Alternate History Help

I dont know if this is really active but i made an alternate history map an concept with an axis win but i dont know what would happen afterwards i need some tips about how Hitler,mussolini and hirohito would manage their own people and the peoples on all the conquered terriotories
Alterado.png
 
That's a bunch of space filling empires it seems to me...

I don't think Nazi Germany would allow a Jewish state, even if it is Madagascar.

Also Turks aren't Arab from what I understand.

And I'm no expert on the exact logistics of World War II, but I don't see Japan owning that much territory. The conflict in China was a logistical nightmare in OTL, much less India and Australia.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't a German Empire(I'm presuming a
Nazi one- correct me if I'm wrong)have also
taken Canada(not to mention the British Isles?)
 
Wouldn't a German Empire(I'm presuming a
Nazi one- correct me if I'm wrong)have also
taken Canada(not to mention the British Isles?)
Canada is a nazi puppet,the map doesnt show puppets well but the nazi puppets are finland,british isles,ireland,france and canada
 
That's a bunch of space filling empires it seems to me...

I don't think Nazi Germany would allow a Jewish state, even if it is Madagascar.

Also Turks aren't Arab from what I understand.

And I'm no expert on the exact logistics of World War II, but I don't see Japan owning that much territory. The conflict in China was a logistical nightmare in OTL, much less India and Australia.

Madagascar was the orginal plan where to deport the jews after the end of the war
The turks arent the creators of the arab state it was the hashemite(Iraq) wich had friendly relations with the axis and actually joined them after the soviet capitulation in this alternate history
This is alternate history,in this world the campaign in china went really well allowing the japanese to join against the soviets with germany also those territories to the east mostly the soviet union,afeghanistan,the east indies,india and australia where already stipulated in the axis division of asia where everything east of the urals would belong to the japanese
 
What's with all the massive straight borders in places that could have been demarcated with massive mountains?
 
What's with all the massive straight borders in places that could have been demarcated with massive mountains?
The straight border in the urals was the division of asia proposed by the japanese and accepted by the germans,the straight borders in South america are really wrong and have been changed but i dont know who to update maps so yeah,also the straight border in américa was like the division of South korea and north korea wich had na perfectly straight and artificial border before the Korean war,the french-german border was planned to be like that because of lebensraum
 
The biggest issue for me would be that the Germans, whose economy and war potential was about 4 tomes that of Japan, seems to have gotten very little compared to Japan. i'd suggest the German Raj would go some way to redressing that imbalance.
 
What's with all the massive straight borders in places that could have been demarcated with massive mountains?
The urals was actually a little more curved but i straighted it up because i didnt have much patience to be dividing afghanistan and índia perfectly as it was stabilished so i just gave it to japan since in this world they did a ton of wor
 
The biggest issue for me would be that the Germans, whose economy and war potential was about 4 tomes that of Japan, seems to have gotten very little compared to Japan. i'd suggest the German Raj would go some way to redressing that imbalance.
I was trying to be very historical in the division of the world,using the treaty of the division of asia,in the treaty most of índia went to japan and only the pakistani área went to the germans
 
Nobody seems to be answering my question...

Well, some of your territorial concessions are a bit difficult to justify, as others have highlighted.

Your best bet is to go to a library, or Amazon, and get some books out. For Nazi Germany I can recommend Hitler's Empire by Mark Mazower and Germany Turns Eastward by Michael Burleigh

Research using those titles, and others for Imperial Japan, will highlight the policies that were used in OTL (Our Timeline) and would likely be continued and expanded upon in your scenario.

I would highlight that Imperial Japan would in no way have the manpower to control such a huge swathe of Russian territory, so that itself will inform how you progress that scenario. Some texts on how the British Empire controlled its territories in he 19th and 20th Century would be informative
 
Nobody seems to be answering my question...
I'd really say the main problem here is the quality of the map--indeed, this is the quality that many mapmakers--including me start out with on this site. There are common tropes, space filling empires, straight borders, lack of research...so on and so forth. Common for beginners--I still have my cringy works on my hard disk. And the problem that comes with this is that such works are exceedingly common an are looked down upon on this site. Many of us (myself included) begin to take the admittedly harsh route of approaching this problem sarcastically.

There are four glaring problems that IMO put me off the most: First, the straight borders. And what enhances this problem is that such straight borders are in regions with some of the world's greatest mountains (the Rockies and Urals). That can happen in relatively small countries like Korea or Vietnam, but when it approaches countries on the scale of the US or the Soviet Union, it just isn't acceptable. And approaching this from beyond plausibility, from a meta standpoint, it just appears an indication of a lack of effort. To solve this problem, I'd suggest using the ever-helpful wiki of this site [1], especially the worlda page.

As for the second problem, that is poor research. For example: Venezuela in this map. It is a state that comprises much of the old Gran Colombia, and surely would claim the heritage of Bolivar's Revolution, as the modern Bolivarian Revolution of Venezuela does. It is an empire, while not ASB is still...illogical at best. If not then there's Siam and the Arab Republic here, with the first being unlikely given OTL Japanese ambitions in Indochina and the latter being ASB as it is simply too dominated by Turks to have any Arab pretensions.

Third, space filling empires. And the problem with space-filling empires is that they are often 1) poorly researched and 2) boring. And this in many ways ties into my second point. Look at the number of nations in your map: saying that there aren't many would be a gross understatement. Yes, the Japanese and German powers would desire greater landmass, but there is a point where it becomes wholly unsustainable and over extension sets in. I can't explain it well, so I'll link you to this video by the Alternate Historian, who is also a member of this site.

Finally, the story. I don’t blame you for this one, as the story is indeed not an essential part of map making, but to truly make your map one that people will truly enjoy, you need to either make it really pretty, or you have to tell us an interesting story of how we got here. If I wanted a map like yours, all I needed to do is search “WW2 alternate history map”. Some good, some bad. I won’t comment.

Still, a commendable first post on this site of ours. Good luck with future endeavors! I'd suggest subscribing to the XVII Map Thread to see what the standard is for this forum in maps; and reading the Oneshot Scenarios thread for the standard of scenarios.

[1]: Not the much-despised page that is the alt-hist wikia
 
Last edited:
I'd really say the main problem here is the quality of the map--indeed, this is the quality that many mapmakers--including me start out with on this site. There are common tropes, space filling empires, straight borders, lack of research...so on and so forth. Common for beginners--I still have my cringy works on my hard disk. And the problem that comes with this is that such works are exceedingly common an are looked down upon on this site. Many of us (myself included) begin to take the admittedly harsh route of approaching this problem sarcastically.

There are four glaring problems that IMO put me off the most: First, the straight borders. And what enhances this problem is that such straight borders are in regions with some of the world's greatest mountains (the Rockies and Urals). That can happen in relatively small countries like Korea or Vietnam, but when it approaches countries on the scale of the US or the Soviet Union, it just isn't acceptable. And approaching this from beyond plausibility, from a meta standpoint, it just appears an indication of a lack of effort. To solve this problem, I'd suggest using the ever-helpful wiki of this site [1], especially the worlda page.

As for the second problem, that is poor research. For example: Venezuela in this map. It is a state that comprises much of the old Gran Colombia, and surely would claim the heritage of Bolivar's Revolution, as the modern Bolivarian Revolution of Venezuela does. It is an empire, while not ASB is still...illogical at best. If not then there's Siam and the Arab Republic here, with the first being unlikely given OTL Japanese ambitions in Indochina and the latter being ASB as it is simply too dominated by Turks to have any Arab pretensions.

Third, space filling empires. And the problem with space-filling empires is that they are often 1) poorly researched and 2) boring. And this in many ways ties into my second point. Look at the number of nations in your map: saying that there aren't many would be a gross understatement. Yes, the Japanese and German powers would desire greater landmass, but there is a point where it becomes wholly unsustainable and over extension sets in. I can't explain it well, so I'll link you to this video by the Alternate Historian, who is also a member of this site.

Finally, the story. I don’t blame you for this one, as the story is indeed not an essential part of map making, but to truly make your map one that people will truly enjoy, you need to either make it really pretty, or you have to tell us an interesting story of how we got here. If I wanted a map like yours, all I needed to do is search “WW2 alternate history map”. Some good, some bad. I won’t comment.

Still, a commendable first post on this site of ours. Good luck with future endeavors! I'd suggest subscribing to the XVII Map Thread to see what the standard is for this forum in maps; and reading the Oneshot Scenarios thread for the standard of scenarios.

[1]: Not the much-despised page that is the alt-hist wikia
Really liked the response i know i still have much to fix but as i stated before this is not the current status of the map,as stated this was a early version of na map based on one of my heart of iron games,currently i improved the map and used na improved version of another map for coloring where i colored every single state of the world,i have some things to fix like the arab things and siam the current map was too big for the post but im going to post its link in imagur any constructive criticisms are welcomed https://imgur.com/uljvGAe some of the borders are still straight because i used a map of the world's states also ignore the borders of siam they are really blown out of proportion because i didnt really think at what i was doing (Also i mispelled greater in the name of japan) There is also a third version of the same map wich only changes the african,north american and ural borders
BaseMap.pngszz.png
(The ural border is more curved wich while not really following the urals curve it does curve more than the straight line in order to kinda follow the way it was estipulated in the partition of asia by the axis)
 
Last edited:
What do you mean?
Some states where literal squares or had straigh lines as a border,the map also comes with many rivers but i didnt really know how japan germany and italy would use rivers as a way to divide their claimed áreas so i just used the states of the world
 
Some states where literal squares or had straigh lines as a border,the map also comes with many rivers but i didnt really know how japan germany and italy would use rivers as a way to divide their claimed áreas so i just used the states of the world
I mean there are certainly many other ways to draw borders: when I started out, I just drew arbitrary borders (though ones that at least weren't straight lines) and sometime used rivers to base then on--which itself is not the best method. The simple fact is that excessive straight line borders is not going to make your map a good one per se and you should really make use of the resources and year-by-year borders of the worlda page, as well as do your own digging concerning more detailed geographical features. You really shouldn't have used a modern basemap.
 
y to
I mean there are certainly many other ways to draw borders: when I started out, I just drew arbitrary borders (though ones that at least weren't straight lines) and sometime used rivers to base then on--which itself is not the best method. The simple fact is that excessive straight line borders is not going to make your map a good one per se and you should really make use of the resources and year-by-year borders of the worlda page, as well as do your own digging concerning more detailed geographical features. You really shouldn't have used a modern basemap.
Thanks for the maps,and the tips i will try to make it better,even tho the first map i posted was just to give na idea to people who wanted to anwer the question and not about the map or the world was divided,im tryng to get some better knowledge on how the italians germans and japanese would treat the people within their borders and not about the borders necessarely,for exemple the ural border was created with lazy curve paint tool,all i wanted was the answer to that question but at least next time i know how to make a better map and people can actually focus on the question
 
Top