Well, it Is Syria. I have not based it off of any specific year, and I don't think every Map on warlight has a name like : "Syria: superbonuses based off of governate districts and all other parts off of local features". In addition I don't think anyone would disagree that my map is NOT Syria.

Edited 4/16/2015 20:23:32

Well, obviously you're basing it from 2011 and before, and your map is technically what Syria was, not is.

...

How about this:

-Its my map. I name my map what I want to name it, as long as no one else has named it that. If i had based my map on specifically the governate, district, and municipal boundaries which were in place in 2011, I would have named my map "Syria 2011". I did not. I am either calling it "Syria" or "Modern Syria".

-This is a map of Syria which, besides the major governamtes, which I guarantee you will not change unless ISIS completely takes over, is not based off of any formal map. Rather, it is based roughly off of a combination of city locations, physical features, and population densities. I do not want to even base my map off of specific district boundaries, as I feel it would produce disproportionate bonuses and make the map more "rough" looking.

- I don't really care if anyone criticizes the name of my map. I don't care too much about people who rate my map because of what I named it. All I care about is constructive map-making tips that will help make my current and future maps better, aesthetically and technically.

- And, in all honesty, if you are that concerned about the name of a map, then make your own map of Syria and call it "Syria 2011". I won't criticize what you name it, or in fact what anybody names any of their maps. Its their map. As long as the name has some resemblance and accuracy in relationship to the map (ie, calling a map of Syria "Iraq" would be just wrong), the name is fine by me.

Edited 4/16/2015 21:12:20

Its my map. I name my map what I want to name it, as long as no one else has named it that. If i had based my map on specifically the governate, district, and municipal boundaries which were in place in 2011, I would have named my map "Syria 2011". I did not. I am either calling it "Syria" or "Modern Syria".

Really obvious, I'm not (can't) commanding you to do this, but suggesting. Also, I think the organisational districts have been the same officially since 2011.

This is a map of Syria which, besides the major governamtes, which I guarantee you will not change unless ISIS completely takes over, is not based off of any formal map. Rather, it is based roughly off of a combination of city locations, physical features, and population densities. I do not want to even base my map off of specific district boundaries, as I feel it would produce disproportionate bonuses and make the map more "rough" looking.

I don't know about districts, that's for you to decide, but ISIS has already affected the map of Syria quite a bit. Add in the various terrorists and Kurdistan and you have an even smaller Syrian Arab Republic.

I don't really care if anyone criticizes the name of my map.

You should, for optimal settings.

And, in all honesty, if you are that concerned about the name of a map, then make your own map of Syria and call it "Syria 2011". I won't criticize what you name it, or in fact what anybody names any of their maps. Its their map. As long as the name has some resemblance and accuracy in relationship to the map (ie, calling a map of Syria "Iraq" would be just wrong), the name is fine by me.

That's like saying I won't criticise you for having a poor map, it's their map. Fine isn't good enough, optimally accurate is good enough.

Can we just let this be? I am tired of this. I think we have made our points clear.

Fine, you don't look like you're going to change your map's name anyway.