Map Thread XV

Status
Not open for further replies.
A mini project I randomly started working on last night. :p
88XHm6R.png


D6wpcQY.png


Asidw5I.png
 

Isaac Beach

Banned
I promise that one of these days I'll post an actually complete worlda map; as opposed to these constant differing WIPs. :coldsweat:

A cover of Bruce Munro's interesting Eastward Ho, in which a 1960s biological exchange between the Soviet Union and the US renders most of the Caucasian and African descended populations of both states dead, leaving the Native Americans and other ethnicities to flourish. And of course the rest of the world collapses and reforms in various ways. Most of the Americas are done sans Canada and a couple of bits in South America, and Europe and the Middle East are just about done as well. Wanted to pump out a classic alternate history map into my gallery as it's been a lot of new stuff and I felt it needed a worlda for consistency's sake.

Blank world map.png
 
This is so cool! I love geological PODs, any new islands and stuff of the sort! I can't wait to learn more about this island!
Thank you! I'll be posting more about it on my secret website, but I'm sure I'll post it here when the full "Wikipedia" page is finished. :D Here's a map with the names of the provinces and glaciers, if you like things like that:

eKpQWH2.png
 

CannedTech

Banned
Thank you! I'll be posting more about it on my secret website, but I'm sure I'll post it here when the full "Wikipedia" page is finished. :D Here's a map with the names of the provinces and glaciers, if you like things like that:

eKpQWH2.png

Who are the settlers? Scandinavians or some other group?
 
Europe remains a mess, but it’s not as much as a mess as it was at the beginning of the century. Armies of child soldiers no longer roam the countryside of central Europe, and national governments are finally able to exert control outside their capitals.

What the fuck happened to Europe again? (I mean, they were bombed flat and conquered by the soviets, but you can say the same for parts of Europe in WWII, not to mention parts of the USSR itself. :biggrin: ). Did they have another nuclear war after the Soviets left? And what was the Deluge?
 
Last edited:
What the fuck happened to Europe again? (I mean, they were bombed flat and conquered by the soviets, but you can say the same for parts of Europe in WWII, not to mention parts of the USSR itself. :biggrin: ). Did they have another nuclear war after the Soviets left? And what was the Deluge?

They were bombed flat, and had decades of Soviet occupation that saw little actual infrastructure improvement. The Soviets withdrew after the Deluge (a volcanic eruption in the Antarctic caused global flooding and climate change), and things never really picked up because there was no Marshall Plan and no major outside help until relatively recently.
 
They were bombed flat, and had decades of Soviet occupation that saw little actual infrastructure improvement. The Soviets withdrew after the Deluge (a volcanic eruption in the Antarctic caused global flooding and climate change), and things never really picked up because there was no Marshall Plan and no major outside help until relatively recently.

Why no aid from the US after the Soviet withdrawal? How long ago was the Soviet withdrawal? The "no infrastructure improvement" stuff makes no sense: development and industrialization of the Soviet block was always a Soviet priority. Sure, it was _crappy_ development, but after the initial "looting" stage, rebuilding took place in Eastern Europe as in the west after WWII, and given that a rebuilt western Europe would have a lot of industrial potential, not doing so would be a serious case of cutting off their nose to spite their face. And the Marshall Plan may have saved (more) of Europe from going Communist, and other parts of it ending up as screwed economically as Latin America, but Europe without it certainly wasn't going to end up as Somalia-type failed states.

Admit it, you just wanted an "edgy" Subsaharan Africa - Europe switcheroo. :openedeyewink:
 
Why no aid from the US after the Soviet withdrawal? How long ago was the Soviet withdrawal? The "no infrastructure improvement" stuff makes no sense: development and industrialization of the Soviet block was always a Soviet priority. Sure, it was _crappy_ development, but after the initial "looting" stage, rebuilding took place in Eastern Europe as in the west after WWII, and given that a rebuilt western Europe would have a lot of industrial potential, not doing so would be a serious case of cutting off their nose to spite their face. And the Marshall Plan may have saved (more) of Europe from going Communist, and other parts of it ending up as screwed economically as Latin America, but Europe without it certainly wasn't going to end up as Somalia-type failed states.

The United States was busy getting its own chickens in line and fixing itself, and then it got distracted by NAWAPA, so they felt like they had more important things to deal with than Europe. And yes, that's what I meant by no infrastructure improvement. It was cheap and easy to build, and it had a tendency to break down when there wasn't a government able to keep it up. Without anyone outside help, things just kind of got bad and didn't ever really get better.

Admit it, you just wanted an "edgy" Subsaharan Africa - Europe switcheroo. :openedeyewink:

No.

Everything has happened for a reason.
 
Here's the modern day Major Alliances in An Alternate 'People's Revolution';


Atlantic Treaty Organization (ATO):
The successor (or reform depending on the legal expert) of NATO, ATO fills the same roles as NATO did but includes a larger area and has an official relationship with the United Nations as a provider of Peacekeepers and as a logistics arm for Peacekeeping operations; ATO is large, however it is not guaranteed to continue on in coming decades, while the majority (or perhaps plurality, the polls change seemingly every other time) support the status quo there are vocal groups who call for change, with the two largest groups being opposites, with one favouring expansion while the other supports dissolving it in favour of a EU Common Defence and America going its separate way; there is a third opinion that is shared among minorities of all three groups (in different variants) of the Peacekeeping aspects being given further support and integrated more into the UN.

African Mutual Defence Organization (AMDO):
AMDO is the newest of the major defence alliances in the world; started by South Africa, Côte d'Ivoire (which French encouragement), Mozambique, Botswana and the Republic of the Congo in 2002, it has gradually grown to encompass members from across the African continent, however much of the initial idea of it creating a united African defence group has been dulled as quite a few of the African countries not party to it don't fully trust it or otherwise look elsewhere in terms of defence.

Asia-Pacific Treaty Organization (APTO):
Originally created in 1980 between Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Australia and North Borneo with American backing, APTO has gone on to encompass quite a few of the Asia-Pacific region countries, however further expansion is unlikely as China and India have their own defence prerogatives (not to mention China does not trust APTO) and the remaining South-East Asian states have no interest in joining; the only really talked about future expansion is among the Pacific Island countries, however even that is talked of more as a possibility rather than something that anyone considers likely.

Middle-Eastern Defence Organization (MEDO):
MEDO came into being in the late 80's as a concept and was put into force in the early 90's following the 'Reform Era' of the former USSR; initially comprising Iran, North Yemen, Jordan and Bahrain, it gradually expanded over the next 20 years to its current size, with the last member to join, Palestine, being in 2009.
While originally starting off as a regional defence against potential Soviet or Soviet-proxy aggression, the alliance now is united via multiple threats, be it the UER to the North and it's allies, the extremists in Saudi Arabia to the South or the mess that is Pakistan, and looks set to continue well into the future.

Eurasian Security Union (EuSU):
The EuSU is essentially the successor to the Belgrade Pact and COMASSIS; while the EuSU is considerably smaller than its predecessors, the remaining members are all adamant in their collective defence agreement.
While the other major alliances have'nt always had high standards for Democracy, the EuSU essentially has none, comprising liberal democracies to guided democracies to the outright dictatorship in Syria.



APR 2016 World Alliances.png
 
Hrm. I suppose that Morocco/Algiers/Tunis are Ottoman vassals, same as inner Arabia? Might would help to use a different color for that. Try taking the Turkish shade and desaturating that some instead of being so bold.

Haven't seen that color for Sicily in a while. It's a nice one. Is it Peninsular Dominant, or is it just personal choice?

Also, Corsica and Elba seem to be using the same shade as Terra Nullis (same as Rhodes, Hormuz, etc). Unless the islands had a complete die off, they should just use a neutral white color if it's a neutral state.

Also, borders: borders should never have jagged edges like you have them, where they are all two pixels wide. Instead, try to have them where they only touch on the corners, not on the sides. (Not that it isn't allowed, but should only be used sparring, when there is no other option). That will allow your borders to look a bit more organic instead of suffering from straight line syndrome. (See, Hungarian-Ottoman border, which I imagine is a military frontier).

That's why your central asian borders look so thick compared to others.

Also, interesting China. Something happen over there?
1. I used the lighter shade for the Ottomans in TOASTER to color the vassal states. Maybe I should've picked the even lighter shade on retrospective, I guess.

2. Actually, I just picked the color of Naples there.

3. Oh, crap, that's my mistake. I forgot to color them while making the map and didn't even notice until now.

4. That's what I was doing for borders in Europe, but by the time I got to all the minor khanates and African states, I sort of gave up by then. Yeah, there's a lot of fixing needed there.

5. Shun Dynasty :)
 
The United States was busy getting its own chickens in line and fixing itself, and then it got distracted by NAWAPA, so they felt like they had more important things to deal with than Europe. And yes, that's what I meant by no infrastructure improvement. It was cheap and easy to build, and it had a tendency to break down when there wasn't a government able to keep it up. Without anyone outside help, things just kind of got bad and didn't ever really get better.
.

I meant help _after_ the Soviet withdrawal, by which time I imagine the US has a bit more money on hand...(What's NAWAPA? I don't see anything that abbreviates to that).

Did England get Sea-Lioned, or just heavily nuked?

This seems really too pessimistic about the ability of what is still going to be a well educated populace with a centuries-long traditional of centralized government to recover, especially after decades of functional and generally orderly (if oppressive) Soviet government. [1] I can see "Eastern Europe" west Europe. I can see "post-Soviet Soviet Republics" Europe. I can see "Latin American dictatorships" Europe. I can even see "Red China" or "Iran" Europe. But "Congo" Europe? "Afghanistan" Europe? "Somalia" Europe? "Liberian Civil War" Europe? Those are situations with massively different antecedents, and I don't find them plausible, save in, say, a situation where western Europe was heavily nuked and nobody ever showed up to establish order.

I have no problem with western Europe being this world's problem child, but state failure on the level described just doesn't work for me.

(I wonder if anyone is going to show up and accuse me of being a racist for doubting Europe's [2] ability to fail as badly as Somalia? :evilsmile: )

[1] West Europe is at a disadvantage compared to our OTL East Europe 1989-1990 in that it doesn't have an equivalent of the EC to latch onto, but I'm not sure why nobody in the anti-Communist block is willing to help at this point, and not sure why otherwise it's going to be even worse.

[2] Also, I should stop saying "Europe" as if it were homogeneous - Europe is a bunch of different countries: their responses and abilities to recover, and their responses, will no doubt vary substantially. Nobody in any of the clubs willing to take any of them in, not even the Non-Aligned? One would think that India, say, would be amused at the notion of patronizing, er, being a patron of an impoverished European nation...:biggrin:
 
I meant help _after_ the Soviet withdrawal, by which time I imagine the US has a bit more money on hand...(What's NAWAPA? I don't see anything that abbreviates to that).

NAWAPA is the North American Water and Power Alliance. You build a bunch of canals and reservoirs to pump water from rivers in Alaska and the Canadian Arctic south into the United States for freshwater and hydroelectricity.

Did England get Sea-Lioned, or just heavily nuked?

Bombed a lot.

This seems really too pessimistic about the ability of what is still going to be a well educated populace with a centuries-long traditional of centralized government to recover, especially after decades of functional and generally orderly (if oppressive) Soviet government. [1] I can see "Eastern Europe" west Europe. I can see "post-Soviet Soviet Republics" Europe. I can see "Latin American dictatorships" Europe. I can even see "Red China" or "Iran" Europe. But "Congo" Europe? "Afghanistan" Europe? "Somalia" Europe? "Liberian Civil War" Europe? Those are situations with massively different antecedents, and I don't find them plausible, save in, say, a situation where western Europe was heavily nuked and nobody ever showed up to establish order.

Yes, it's a very pessimistic take on what happens when things really go south, but I'm a very pessimistic person operating in a very pessimistic universe.

I have no problem with western Europe being this world's problem child, but state failure on the level described just doesn't work for me.

Okay, that's fine.
 
The United States of America was, until 1919, the dominate power of the America’s. They had Spheres of Influence all across North and South America, won a smashing victory in the Spanish-American War - in which it gained the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and several Pacific islands, - gained control of the Hawaiian Islands, and was the world’s largest economy by 1913. It seemed as if almost nothing would stop this nation from becoming world power – Almost.

The United States made the grave mistake of joining the Central Powers in late 1917 in The Great War, when German Empire secretly sent the US a telegraph promising them all of Canada if they joined the war on their side. After much discussion in Congress, America declared war on the Entente. This, however, aided the Central Powers little, as the war in Europe ended with an Entente victory on November 31, 1918 with Germany calling for a cease fire.

At first, the US did well in the war. Despite the opposition they met from the Canadian army and the locals living there, they continued to march north. At their extent in February, 1918, they had occupied The Maritimes, Vancouver Island, several cities such as Vancouver, Winnipeg, and Montreal, and even going as far as the outskirts of Quebec City. The siege of Ottawa by this point looked to be an American victory. By March however, things started to turn against the Americans. More British forces were sent to Canada and successfully stopped the advance and lifted the siege at Ottawa. Hawaii and the Philippines were under attack by British, French, and Japanese forces. By May, all of Canada’s territories were regained and began the invasion of the US. The American’s were losing their gains, and more.

Riots and Protests against the war occurred in much the major Americans cities once it became clear the US was losing the war. By October, most of New England, much of Alaska, Washington state, and all of their Pacific territory was under Entente control. Under pressure from both the Entente and the American people, the United States called for an armistice on November 1st, 1918.

The Treaty of Ottawa was signed on April 10th, 1919. The United States of America was forced to make the following concessions:

· The Philippines, Hawaii, and the Panama Canal Zone were to be given to the United Kingdom. Samoa, Puerto Rico, and Navassa were to be given to France.

· Canada would annex Alaska, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Michigan, Washington state, and parts of Idaho and New York.

· The US Army was to be no bigger than 150,000 men.

· The US would have to pay $600,000,000 in war reparations to Britain and France.

The United States lost nearly a fourth of their territory, over 300,000 American soldiers were killed, and the war and the reparations had wreaked havoc on the economy. By the end of it all, the United States of America was no longer the great power it once was.

After the war, a great economic depression hit the US, and – to a lesser extent – the world. 20% of the nation was unemployed by 1921, the lowest it had ever been in the country’s history. President Woodrow Wilson attempted to improve the situation during his last years in office, but his efforts weren’t enough.

James M. Cox became president in the 1920 election. He proceeded to create many economic reforms and programs to get the people back into the work force, rebuilt the economy, and rearm there military. By the next election, Cox had managed to reduce the unemployment rate to 10.5%, strengthened the military to 500,000 men, and the economy was nearing per-war levels. The British opposed the Americans rearming the military, but because they were experiencing much trouble at home, they hardly did much; Canada meanwhile decided to arm the border between the two countries. In 1924, the Americans intervened in a civil war of one of their former adversary: The Empire of Japan.

The Japanese REALLY wanted to expand their influence and territory throughout the Pacific, especially in the Philippines when the war ended. They ended up however getting very little at the wars conclusion. The United Kingdom and France for the most part boxed the Japanese from getting anything with the exception of German territory in China. This angered the Japanese, but more so did it anger the military. In 1923, after being inspired by the events in Italy, many top military generals attempted a coup against Emperor Taishō. It failed, and Japan fell into civil war, the right-winged militarist versus the pro-monarchist. In 1924, the pro-monarchist called upon the British and French for aid. When that failed, they called upon the aid of the United States, who agreed to help. By 1925, the militarist lost the civil war and the pro-monarchist regained power in Japan. Later that same year, the United States of America and the Empire of Japan signed the Japanese-American Alliance, an economic and military alliance between the two nations.

Together, the two nations began to stabilize the region. China was in chaos with many warlords attempting to either control all of China or enough of it for their own interest (Korea was in a similar situation). Stability was brought to Korea in 1927 and China in 1930, both becoming republics and both becoming members of the alliance. The communist in China were driven out west to the province of Xinjiang, declaring it the People’s Republic of Xinjiang, where they remain to this day.

By 1937, the Japanese-American Alliance had been successful in expanding their influence in Asia, the Pacific, and The America’s. That year however, a powerful European nation became a member of the alliance: The German Republic. Germany (also known as the Weimar Republic), like the US, lost much of its land and empire and was plunged into economic ruin (except in a worse situation with the whole hyper-inflation thing being a factor). In 1925, a man named Karl Jarres was elected president of the fledgling republic. He managed to restore much of the nation’s prestige and have it recover from its economic woes. In 1937, the Weimar Republic was renamed the German Republic and remilitarized the Rhineland as well as making union with Austria. Towards the end of the year, the German Republic decided to join the Japanese-American Alliance in order to further its prestige and to reopen relations with its old ally.

Upon Germany’s membership, the alliance was given a new name: The New Central Powers. An alliance made up of mostly democratic nations and support of democratic movements throughout the world. The movements are also a pretty good way to spite…

The Entente, which is still made up by the United Kingdom, France, as well as other nations. The empires of the Entente have been decaying since the end of The Great War. Their economies have been stagnating since the wars end and they couldn’t properly digest the vast gains they made. Many rebel groups exist in the America’s, Africa, and Asia against the two powers supported by either the NCP and the communists. Despite the attempts at cracking down on these insurgent groups, they can never be truly defeated. While none of the Entente members have or will ever become a part of the new Fascist movement, their recently right winged policies have made both countries somewhat totalitarian in there doings although retain some elements of democracy (France is easily the most democratic of the nations in the Entente, being on par of that of the US).

Meanwhile in the east, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – which emerged from the ashes of the Russian empire in 1922 – is, for the most part, the same it is was in OTL: A Stalinist-like dictatorship that has killed millions of its own people to further their industrial capacity. They are the leader of the Communist world, and almost always directly involved with any communist movements in the world. They have also been a little more successful in spreading communism around the world. In Spain, the Republicans won the Spanish Civil war and turned Spain into a communist nation. The Spanish have been very helpful to the Soviets by helping spread communist rebellions and insurgencies throughout Africa. This has made tension between Pairs and Madrid very high, the border between France and Spain is currently heavily militarized and some skirmishes occur at least once a week. The Soviet Union also founded the People’s Republic of Xinjiang, established after stability was returned to the Republic of China and tries to claim all of China for itself. A series of recent uprisings may lead to the fall of the unstable country.

On the Mediterranean, Italy is the dominant force of the region. Becoming Fascist in the early 1920’s the country’s leader, Mussolini, wanted to recreate the Roman Empire. The 1920’s and 30’s saw the rapid rise of Italian power and dominance in not just the Mediterranean, but in Europe and North Africa. Italy annexed Albania and Ethiopia, Invaded Greece and Egypt and made puppet states out of them, and supported Fascist movements in Hungary and Bulgaria. Italy intervened in the Spanish Civil War in support of the Nationalist, but still ended up losing to the Republicans. Italy ended up making puppets of the Balearic Islands instead. As of 1940, Italy and its allies have their sites on Yugoslavia, France, and the Middle East for expansion, although they are still under the watchful of the Entente so they can’t do such things until they’re gone.

It’s 1940, and it seems as the world is – once again – moving to war.


Japanese-American Alliance.png
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top