Map Thread XVI

Status
Not open for further replies.
View attachment 338441
Progress was made.
Ecclesiastic states (ie Liège, Trier, Köln, Cambrai, Basel, Verdun, Toul, Metz) were considered to be dominions of the Papal States.
Savoy is still ugly with Saluzzo in the middle, and I may have given them a chunk of Liguria by mistake. And I could have issues with a small northward drifting in Lorraine.
Still many thanks to @Bob Hope's basemap, and this one : https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe..._1477-en.svg/950px-Map_France_1477-en.svg.png
If you have not already got it, try this
http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archive/central_europe_1477.htm
 
The voting has come in and 2 colour schemes are tied
I now need a vote to decide which works best
No. 1;
1450.8nn the age of aquisition Onslaught extract.png
 
View attachment 338441
Progress was made.
Ecclesiastic states (ie Liège, Trier, Köln, Cambrai, Basel, Verdun, Toul, Metz) were considered to be dominions of the Papal States.
Savoy is still ugly with Saluzzo in the middle, and I may have given them a chunk of Liguria by mistake. And I could have issues with a small northward drifting in Lorraine.
Still many thanks to @Bob Hope's basemap, and this one : https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe..._1477-en.svg/950px-Map_France_1477-en.svg.png
Though Liege, Trier, Köln, etc went back and forth between Wettin, Habsburg, and Wittlesbachs hegemony, incase a more indepth map on their situation is ever done on here. Really wish I could find the name of that Cambridge historical atlas I read some years back that was part of a series of world history that was comprised of about twelve thick, black books. That historical atlas was the best I ever came across... Anyways, wasn't Orange also independent for a while? Though perhaps that was for a very limitted window of time.
 
View attachment 339581 Making maps of alt US states is hard. How do you do anything with the west without drawing arbitrary lines. :idontcare:
You look at topographical maps, go by watersheds, the evolutional of territories and districts, the administrative divisions used by the non-Americans when dealing with a land, and then you make changes to make it more like IOTL due to it being a good idea. Such as how the borders of Mexican Baja and Alta California are the same before the Mexican-American War as they are IOTL again, how Idado gave up lands to Montana and Wyoming because they were on the otherside of the Continental Divide, how the IOTL border of Utah is in part due to how their are mountains seperating what would have been the northeast corner if they made the state a rectangle, and... I really don't know what to say about Victoria.

I would say look over this at random. You will be bound to find some interesting territorial boundaries that happened back before anyone really knew what the lay of the land was like. So many fun borders were created due to people being mistaken on how far something was. And while I am unsure if it was true, there may have been problems with US-British borders in part due to the crease of an atlas. Might be thinking of another example, though.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_evolution_of_the_United_States
 
You look at topographical maps, go by watersheds, the evolutional of territories and districts, the administrative divisions used by the non-Americans when dealing with a land, and then you make changes to make it more like IOTL due to it being a good idea. Such as how the borders of Mexican Baja and Alta California are the same before the Mexican-American War as they are IOTL again, how Idado gave up lands to Montana and Wyoming because they were on the otherside of the Continental Divide, how the IOTL border of Utah is in part due to how their are mountains seperating what would have been the northeast corner if they made the state a rectangle, and... I really don't know what to say about Victoria.

I would say look over this at random. You will be bound to find some interesting territorial boundaries that happened back before anyone really knew what the lay of the land was like. So many fun borders were created due to people being mistaken on how far something was. And while I am unsure if it was true, there may have been problems with US-British borders in part due to the crease of an atlas. Might be thinking of another example, though.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_evolution_of_the_United_States

Victoria's eastern border is the continental divide and the same as British Columbia's. The north is the 54' line as close as I could eyeball it. Mississippi, Alabama, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Lakota, New Mexico, and Arizona are all based on old territorial lines. As are the Canadian lines IIRC. Don't remember what I was thinking with Idaho, it's been a while since I made the map

I moved Baja's border north to include San Deigo and the Salton Sea. It would be the natural capital.
 
Victoria's eastern border is the continental divide and the same as British Columbia's. The north is the 54' line as close as I could eyeball it. Mississippi, Alabama, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Lakota, New Mexico, and Arizona are all based on old territorial lines. As are the Canadian lines IIRC. Don't remember what I was thinking with Idaho, it's been a while since I made the map

I moved Baja's border north to include San Deigo and the Salton Sea. It would be the natural capital.
I'm not questioning those early borders you mentioned, just suggesting for the west that looking over old borders would be helpful. When it came to Victoria I was mostly thinking about the name, as she wouldn't be Queen until loooong after the Americans got the land. As for the Californian border... I feel it would be a tad tricky. The Salton Sea is less than worthless and didn't exist until maybe a century back so no need to think of that, but having San Diego with Baja... I suppose it would depend on how things changes, since Alta California was run by Fransiscans and Baja California by Jesuits. Having the border moved further north, changing them to North and South California, and having the south by filled with Spaniards, Natives, and Mexicans and the north with Miner Forty-Niners seems a simple enough thing to do. It would need LA in the south through, as just getting San Diego would leave Baja as a pretty poor state. Lived most my live in San Diego. But yah, just my two cents.
 
This is an unfinished map of Europe after the Second Weltkrieg (in a slightly different Kaissereich scenario). At least, this is how I imagine Europe to look like. Basically, Germany falls apart in many states, and some parts are ceded to other countries. Greece expands a lot, Russia also. Most of Eastern European German puppets are gone, and Poland is the only one left. But again, it will be split in 1962 between Germany and Russia. Illyria is established, and Serbia is huge ;). Italy reunites. Ottoman Empire complitely falls apart.
And btw in 1950's Strasser bros seize power in Germany, establish (obviously) a Strasserist state, end up annexing East Prussia and Democratic Republic of Bavaria, then go on rampage and nuke half of Europe in a mini-WW3.
The black line represents the former German borders in Europe (before capitulation of Germany in 1942).
 

Attachments

  • map.png
    map.png
    287.2 KB · Views: 352
Is it just me or is this thread moving kinda slow?
Around the time of the begining of semester for those in university, as well as presumably the time most end their summer vacations. Give it another week and people will settle back in. Is it is any consolation, the Map Shitpost thread has been doing brisk business the last day and a half.
 
Around the time of the begining of semester for those in university, as well as presumably the time most end their summer vacations. Give it another week and people will settle back in. Is it is any consolation, the Map Shitpost thread has been doing brisk business the last day and a half.

This. It's mid-august. Expecting things to happen is a quick ticket to disappointment.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top