by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .213214215216217218219»

Sillanpaasema

Same! Happy new year guys!

So; how would people feel about trying to set a regional map scale?

I know it's come up several times before (usually thanks to me), but I feel it would be a great improvement, practically and aesthetically. I would *love* to put lines of latitude and longitude on the map, or at least some sort of grid, and it could make it easier to work out all sorts of nation-building and roleplay, especially when we're at war and our armies teleport arbitrary distances at will.

Either way, I'm going to continue redrafting the regional map. I'll be pulling the 'outer' islands closer in, probably, and going for a more realistic look overall.

Well, as realistic as you can get with a platypus skeleton as the centrepiece.

I'm not necessarily opposed to a regional map scale, but it presents a couple of problems. If we keep NS numbers then nations will be either so crowded that they'll look like a cyberpunk-esque sprawl or so large that they'll necessitate some sort of quasi-feudalism to operate effectively, and both imply various economical and military problems that will need to be kept in mind. This won't be a problem if we reduce the population, but I like having the standardized numbers even if they are unrealistically inflated, so I'm more in favour of the first option. The second problem is determining what the total size of the planet is, which would be much harder to keep consistent, especially with regards to extra-regional interaction and anything space-related. This can be handwaved if necessary, though.

I'll have a look later to see what sort of regional area we can expect with a reasonable population density using NS numbers and, say, NS numbers cut by 90%.

Quite a few RP regions use artificially much-lowered populations (cf. Maredoratica, or Astyria, of which I'm the cartographer, where I have a nation of just 1.4 million and where some others are also using >5% of their game population. There's still great variation there, with the largest country having [I think] about 2 billion people), so it wouldn't disadvantage us in interregional stuff to have a popcap ourselves. As a geographer, and as someone intent on mapping my nation in detail, I'd much prefer a 'realistic' landmass for Maltropia and a population probably comfortably under a billion, or even a quarter billion (especially as half the country is practically polar in climate).

I know Ishgar used to portray his country as very nearly a single, continuous urban area, and with his then-10 billion that would have made his peninsula only about the size of Iran (assuming, maybe very unrealistically, a consistent Hong Kong level of pop. density). Reconciling those statistics with the mental images I have of Maltropia (including tundra wastes in the Islands and uninhabitable mountain ranges in my two peninsulae) necessitates a much, much lower population either way.

Handwaving for extraregional stuff is pretty much obligatory in NS, since sometimes travel between two regions needs to ignore the possible existence of a) vast oceans or b) vast regions in between. I've never really worried about figuring out how a region works on a spherical Earth; the philosophy I subscribe to is that all the RPing world's regions exist on a pretty much Earth-sized planet, and the blatant discrepancies are furiously handwaved away.

To me, those are very minor points and, considering how little we're likely to do with space beyond infrequent references to satellites and space stations, their relationships with the planet itself aren't important beyond the fact that they're orbiting it.

Against that, I set the logistical and administrative problems you've identified. International trade, also, becomes fruitless if you have to sail for weeks just to go to the next country over. As I've mentioned, any kind of detail on maps really does need us to have a set scale (lest my fjords wind up as wide as the Mediterranean). As for 'standardised' numbers, well, with a map scale all we need to do is pick a comparable population density, calculate by area and we're sorted for population. I've had my population capped at a bit under 7 billion for a couple of years now, anyway, so I'm okay with a slight mismatch created by arbitrary statistics. I'll happily set up a page on IIwiki to list basic pop. stats for the region's countries, too, if needs be.

Oops; in the first paragraph, that should be '<5%', as you can probably tell from context. :P

I have a preference for the NS numbers, but I'm not objecting to lowered populations. It's just a decision that has to be made. You can probably determine what the map scale should be based on your preferred area and population as a start. If nobody has any objections I'll just work out what my population is supposed to be afterwards.

As for space, I had a plan for some detailed space exploration and development once. That was reliant on an assumption that unrealistically large amounts of resources and manpower were available, but I'd still like to do something along those lines at some point. Like I said, though, I'm fine with handwaving this.

As it transpires, I'll need to make the regional map substantially larger if I want to have coasts that are both detailed and realistic, since at present, if I use a 1 pixel = 100 sq. km scale, the fjords and inter-subcontinental canals wind up rather wide while the countries themselves are too small. At that scale, Maltropia + Islands is Ukraine-sized, Bigfootia is Thailand, Anderios is Zimbabwe and even all of former Ishgar is barely Peru-sized. I'll try to come to a scale that works for everyone. I know I'll likely have one of the lowest densities in the region, since topographically and climatically speaking much of Maltropia is uinhabitable, so I'm quite fine with other nations in the region having populations three or four times larger if they want. I suspect you want to remain well above a billion, which is quite alright with me. As I say, I'll try to make everyone happy with this.

Space exploration/development should still be more than possible at that size, assuming better resource management than contemporary RL states. We'll work something out regardless.

In the meanwhile, I welcome feedback on the revamped Outer Continents. https://i.imgur.com/3JArW5b.png

What if that bigger part of Ishgar in the north were equivalent to India in terms of area?

That could work. That would make each pixel a 20 by 20 km square (so 400 sq. km). Maltropia would be Algeria in size, Bigfootia would be Saudia Arabia, Anderios would be halfway between Argentina and India. Populations wouldn't really reach above a billion without some massive urban agglomerations (Ishgar).

Sillanpaasema

Maltropia you are really good at making maps, and i think that Anderios idea with India sized Ishgar is a good idea. And btw i also fixed my flag so no more ugly standard flag

Communism must be erradicated

That's fine by me. If that's the scale we're going with I'll probably set my population to something like 3% of NS' numbers. The map looks good as well.

I suppose that gives us a unanimous agreement. Sweet.

3 years after we first set out to set a scale it's finally done...

And there it is. A new map for the WFE.

Looking good!

Paradox STRONK

*dies*

Get well soon.

THE POTATO IS OFFICIALLY IN THE RUNNING

YOU CAN NOW VOTE FOR THE POTATO!

VOTE TODAY! A POTATO FUTURE!

NEVER!

Wooo, finally getting Maltropia up to date with the new map: http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Principalities_of_Maltropia

Meritocratic conglomerate

Esquarium

Helloooo

Yo o/

«12. . .213214215216217218219»

Advertisement