OTL Map Thread Mk IV., 2014-

[Witch0Winter]

Sorry if this has been asked already, but does anyone have a finished version of this topographical map? It'd be really great if they did, I could really use it. If not, I'm considering trying to finish it myself.

 

[Chicxulub]

There is no complete version so... go for it Toix.

 

[Witch0Winter]

There is no complete version so... go for it Toix.

Sweet. I'll try to at least finish Canada and Alaska, since I have some topographical maps I got from the CIA World Factbook website.

 

[Zanzibar]

Sweet. I'll try to at least finish Canada and Alaska, since I have some topographical maps I got from the CIA World Factbook website.

I'll work on Japan and Oceania.

 

[LSCatilina]

The topographic map have its lot of errors and mistakes, not mentioning the outdated features such as coasts and rivers, that said.

 

[Upvoteanthology]

The topographic map have its lot of errors and mistakes, not mentioning the outdated features such as coasts and rivers, that said.

What is the topographic map used for, anyway? Wouldn't a climate map be better for making borders?

 

[LSCatilina]

What is the topographic map used for, anyway?

As far as I know, nothing. I always considered it too unreliable to be used for OTL map making, but maybe other people did find a use for it.

Wouldn't a climate map be better for making borders?

I don't see how : the sheer ammount of states, nations, etc. including and dividing different climatic zones point otherwise, at least for TL remotely similar to OTL.

I think a map pointing only mountain ranges would be simpler to use than a full topographic map (as in, lines showing mountain ranges rather than filling colours) and more relevant to border making.

 

[TheBatman]

As far as I know, nothing. I always considered it too unreliable to be used for OTL map making, but maybe other people did find a use for it.


I don't see how : the sheer ammount of states, nations, etc. including and dividing different climatic zones point otherwise, at least for TL remotely similar to OTL.

I think a map pointing only mountain ranges would be simpler to use than a full topographic map (as in, lines showing mountain ranges rather than filling colours) and more relevant to border making.

What is the topographic map used for, anyway? Wouldn't a climate map be better for making borders?

It could be useful, I know a few borders are spelled out specifically by how they wind around certain geographical features (the Chile-Bolivia border comes to mind), such as mountains and valleys, and go so far as to also include the lengths they go before changing features (i.e. distance from where it starts on Mt. X to where it ends).

Granted, this might be more useful on a BAM scale than with WorldA.

 

[LSCatilina]

Granted, this might be more useful on a BAM scale than with WorldA.

It's too complex fore worlda, hence why I think depicting only mountain ranges would be useful, as we depict only rivers and not all their basins.

Even for BAM, i've doubts : it had been attempted but the projection mistakes make details even more shaggy. Eventually it's too complex to be drawn at hand, and only a simplifed version, IMO, have chances to be useful.

 

[Clandango]

Ok, here's the updated GCS 2015 which now has the colors for Malaysia, Colombia, Oman, Yemen and Azerbaijan, gives connected-box borders for Costa Rica's island and Venezuela's islands and shows Crimea as Russian, since that accidentally got left off the last one.

To think. If not for Rügen, Germany would not even be shown with it's own color on our maps.

 

[Upvoteanthology]

I think a map pointing only mountain ranges would be simpler to use than a full topographic map (as in, lines showing mountain ranges rather than filling colours) and more relevant to border making.

That'd be much better, plus more refined rivers.

 

[LSCatilina]

That'd be much better, plus more refined rivers.

We have already map with more refined rivers. But for reasons that I can't really grasp, people are generally used outdated basemaps, even when they're put on the AH.com wiki.

 

[Upvoteanthology]

We have already map with more refined rivers. But for reasons that I can't really grasp, people are generally used outdated basemaps, even when they're put on the AH.com wiki.

I always use the ones on the wiki, I think the period pages do need a but of an overhaul. There are lots of WIPs and things from 2005 on there.

 

[metastasis_d]

We have already map with more refined rivers. But for reasons that I can't really grasp, people are generally used outdated basemaps, even when they're put on the AH.com wiki.

I usually go to my AH folder when I want to start a new map.

 

[iori]

To think. If not for Rügen, Germany would not even be shown with it's own color on our maps.

The countries I use colors for on the modern day map has always been based on my own reasonings; originally I only showed colors for the World Powers, which Germany, being one of the Second-Tier Global Economic Pillars* and being geopolitically influential, I consider one of, hence it being included.


*In case anyone's curious the U.S., Japan and China are the First-tier, India being 1.5-Tier and Germany being Second-Tier; collectively they comprise the primary pillars of the planetary economy, with major economic problems in any of them resulting in economic affects worldwide, with the importance of each meaning more effect.

 

[LSCatilina]

I always use the ones on the wiki, I think the period pages do need a but of an overhaul. There are lots of WIPs and things from 2005 on there.

I should probably do so, but last time I had to dig in every map thread in order to find patches and updated maps not put on the wiki.

I'm not that stressed to do it too soon : as far as I know (and I tried to make sure it was the case, but it may be that people don't try to follow up) what's on the wiki for what matter worlda is generally up to date. (Which doesn't mean you don't have obsolete map, but when there is, it's because nobody made a more recent attempt)

I usually go to my AH folder when I want to start a new map.

I was mostly speaking of basemaps with rivers, rather than maps of 2014/2015*

(Tough many UCS worlda, Iori's maps being excluded then, of 2015 on this tread are generally incorrect or incomplete that said)

 

[iori]

It's too complex fore worlda, hence why I think depicting only mountain ranges would be useful, as we depict only rivers and not all their basins.

Even for BAM, i've doubts : it had been attempted but the projection mistakes make details even more shaggy. Eventually it's too complex to be drawn at hand, and only a simplifed version, IMO, have chances to be useful.

If we all thought like that we'd have no river maps or unique maps or other such things.

Yes you can't make it perfect, but then guess what, at the scale the Worlda is at you can't make the borders or coastlines perfect either.

 

[LSCatilina]

If we all thought like that we'd have no river maps or unique maps or other such things.

Well, giving how much the topographic map is unused, it's less about me (apparently) trying to crush down map diversity, then having a map being too complex for the scale involved to be used for map making as an established situation.

Unless you think I'm secretely removing every worlda map based on the topographical worlda, that is.

Yes you can't make it perfect, but then guess what, at the scale the Worlda is at you can't make the borders or coastlines perfect either.

I think you're avoiding a point in my posts : guess what, I never said it shouldn't be done, but that it was too complex at this scale to be useful for making other maps.

I'll be much obligated that, if you feel being snarky, to actually read my point before answering them : people can do whatever they want, it's not me that will stop them (even if I had somehow the power to), but too much complexity on a fairly small scale won't be much usable for making other maps.

Of course actual features on worlda are simplified : but I think there's a clear difference between a coastline, which is easily visible and distinguishable (thanks in no part to the difference of colour between land and sea, light green and light blue) and a mix of different colours which aren't always fitting the projection or the rivers (and weren't updated with these features) and supported but by themselves.

But, guess what, I think it can be simplified as we did with coastlines : hence why I think that depicting mountain ranges rather than the whole topographic situation would be better at this scale.

 

[Gryphon]

What is the topographic map used for, anyway? Wouldn't a climate map be better for making borders?

As the person who started off the topo map (and as one of the people who's been involved in the Worlda mapmaking for years- I redrew half the North American rivers at least once and I've put together a handful of patches for some North American borders NO ONE BLOODY USES):

I don't think it's been stressed enough that the Worlda is quite possibly the single most accurate set of historic and general purpose maps ever. The topo map is an attempt to extend this farther into the realm of physical maps as well; it doesn't need to have a specific use to be worthwhile. At this point the maps themselves are their own reward.

(That said, if you really need a reason, the original ostensible purpose of these maps is to create a repository for the mapmakers in the map threads, and the topo map can actually be very useful in making ahistoric maps look better. There's a couple of maps I've even had to hold off making until a couple of regions on the QBAM get topography'd, and I know of at least one project I'd like to do in the future that would be made vastly more fun with a topo Worlda.)

(Also, I think we have a climate zone map somewhere, and to be honest, how would you define mountain ranges to outline them except with a topo map? You could do continental divides, sure, but that's a different thing altogether.)

 

[metastasis_d]

On that note, I've wanted to do continental divides and watersheds for major rivers for a while now.