Q-Bam Historical Map Thread

Yet it is only a variant of what Boris is planning for rebels.
Lines are by far way easier to both add and edit - Personally I would leave the rebels as we have been doing since forever, but if we are going to change it, then the easier-to-edit solution should be the one to go.
 
Lines are by far way easier to both add and edit - Personally I would leave the rebels as we have been doing since forever, but if we are going to change it, then the easier-to-edit solution should be the one to go.
This is how Boris says he does it
For the first one it’s just reducing the opacity of one of the colors by 50 in Paint.NET, and then drawing each around a base shape, either inside or outside it, until there’s about 4. For the second, I took those same 4 layers, made them all a third color, then used the paint bucket tool with the horizontal lines fill with the rebel and country colors as my primary and secondary.
so he has to create the first to get the second!
 
so he has to create the first to get the second!
you can just count the amount of pixels outwards instead of having to fiddle with oppacity, which can easily lead to much more inconsistent looks
edit: I also think the fuzzy borders clash tremendously with the blocky, pixel look of the rest of the map (basically I think it looks horrible)
 
Q-BAM is meant to be functional, not pretty. For pretty things we have pixel art, for raster, and many of the tricks for vector maps. I think this is an extremely severe downgrade and that it also puts in danger the kind of functionality the map was made to be used for. I would never even suggest using this kind of effect for a raster map in this way. The scale and the precision, each on their own, invalidate any arguments I've seen so far for this, and together, they honestly make me fear that this could be the likelies start of the end of the usefulness of the Q-BAM, and thus, of its life, I have ever seen in the forums since like 2011, when I was simply lurking.
 
I think you guys are being a bit too dramatic frankly.. if @Crazy Boris wants to use this style for their historical Q-BAMS then all power to them. If you prefer the old style, then simply overlay his map and redo the rebels in a fairly simple fashion. Given the open source nature of the project, I see absolutely nothing wrong with an author who puts hard work into making their own series deciding to change individual portions to suit them. Its not like every WorldA follows @hadaril's formula.. very recently many have been making WorldAs in a new style introduced by @Library of Alexandria and this isn't "spelling the end of WorldA" or whatever.. you're free to use what style you wish and frankly it isn't difficult to transfer one to the other. To me, Q-BAM isn't "meant" to be one thing or another... we all have access to the basemaps and even if a style is not something you like then its all standardized and so incredibly easy to just redo to your own liking. The projection is really the only thing you can't really mess with on this project, but the rest is in the eyes of the author. Whether its pleasing aesthetically is another matter entirely, but I don't think we should be claiming that this is "the end of Q-BAM" just because one regular contributor is creating his own scheme. Thats never been new to this forum and we have a number of different schemes and formats.
 
very recently many have been making WorldAs in a new style introduced by @Library of Alexandria
Well to be fair, this "style" isn't that different for what I have seen of other worldAs, but I digress. I agree with you that no one should be beholden to anything, people should be able to make their own stuff without someone saying that it's bad because it goes against the "norm"
 
Last edited:
Who is talking about a norm here though? I'm talking about usability and willing uncertainty in borders is a direct opposite of that.
 
I think you guys are being a bit too dramatic frankly.. if @Crazy Boris wants to use this style for their historical Q-BAMS then all power to them. If you prefer the old style, then simply overlay his map and redo the rebels in a fairly simple fashion. Given the open source nature of the project, I see absolutely nothing wrong with an author who puts hard work into making their own series deciding to change individual portions to suit them. Its not like every WorldA follows @hadaril's formula.. very recently many have been making WorldAs in a new style introduced by @Library of Alexandria and this isn't "spelling the end of WorldA" or whatever.. you're free to use what style you wish and frankly it isn't difficult to transfer one to the other. To me, Q-BAM isn't "meant" to be one thing or another... we all have access to the basemaps and even if a style is not something you like then its all standardized and so incredibly easy to just redo to your own liking. The projection is really the only thing you can't really mess with on this project, but the rest is in the eyes of the author. Whether its pleasing aesthetically is another matter entirely, but I don't think we should be claiming that this is "the end of Q-BAM" just because one regular contributor is creating his own scheme. Thats never been new to this forum and we have a number of different schemes and formats.
I agree, I was passing an opinion only because Boris asked for one originally.
Well to be fair, this "style" isn't that different for what I have seen of other worldAs, but I digress. I agree with you that no one should be beholden to anything, people should be able to make their own stuff without someone saying that it's bad because it goes against the "norm"
I agree.
Who is talking about a norm here though? I'm talking about usability and willing uncertainty in borders is a direct opposite of that.
Usability depends on how much the contributor is willing to put into it.
With rebels the borders are NEVER going to be certain so using a border line is what is actually the direct opposite of uncertainty.
 
This border change between Norway and Russia does not seem to be present in any of the pre 1826 qbams
 

Attachments

  • Norway-Russia1826.png
    Norway-Russia1826.png
    292.3 KB · Views: 99
  • Capture.JPG
    Capture.JPG
    345.5 KB · Views: 73
does anyone have better source on the borders of the pre-1826 condominium?
The first map i posted seems to use modern norwegian municipal boundaries; the second one is from 1824, but its not very detailed.
The first map isn't modern, it's the churchyards and graveyards

1652035599333.png


Found this map of the 1826 agreement on a Norwegian Government website.
This isn't the 1826 agreement, read the 7.2 textbox it coincides with
 
Last edited:
Found this map of the 1826 agreement on a Norwegian Government website.

View attachment 739984
I think the blue area is shows the visa-free area for permanent residents, not any kind of claim as some might wonder
"The agreement will allow visa-free border crossing for permanent residents who live within 30 kilometres of the state border in both Norway and Russia, and is expected to enter into force during the course of spring 2012. "
 
December 30th 1917 Middle East Map.png

One of the little projection projects that I thought I'd share since I like it so much. This is the Middle East, Eastern-ish Africa, and whatever else is on there.
December 30th, 1917
End of the Battle of Jerusalem
 
Top