Map Thread XVII

Status
Not open for further replies.

JJohnson

Banned
Valdore Javorsky said:
Hey guys!

Since Nightrise is a project I've been personally working on for a long time, and since I usually don't want to show progress (as most ideas are somewhat retarded) but I wanted to hear your general opinion regarding a certain idea that's been in my head for a few months.

View attachment 349614

This is the so-called "Reichsbund", a predecessor of its modern variant. It was established 1878 with a soviet-union-esque system, as (with the exception of Switzerland), all of the non-German Countries were puppets of Germany, paid with the same money, had common citizenship and free borders, but remained "nominally" independent. (Similairly to austria-Hungary, I guess)

In the World and Timeline of Nightrise, there's a one central industrial world war, the "Great War". It's a sort-of mix of the first and second world war OTL regarding tech.
Its belligerents are the Entente (German Reichsbund, Japan, Great Britain, China and Spain, later Romania, Sweden-Norway and Serbia) versus the New Rise Powers (Anti-demonic, ultra-ecclestical [They even attacked the roman catholic church for that]) - (French Emire, Expansionist Italy, Bulgaria, Turkey, Mongolia, Manchuria, East Turkestan (Xijnxjiyangfgsws-thingy), Tibet and ome other minor powers, mainly in India and in Arabia).
(As for the US-equivalent, I'm not sure yet. Making it New Rise would be interesting, especially regarding Utah/Deseret and th American stereotypical "general christian extremism", but I'll see it more on British-German side as due to their population)

Since we're talking about a world war which has the British Empire, the German Kaiserreich, Japan and China on one side, it's easy to say that it ends in an Entente victory.
French Empire is stripped, Italy is thrown back into disunity as it has before, Turkey and the Arab states are fighting themselves and the new state of Israel; Bulgaria and Finland are puppeted, loads of colonial area change bluh bleh blah.
This is the original "post-war" reichsbund, which was renamed "Danube Federation" (Donaubund) in 1937.
View attachment 349615


As you can see, the Swiss Federation remains in the Reichsbund albeit multiple leave attempts, and the germanized-over-the-decades Netherlands have become a puppet as well.

Now this is where it becomes interesting:

what if, instead of making a dutch puppet, Germany annexed all of it and a bit of French territory as well?
View attachment 349616
Here you can see my new concept. In it, the liberated Netherlands only appear during the last months of war as German-British forces eventually broke through France. However, in the following Treaty, far more area is ceded to Germany and the practically-german Dutch are incorporated into Big G. It also shows that Switzerland eventually leaves the Reichsbund. on the other Hand, the Vatican is reincorporated into the Reichs-/Donaubund (since it was a German mandate until the 1810s).


What do you think?
Is the new western border idea too wanky? Is it too wanky because the Reichsbund already OP'ed Germany enough, or does it even matter anymore?
What do you think about Switzerland? should it leave, as there were independence riots, or would it be weird to let them just slip away?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't include Switzerland, since it's enjoying its neutrality, though in your timeline, maybe that's different. I wouldn't include the Netherlands other than maybe a monetary union and common defense pact, but leave it as a Netherlands-Belgium united country, but that's just me. Keep up the good work!
 
Clandango

Clandango

theman7777 said:
Here is my postwar map suggestion:
View attachment 349704
I think that in switzerland the italian-swiss areas should be split off, and the rest directly integrated into Germany. If areas like the netherlands, poland, and hungary are a direct part of germany, there is no reason for switzerland, which is primarily german-speaking, not to be directly annexed. Personally I really like the idea of germany annexing those parts of france, and i think the resulting border is very aesthetically pleasing. I disagree with @Terranoso in that it is not too much of a stretch for those areas of france and the low countries to be annexed. My reasoning is similar to what I mentioned before, the fact that a couple million french is not that much when you consider all of the other non-german ethnic groups that are directly part of germany. As always, I really enjoy the work you're doing on the project and can't wait to see the finished version!
Click to expand...
The Swiss as a united entity basically began seven hundred years ago, and from there on it was them and the other cantons increasingly coming together and kicking the pants off the Holy Roman Emperor. Hell, considering that the Habsburg's ancestral castle is in Switzerland should say something. What dynasty would give up something in between loads of their possessions if they had a choice? The place is armed to the teeth, and they were kept independent for so many years because they provided hordes of high class mercenaries and no one wanted anyone else to monopolize that.

On a side note, I don't believe Swiss German would be understood by Prussians, or vise versa. I also find it confusing why you seem to disagree with Terranoso. How is saying that a couple extra million French people would be unsettling for stability or such wrong? With all the land acuired, Germans are a minority in forty percent of their territory. Seems kind of pointless to have given up partially German Swiss territory to Italy and France in this setting if minorities aren't an issue.

Anyways, the Walloons, Dutch, Flemings, Alsatians, French, Swiss, Poles, Lithuanians, Magyars, Romanians, Ruthenians, Ukranians, Rusyn, Russians, Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Czechs, Slovaks, socialists- Ahh, and getting rid of Switzerland means no safety valve for political radicals and reformers. And no place for international organizations. Going to be a spectacular show when this collapses.
 

Jcw3

Banned
merkmuds said:
I have a question. How do you make the growth of countries after a ISOT seem so realistic?
Click to expand...

First of all, thank you. Second of all, I use several things. An exponential growth calculator to plot the population increase. (Normally a 1.1 to 1.3% increase over 200 years.) Then I take into account that nation's need for more expansion, and their desire. Malta, for instance, only has a couple settlements on Sicily (probably claimed the island, but might sell it to Britain or the Arabs at a later date). Malta's a low-population, self-sustaining country. Not much is going to change that. They'll find a few choice spots and grow at their leisure. Rivers and coastlines are also useful. You do have to take into account climate. There's a reason Sudan focused on Ethiopia and not its northwestern territories.

India, on the other hand as Malta, is bursting at the seams, has plenty of undesirable minorities that would want to leave, and has a lot of motivation to grow and expand. Hence the chaos in Asia.

You have to take into account a lot of things, basically. Population growth. Common sense. The resources available to the nation, both at home and in the virgin earth. The population of the country, whether they *want* to leave and settle new, untouched lands. Whether they need to settle new lands (or how much, anyway, there will always be some growth after this long of a time). How good the land is.
 
Valdore Javorsky

Valdore Javorsky

Clandango said:
The Swiss as a united entity basically began seven hundred years ago, and from there on it was them and the other cantons increasingly coming together and kicking the pants off the Holy Roman Emperor. Hell, considering that the Habsburg's ancestral castle is in Switzerland should say something. What dynasty would give up something in between loads of their possessions if they had a choice? The place is armed to the teeth, and they were kept independent for so many years because they provided hordes of high class mercenaries and no one wanted anyone else to monopolize that.

On a side note, I don't believe Swiss German would be understood by Prussians, or vise versa. I also find it confusing why you seem to disagree with Terranoso. How is saying that a couple extra million French people would be unsettling for stability or such wrong? With all the land acuired, Germans are a minority in forty percent of their territory. Seems kind of pointless to have given up partially German Swiss territory to Italy and France in this setting if minorities aren't an issue.

Anyways, the Walloons, Dutch, Flemings, Alsatians, French, Swiss, Poles, Lithuanians, Magyars, Romanians, Ruthenians, Ukranians, Rusyn, Russians, Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Czechs, Slovaks, socialists- Ahh, and getting rid of Switzerland means no safety valve for political radicals and reformers. And no place for international organizations. Going to be a spectacular show when this collapses.
Click to expand...
I've already decided to let switzerland be independent again - they joined the Reichsbund due to the swiss' verge of collapse, but they left after that "great war" shitshow.

regarding the ethnicities: Germany isn't really "Germany" (only in common language), but actually the "Danube Monarchy" inside the Danube Federation (Three Rivers Federation).
The Three Rivers' Federation has its specific "Member states borders" (which essentially act like UK's internal province borders) because of the Austro-Ukrainian Alliance during the Great Revolutionary Wars between 1856 and 1878 - and were essentially just left over there for the aesthetics. They serve no real divide.

German may be the lingua franca but in exception of some nationalist dreamers, somewhere about 92% of the population sees them as just another ethnic group.
 

merkmuds

Jcw3 said:
First of all, thank you. Second of all, I use several things. An exponential growth calculator to plot the population increase. (Normally a 1.1 to 1.3% increase over 200 years.) Then I take into account that nation's need for more expansion, and their desire. Malta, for instance, only has a couple settlements on Sicily (probably claimed the island, but might sell it to Britain or the Arabs at a later date). Malta's a low-population, self-sustaining country. Not much is going to change that. They'll find a few choice spots and grow at their leisure. Rivers and coastlines are also useful. You do have to take into account climate. There's a reason Sudan focused on Ethiopia and not its northwestern territories.

India, on the other hand as Malta, is bursting at the seams, has plenty of undesirable minorities that would want to leave, and has a lot of motivation to grow and expand. Hence the chaos in Asia.

You have to take into account a lot of things, basically. Population growth. Common sense. The resources available to the nation, both at home and in the virgin earth. The population of the country, whether they *want* to leave and settle new, untouched lands. Whether they need to settle new lands (or how much, anyway, there will always be some growth after this long of a time). How good the land is.
Click to expand...


Interesting, you clearly put a lot of effort into your maps :). Will you ever make a quick guide to help beginners?
 

Jcw3

Banned
merkmuds said:
Interesting, you clearly put a lot of effort into your maps :). Will you ever make a quick guide to help beginners?
Click to expand...

I think I just did.

Pithy comments aside, maybe. That post I just made, I think it is about all I can really say. I learned mapmaking through trial and error, developed my own style. Still am learning, legends remain a pain in the ass. The alignment is never right! But I do honestly think trial and error is the best way to go about it. I create a coherent world in my head first* and then draw the map.

*(British Empire ISOTed. Okay, what's the logical result of that? Indian domination, unless there's a collapse. That seems harder to draw, so I'll assume India is mostly united, with a bunch of breakaway states. Okay, what about Britain? It's fairly remote, isolated from its former colonies, assume that it's crawled up its own ass in isolationist fervor, and is just focused on keeping Europe and a few distant colonies under control. That also allows me to draw out more impressive borders for states like Kenya, Jamaica, or Ghana, so win-win. Nigerian/East African superpowers are a cliche for me. Break up Nigeria, have Kenya and Tanzania as rivals. Build up from there.)
 
Clandango

Clandango

Valdore Javorsky said:
I've already decided to let switzerland be independent again - they joined the Reichsbund due to the swiss' verge of collapse, but they left after that "great war" shitshow.

regarding the ethnicities: Germany isn't really "Germany" (only in common language), but actually the "Danube Monarchy" inside the Danube Federation (Three Rivers Federation).
The Three Rivers' Federation has its specific "Member states borders" (which essentially act like UK's internal province borders) because of the Austro-Ukrainian Alliance during the Great Revolutionary Wars between 1856 and 1878 - and were essentially just left over there for the aesthetics. They serve no real divide.

German may be the lingua franca but in exception of some nationalist dreamers, somewhere about 92% of the population sees them as just another ethnic group.
Click to expand...
Ahhh, the problems of Duestch versus Germanic. Anyways, I think the Dutch should also be independent, but I would need to see a world map to tell if there is much in the way of a Dutch empire that the Germans would want to keep the Netherlands around for, as otherwise the colonized are jumping ship or going to the British. If you do go for annexation, perhaps you should show the Netherlands flooded? If there was a big war over the area then I assume the dikes would have been blown by one party or another. Certainly would add flavor.
 
Valdore Javorsky

Valdore Javorsky

Clandango said:
but I would need to see a world map to tell if there is much in the way of a Dutch empire that the Germans would want to keep the Netherlands around for, as otherwise the colonized are jumping ship or going to the British.
Click to expand...
the Dutch empire was annexed in 1864 (east indies, dejima, Caribbean, Suriname etc) but they rebuilt a few colonies (mostly South Africa) which were ceded to Britain or some other power. Not that it mattered since the Dutch were finlandized by Germany before their Annexion anyways...
 

Arkenfolm

B_Munro said:
WIP: a commission updating my "Travels of John Mandeville" map to the current day.

mandeville_in_the_21st_century_by_quantumbranching-dbq2872.png
Click to expand...

Where's Ophir and King Solomon's Mines?
 

Undeadmuffin

To the Spanish have been granted Iberia, for these lush lands, only the guard of the Hercules pillars have been asked
To the French have been imposed the guard of the Pyrenees (since Spain would probably fail at its only task) and the guard of the Rhin to rein the Furor Germanicus
To the Italians, the golden child of Rome, have been given the guard of the Alps and the Illyrian coast
To the Greeks, for the gift of philosophy have been given Thrace, but for the task of guarding the southern flank of Europe, the eternal guard of Anatolia have been imposed
To the Germans, who's great strenght is known to be uncontrolable, have been given Mitteleuropa, danger to its neighboors but also source of power for those in need
To the Hungarian, the Danubian plains have been given and the guard of the Carpathian asked in exchange of these fertile lands
To the Serbs the Illyrian highlands and to the Bulgarian the Black sea for these need to be shielded from harm
To the Romanian, for their impudence at usurping the name of Rome, have been imposed the guard of the East, along the three other guardians;
The Poles, who's wings allow them to roam the plains, the Balts, who's lakes are their greatest wealth and shield and the Finns, the North have been granted to those who guards their Scandinavian brothers from the harm of the East
The Danes, sealoving peoples, received dominion over the peninsula and northen isles
The Swedes, who's hard work is put in use in the great forest and mines of their realms
The Norwegians, receiving the ice, the sea and the mountains as gift since they are the only one who can see the beauty in them
The last peoples are the Briton, alone in their islands, they have been given the guard of the Western sea as nothing else can be asked to them, master of their land

Extract of the poem EUROPA, explaining the border of the continent

Europa.png
 

wtw

theman7777 said:
Here is my postwar map suggestion:
View attachment 349704
I think that in switzerland the italian-swiss areas should be split off, and the rest directly integrated into Germany. If areas like the netherlands, poland, and hungary are a direct part of germany, there is no reason for switzerland, which is primarily german-speaking, not to be directly annexed. Personally I really like the idea of germany annexing those parts of france, and i think the resulting border is very aesthetically pleasing. I disagree with @Terranoso in that it is not too much of a stretch for those areas of france and the low countries to be annexed. My reasoning is similar to what I mentioned before, the fact that a couple million french is not that much when you consider all of the other non-german ethnic groups that are directly part of germany. As always, I really enjoy the work you're doing on the project and can't wait to see the finished version!
Click to expand...
Not enough Finland, and why the hell are you annexing Hungary?
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top