph, that's one deadline I've made :)

Actually I should join the *PCOPOWLWHMAP6OEMM* now :) And Sir Nick the *NSPGCOTGWHMAPALOMWLT50TTHNTPIAOLUBSITDPOWLRTTTTMMLSAONCOHOTMWOTDTWPSMTTCS*.
Whoever guesses what it stands for the first gets a cookie :)

And I keep counting the big USA map as Rashaz', because he made it, even though someone else adopted it.
The same goes for you, Domenico, if you ever want to join the *PCOPOWLWHMAP3OEMM*, you still have to make three more maps...

You should sort it by the territories, not by the amount of maps ;-)
It's no achievement to do miserable made maps with too little territories so that nobody wants to play it.

I sort by both.
If players A, B and Moros all have made 6 maps, but player A's maps contain 200 territories, B's 400 and Moros' 813, they are arranged like: Moros-B-A

*NSPGCOTGWHMAPALOMWLT50TTHNTPIAOLUBSITDPOWLRTTTTMMLSAONCOHOTMWOTDTWPSMTTCS*
Lol, that's the longest "acronym" I've ever seen.

Yes, i am slightly famouse

I made 3 maps with 600 territories, but I'm not in the graph.

Thank you! I try to keep up with everyone who makes three maps, but sometimes I miss something. Your maps will be added to my graph, and after a while, when more maps have been uploaded and when 75% of the maps have been rated(thank you Fizzer!) I'll upload the new graph.

Yay! I'm in the club now, my third map got published today.

Thanks for reminding me! I'll post a new one soon, this time with the avarage rating per map.

I haven't started to make it yet, but I'm hopefully going to make a 1,600 territory map, which would be the second largest.

Bwog... make sure the map merits that number of territories. This is by no means intended to offend but many before have claimed their intentions to make such a massive map only to have a miserable design or simply get overwhelmed by the level of effort involved.

I'd recommend discussing your idea for such a large map with one of the experienced mapmakers (not me) to get their opinion on its value. If it's like [this debacle](http://warlight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=9665) then I wouldn't recommend proceeding since it simply won't be worthwhile.

Again, I don't mean to offend... I just recommend vetting the idea out before spending the necessary effort.

No map is unesisary, there is no such thing as unecisery effort. Your imagination and map ideas are yours along. Make the map share it with overs. Dont let a warlight member telling you what to make. Its your map, your time, your ideas. No offense Richard

Unesisary?

There most certainly is such a thing as unnecessary effort. I know I would hate spending the time to make a massive 1600 territory map only to see it universally panned and rarely if ever used. That is a waste of time. I am sure I am not alone in that viewpoint. As such, discussing a map idea prior to investing your time and effort only makes sense.

Ok, I've forgot what **NSPGCOTGWHMAPALOMWLT50TTHNTPIAOLUBSITDPOWLRTTTTMMLSAONCOHOTMWOTDTWPSMTTCS** stands for...

Here's a new acronym for myself: **EMPERORMOROSOFMOROSIA. It stands for: Extreem Mal Persoon En Regerend Over Rechtmatige Morosia-grondbezittingen, Ook Regelmatig Onbevredigende Scheldpartijen Ontwijkende Fantastische Manager Over Regerings-Overeenkomsten, Samengevat: Inderdaad Almachtig.**

Ask RvW for the translation :)

Oh, replace **Mal** with **Magnifiek**. (**FIZZER! MAKE AN EDIT BUTTON!**)

Succinct translation: "I'm *very* self-confident". :p

Now I have 4 maps with 1206 territories. (I uploaded Veneto map with 581 territories)

There should be a very large reason to add me to this chart in the next day or so.

Haha, **big** reason.
And I wait with showing the new graph until almost all map-makers have an average rating.