The M-BAM Main Thread
- Thread starter Pogoboy20
- Start date
Oh. I wasn't checking for lakes. I thought the lakes were for a later update, and we were only focusing on borders for now.
There are some lakes, but they are kind of small. I don't think we can fit them in properly.
Terrible. I can't get that damn north east section right. Every province I make is out of proportion or wrong. I think I might have bit off more than I could chew.
Sorry about missing this error. I did the Northeast last, so after a good two hours of checking US states for errors I must have missed these. I rechecked the entire region. Pennsylvania is good, but some of the county borders for West Virginia look strange. There isn't any glaring errors, but the projections seem off. Can somebody confirm this?
Last edited:
Alright, I checked Magadan, Amur, Khabarovsk, Chukotka and Sakha. The entire thing needs a touch up. Also, the water features are out of place. Whoever drew the Lena river forgot to account for the map projection, so it isn't in the right place.
Here's my attempt to fix Amur and Khabarovsk, but the rest of East Russia needs fixing. I would also check up Amur and Khabarovsk as well, I don't think I fixed them up fully.
Here's my attempt to fix Amur and Khabarovsk, but the rest of East Russia needs fixing. I would also check up Amur and Khabarovsk as well, I don't think I fixed them up fully.
OK, I did a bit more for Russia. Krasnoyarsk and Irkutsk needs to be redone. I fixed the errors in Buryatia and Zabaykalsky, and also revised Amur and Khabarovsk. Tuva seems fine.
How accurate are we expected to make these maps? Because a lot of the Russian 2nd level divisions only follow the general path of the internal border. For example, these are the real borders for Zabaykalsky:
As you can see, some of the finer details are missed, but the overall shape of the sub-divisions is accurate. Is this acceptable or not? Because if it isn't, than Amur, Zabaykalsky, Buryatia, Amur and Khabarovsk still need to be redone.
How accurate are we expected to make these maps? Because a lot of the Russian 2nd level divisions only follow the general path of the internal border. For example, these are the real borders for Zabaykalsky:
As you can see, some of the finer details are missed, but the overall shape of the sub-divisions is accurate. Is this acceptable or not? Because if it isn't, than Amur, Zabaykalsky, Buryatia, Amur and Khabarovsk still need to be redone.
So, it's completed? Then that means that Zabaykalsky, Buryatia, Amur and Khabarovsk are finished.
Lol
Of course, eventually it's not The Holy USA, where we need convene a concilium about every 1-pixel-wrong-border of every small-useless-country
OK, I did a bit more for Russia. Krasnoyarsk and Irkutsk needs to be redone. I fixed the errors in Buryatia and Zabaykalsky, and also revised Amur and Khabarovsk. Tuva seems fine.
View attachment 383861
View attachment 383862
How accurate are we expected to make these maps? Because a lot of the Russian 2nd level divisions only follow the general path of the internal border. For example, these are the real borders for Zabaykalsky:
As you can see, some of the finer details are missed, but the overall shape of the sub-divisions is accurate. Is this acceptable or not? Because if it isn't, than Amur, Zabaykalsky, Buryatia, Amur and Khabarovsk still need to be redone.
It's definetely good enough, if nothing else for now
well fuck....added to my copy.....
I have included them and the Buenos Aires patch in my copy. Are there any lake/river/ocean coast changes in there?
here is the updated map of what needs to be done:
I made a minor adjustment to a the coastline of Buenos Aires (literally 5 pixels). I also edited Lake Baikal, there was a small indent that wasn't meant to be there.