UCS Clarification Conference

[Plumber]

These generic colours you all seem to want defeat the purpose of the UCS. I've said it so many times now; it might be a good idea, but it defeats the purpose of the UCS. Because the colours aren't easily recognisable, and you said yourself they tell us nothing about what the state is. The criteria for something to work on a UCS map is that we need to be able to easily recognise it and it needs to tell us what the state is.

This, 100% this.

 

[Orioes]

These generic colours you all seem to want defeat the purpose of the UCS. I've said it so many times now; it might be a good idea, but it defeats the purpose of the UCS. Because the colours aren't easily recognisable, and you said yourself they tell us nothing about what the state is. The criteria for something to work on a UCS map is that we need to be able to easily recognise it and it needs to tell us what the state is.

How does it undermine the UCS? It would allow people to recognize political relationships that would otherwise be hidden because the states involved don't have a color. How is a sea of white hiding political relationships for states that don't normally warrant a color but do in certain instances help the UCS fulfill its purpose? I'm not suggesting we redefine the entire scheme just that we try to take into account that due to the vagaries of history and butterflies we can't have a preset solution to show every political relationship. We are still having debates about iffy states for colors yet people seem to jump down my throat when I voice the obvious solution.

 

[iori]

In my opinion, if you're making a map that has a powerful state that deserves its own color, but is'nt analogous to any other OTL entity with a color than you should just create a color for that country and then talk about it in the explanation of the map.

 

[Orioes]

In my opinion, if you're making a map that has a powerful state that deserves its own color, but is'nt analogous to any other OTL entity with a color than you should just create a color for that country and then talk about it in the explanation of the map.

Which is a perfectly sound thing to do. I'm just perplexed that it is agreeable to do that if you are making a UCS map but heresy if you suggest we should take that in to account when revising the system.

 

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

In my opinion, if you're making a map that has a powerful state that deserves its own color, but is'nt analogous to any other OTL entity with a color than you should just create a color for that country and then talk about it in the explanation of the map.

Which is a perfectly sound thing to do. I'm just perplexed that it is agreeable to do that if you are making a UCS map but heresy if you suggest we should take that in to account when revising the system.

For it to be UCS you shouldn't have to talk about it in the explanation. That's the point.

 

[Lord Insane]

There is a point raised in the Base Maps from 550 BC to Modern Day, all in UCS thread that might be worthy of being taken into consideration...

Maybe we should have a color for this kind of thing; where we know there are smaller states, but not how.

 

[Codae]

There is a point raised in the Base Maps from 550 BC to Modern Day, all in UCS thread that might be worthy of being taken into consideration...

I like using the light grey for "many small states." I'm not sure how well it would work for distinguishing German-American successor states, though.

 

[Lord Insane]

I like using the light grey for "many small states." I'm not sure how well it would work for distinguishing German-American successor states, though.

German colonial successor states, not specifically German American colonial successor states. That said, I agree, that would work, except for the GCS problem.

 

[Thande]

In my opinion, if you're making a map that has a powerful state that deserves its own color, but is'nt analogous to any other OTL entity with a color than you should just create a color for that country and then talk about it in the explanation of the map.

Of course this is acceptable (though "powerful" is not a reason to deserve a UCS colour, as I keep drilling into people's skulls). But if you choose to do so, you should always try to make a unique colour, rather than having a set one that can mean squillions of different things.

Are there any more criticisms of the TCS, as otherwise I will launch soon. I will try to tinker with the Muslim/successor Spanish colours to make them a bit more distinct from Egypt for whoever objected to that.

 

[Thande]

I think Decades of Darkness makes a good challenging test of any colour scheme thanks to its odd combinations of countries, like Aragon with super-Australia and so forth.

Here's what DoD looks like in TCS if you retain a state/territory division...

 

[Thande]

And here's what it looks like if you don't distinguish between states and territories.

With thanks to Scarecrow and AE for making the original map.

 

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

Well, I have no objections.

 

[Thande]

I think I might add back in the state/territory distinction, but make it an optional one in the key.

 

[jmberry]

Of course this is acceptable (though "powerful" is not a reason to deserve a UCS colour, as I keep drilling into people's skulls). But if you choose to do so, you should always try to make a unique colour, rather than having a set one that can mean squillions of different things.

Are there any more criticisms of the TCS, as otherwise I will launch soon. I will try to tinker with the Muslim/successor Spanish colours to make them a bit more distinct from Egypt for whoever objected to that.

I'd suggest that Mali have a color, since West African Colonies show up enough that one would be useful. It's not a live or die position though.

 

[Thande]

I've also been consulting by PM with Rejkjavik and SRegan who have been the most prolific contributors to the ATL Database thread. One suggestion I intend to incorporate is to detach the ChiComm pink colour from its national meaning, just as I have with Commie-red - instead it will mean "second greatest power holding TL's radical ideology (eg Communism from OTL), and often one which has fallen out with the first one"

 

[Lord Insane]

I've also been consulting by PM with Rejkjavik and SRegan who have been the most prolific contributors to the ATL Database thread. One suggestion I intend to incorporate is to detach the ChiComm pink colour from its national meaning, just as I have with Commie-red - instead it will mean "second greatest power holding TL's radical ideology (eg Communism from OTL), and often one which has fallen out with the first one"

Bumping this with an observation I recently made... the Korean colour may be a bit too close to the Japanese colour. I think it can work so long as neither is a vassal/satellite/puppet of the other, but if one is, it is somewhat hard to, without zooming in (and to a lesser degree even then), see that.

 

[Thande]

Bumping this with an observation I recently made... the Korean colour may be a bit too close to the Japanese colour. I think it can work so long as neither is a vassal/satellite/puppet of the other, but if one is, it is somewhat hard to, without zooming in (and to a lesser degree even then), see that.

Did you not see where I changed the Korean colour to a dark orange?

 

[Lord Insane]

Did you not see where I changed the Korean colour to a dark orange?

Er, no, I did not see that.
EDIT: Must have been too focused on the 'rough_draft_2.png' file, which apparently was made the same day Korea's colour was changed.

 

[The Germanator]

In the interest of the UCS, I hereby formally do bump.

 

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

In the interest of the UCS, I hereby formally do bump.

Yeah, no. This whole issue has been resolved already - we handed dictatorial powers to Iori, Thande and the others in the OTL Basemaps thread.

Edit: It was more like a UCS Coup.