Tuva is the best.Here's some more appropriate background music
In completely unrelated news, here's a quick map of what the Republic of China (Taiwan) would look like if it dropped its claims to places controlled by the PRC and Mongolia, but managed to regain control over the rest of its claimed territories.
View attachment 283412
Map Thread XIV
- Thread starter MorningDew
- Start date
- Status
Agreed. If any country has a chance of gaining independence from Russia, it's Tuva. Very narrow chance, but still better than the enclaved republics.
Jcw3
Banned
Washington State ISOTed to a virgin earth. Definitely ASB, but it was made more for fun than anything else. Population growth is a bit wonky, as is tech growth. C.A.U. is the Central American Union.
Standard color - State
Dark color - Territory
Light color - Soon to be state
*Most of the world and states have low populations and are pretty sparsely populated.
*Most populated is, of course, the Cascade Republic, with a high standard of living. The Cascade Republic follows a brand of "Scandinavian Socialist" as proclaimed by Bernie Sanders. Anyone who doesn't like it can leave to the authoritarian US or libertarian FAS or stick with it.
*Theodemocracy is a new-old governing system based on Joseph Smith's theoretical system. Seems to work out surprising well for both the Mormon Republic of Deseret and the Catholic Kingdom of Mexico. Granted, they both seem to hate each other for... Shall we say, religious differences. Both are happy that the Cascade Republic prevents them from having to share their border with a heathen nation. (They both seem to forget about the large Protestant population in the Cascade Republic.)
*Free American States hold that the best government is a small one. A Night Watchman State that allows the market to control ever other aspect of live. Not quite to the point of Bioshock's Rapture, but it definitely is headed that direction.
Sorry if the write up is short, I've had a long day and writing long write ups is not something I want to do when tired. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. If you have any critic or criticism I would like to know. I want to be able to make better maps and I can't do that without it.
I'm not going to be too harsh on you, because this was a map you just did on your own for fun, and I'm not a dick. But the first thing I note is the population. If we assume that Washington's had a growth rate of 0.8% (and that's a pathetic growth rate, completely unrealistic, I'm just using it as an example) they would have a population of 850.6 million, according to this very useful generator for ISOT populations. Link. Unless they've been playing pinata with their newborns, that is not a realistic growth rate. If I were to recommend anything about this map (because most of it is just great!), I would change that date to 2266, same population, but you can get there with a 1.5% growth rate (bit higher than world average), which I think is more sensible with a lot of states that are likely to have very natalist policies. My two cents. Feel free to ignore.
In the aftermath of an ISOT, I think any nation does a series of things.
1. Panic.
1.5. If nation is a shithole like in my Camden or North Korea maps, collapse and recovery of civilization. This is often mixed in with 2 and 3.
2. Adjust.
3. Poke at the new wilderness with a stick. Acquisition of resources like oil and gold from known nearby deposits, farming if they weren't food exporters.
4. Steady colonization. It becomes an important topic in society.
5. Rapid colonization, to the point where colonization is largely the chief national focus. Most of my maps take place here. Nations should reach this point about 90 to 125 years in, I think.
6. Full exploitation of Earth. If the nations don't have space travel capability, they begin to fall apart, due to being used to having a surplus of resources, and resource wars likely begin to overtake it. Most nations will reach this point 400 to 700 years after ISOT. I'll note that Washington, with the current world standard population growth of 1.2%, would have a 9.4 billion population after 600 years. Link.
7. Either the full collapse of civilization or spacewank.
This is the general thought process I use. I just figured it would be helpful to share it. There are other things you have to keep in mind (what does the nation turn into when it all it has is a mirror to look into, remember technological retardation occurs without the rest of the world, etc.), but I think that general process is the most important for mapmaking.
Then there are my minor quibbles. The Mormon state. Why would the Mormons build it around Salt Lake when they could just go south to California, or further south to South America, or to the Pacific or East Asia, if necessary? There are plenty of more productive places than that area, especially to build a civilization. I can buy that it was tradition, but come on, there has to be someone in the LDS who said 'uh, hey, is there really more in Utah than in China, which has more raw materials, fish, and basically everywhere?'
The Yucatan, why do they consider themselves Mayan? I just Googled it and found no evidence of Mayan-Americans in Washington. Is it just some wacky aesthetic they made up?
Okay, now I'm going to stop being a dick, and point out what I like about the map. Aesthetically, it's a great map. Excellent legend, better than mine. Borders are good, and overall, it's lovely to look at. The libertarian states, the reformed America, and the more conservative split-off states are sensible given the rural-urban dichotomy in Washington. I think something more sensible would be to see the rebuilt US built closer to Washington, essentially built out of the rural east, and the Libertarian state constructed further south or east, though.
And here I am being a dick again. Sorry. I hope this is helpful. It is a good map, really. But if you want to talk more about how I personally (and I in no way consider myself a 'true expert!!!1!LEETSKILLZ' or anything) feel about the map, then just PM me. I might have some useful advice.
Think there is also a very small area along the Russian-Chinese border the Chinese claim. Some islands. And I don't believe the former Jewish oblast was claimed by the ROC. And this reminds me a bit of the books I read in college form during the Cold War. One them written by the Chinese having the map showing them going to Lake Balkash, as well as claiming technically they conquered Europe because the Mongols had been in China a long time.Here's some more appropriate background music
In completely unrelated news, here's a quick map of what the Republic of China (Taiwan) would look like if it dropped its claims to places controlled by the PRC and Mongolia, but managed to regain control over the rest of its claimed territories.
You're right. I had only briefly looked at the map and believed that the disputed area was the JAO. (it's not; a smaller area nearby is disputed).
Jcw3
Banned
I gotta say, I trust the dozens of tech companies and Elon Musk way more than I trust random guy on Internet about hyperloops. They're a cool, future-y idea that's realistic. I'm using them.
EDIT: And how is it flawed? They're literally starting to test it. It's not like Musk went 'welp, it's magic!' and then just didn't do anything with it.
Tallest Skil
Banned
On bullet hole destroys the whole thing. Never mind buckling from heat. They're completely unrealistic.
Jcw3
Banned
Early 1900s Tallest Skil: Pah! This tomfoolery with the flying machines those Wright fellows have conjured up is but a silly memetic! Why, one simple gust of flame could rend the whole thing to cinders! By Jove, they can only carry one person, let alone revolutionizing society! And they can only make it a few hundred feet, to boot! Hmph! Pah! Completely unrealistic!
It's like comparing the Stephenson's Rocket to the Shinkansen. They're still working out the kinks.
The Wright Brothers took the work of hundreds of others that had been traded around freely in order to achieve flight, then copyrighted it after they managed to get their own thing to hop. I have my own doubts if anyone would care enough to invest in gigantic peumatic tubes. Don't think much of them either way, though.
Dude, they are not unrealistic, they are a technology that is still being developed but these maps take place in the future and after an ISOT meaning there is not established transportation network so there is more empty long distances to build them which is what they are designed for in theory.
Though with limited resources, it would still make way, way more sense to build new roads systems and railways than to start investing in the development and application of some new method of transportation when settling new areas, even if those new methods are feasible in theory.
Which, from what I can tell, they're not. Nobody's really addressed the problems Tallest Skil has brought up in favor of simply arguing that they're "working out the kinks". However, there's a big difference between working out kinks and actually creating a functional version of an idea. Adding windshield wipers and seatbelts to cars are examples of working out kinks. Inventing a means of, say, teleportation, despite the idea having previously existed, is a bit more of a task.
To drive the point home, Elon Musk's own Tesla cars have been on the road for a number of years now, despite problems consistently popping up with the way they're built. They often have kinks that need to be worked out, yet because they can be built and people will pay for them, they already exist as a means of transportation.
This is actually very helpful! I didn't know what to do with the population so I just put some random numbers in.
I'll keep this in mind for future maps.
I... don't know. Sending them out across the world really would make more sense then caging them in the Rocky Mountains.
Yes. Hence why they proclaim how Mayan they are, they aren't even remotely Mayan.
You're not being a dick. Those are some great points. The reasoning I had I think had to do with people wanting to get "as far away from those godless commies as possible" and wanting to have a capital closer to OTL Washington D.C. Not a great reason, I know.
This is pretty great advice. It is most definitely helpful!
CannedTech
Banned
Gotta' question actually: what's the internal structure of the USSR like? Things certainly seem different from OTL, but they also seem to be dandy with playing Molotov-Ribbentrop with the Germans.
Well it was a direct overthrow of the Tsar, and there was no Bolshevik-Menshevik split, so there's a larger diversity of ideals Overall they're ruled by a central council (officially of equals, but some members are more equal than others...), the council being selected by party branches in each District and members being limited to one 7 year term. Finland, Turkestan, and Carpathia generally do what Moscow says (Carpathia especially), and have been used as testing grounds for certain ideas. In general it's still a dictatorship with people shipped off to Siberia for 'counter revolutionary ideals' and such, but being less centralised on one man's ego they've been better for backing away from bad ideas and so generally better run than OTL's USSR. (They're a bit slower to react due to the council system and need to argue, but taking longer to make the right decision is probably a good trade off.)
As for working with the Germans, well this Germany is merely a militant socially conservative, but economically quasi-socialist, state. So there's no 'Mein Kampf' floating around talking about a need to take the east for 'living space' or whatnot. They still distrust one another (the Worker's Federation is very socially liberal), but it's not a structural hatred. Plus both nations view the Entente with distrust (and having been allies in the Moroccan War helps a bit).
Upvoteanthology
Donor
Okay, on the population point, I feel like I keep seeing population numbers that are way too high. Population is currently growing at a rate of 1.13%. At its peak, it was growing at a much higher rate, but there's no reason for the growth to be any higher than it is today. People aren't going to want to have babies in the apocalypse, they'll want to stay in their homeland unless it's absolutely crucial they move out (or at least have a good reason to, like work prospects or a new revolution). In a world with no surplus of food, there'd be no reason for people to actually have children, even if there really is that prospect to expand into the wilderness. Before 1800 the world population growth never exceeded 0.5%, and that's basically what you'll be seeing in a lot of ISOT scenarios. A lack of food, a lack of clear land outside of the ISOTed land, so technology would regress backwards. It's only today, in a place where most of the world is booming economically, that we're able to get that 1.13% growth. I normally use 1.12% as the highest I go, but sometimes it can go far lower. Ultimately, only in extremely periods of prosperity, which probably would only happen something like three centuries after an ISOT or more, would the population reach the 1.5% estimate that Jcw3 uses.
Jcw3
Banned
1.5% was a bit much. But I usually have all the governments in my scenarios use pretty natalist policies, because I believe at a certain point, colonizing the wastes becomes a national priority for almost every ISOTed nation. Even Canada had some hefty, hefty tax benefits for people with five or more kids. And, uh, weren't abusing or neglecting them, I feel the need to add. 1.2% seems more reasonable to me. I think in a natalist country, 1.2% is a sensible growth, with it being higher in fundamentalist religious states or other authoritarian states.
- Status