I can't comment on the other bits you mentioned, but the source map doesn't actually show the African coast at all, so I couldn't colour it. I'm not attempting to correct the source maps, merely reformat them to the conventions (okay, *a* convention) used here.
The Q-BAM Improvement and Core Thread
- Thread starter iori
- Start date
I can't comment on the other bits you mentioned, but the source map doesn't actually show the African coast at all, so I couldn't colour it. I'm not attempting to correct the source maps, merely reformat them to the conventions (okay, *a* convention) used here.
Frankly, I'm not sure that it would be that useful to adapt in UCS maps that have known issues (at least for this one, the latter is mostly good* in spite of weird colours) just in order to get them adapted.
But that's me, so nevermind then.
*Byzantine Spain may have been a bit exagerated around Levente and Gades' region, and the province of Gaul looks a bit off (while roughly correct, and I think mostly unnoticable if you don't go in details), but that essentialy correct.
Iberia, 418 AD
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hispania_418_AD.PNG
Kingdom of the Alans.
Silingi Vandals.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hispania_418_AD.PNG
Kingdom of the Alans.
Silingi Vandals.
Last edited:
Iberia and Italy, 218 BC
Carthage and Rome shown.
Source map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PW2_Rhone_218BC.PNG
Carthage and Rome shown.
Source map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PW2_Rhone_218BC.PNG
Hi I made this Q-BAM of 1940. Thoughts or anything I've missed?
Edited some minor details again
Edited some minor details again
Last edited:
I just named it 1940 when I saved it. Sometimes it gets some weird encoded name, not sure why though.
worldmap
Banned
ok then,about the map itself it seems your japan circle could be removed, and nigeria has a white dot same with brasilian island its uncolored, you could ake a look if there is a map from that period online, to be sure where and what to change, also i did 1962 world map, and nobody noticed, guess i need to make another post
the General-Government border with Ukrainian SSR should be a bit different
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GeneralGovernment1940Map.png
I should follow the San River
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-Soviet_Frontier_Treaty
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GeneralGovernment1940Map.png
I should follow the San River
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-Soviet_Frontier_Treaty
GENERAL
* You should give the date with more precision : December 1940, May 1940? With the day, if possible. I'll be assuming, giving some indications, that's late Late November 1940.
Choosing one would be better to sort out anachronisms.
* Depiction of inner borders is used inconsistently, and the choice of countries having them or not is rather arbitrary. I'd advise with not showing them all together, but if you prefer to do so, you should represent them everywhere.
WESTERN EUROPE
*Vichy France should be coloured as such (cream yellow) and, in metropole, as under German influence.
Northern France shouldn't be represented as a different country, but separated by a de facto border (red) and claimed by Vichy
* Italian occupation zones should be added
* Forbidden zone in France should be added
* Nord and Pas de Calais départements should be added to Belgium and Northern France military command and not just Nord département. It shoudl'nt be represented as the same country, tough.
* The darker outline on Germany is unecessary
* Iceland should be shown as occupied, not as part of the UK. An outline would be there preferable.
FAR EAST
* Indochina should be represented as Japanese occupied, but still under technical Vichy control (annexations and political reshuffle officially only happened in 1945)
AFRICA
* Egypt should be represented as under Brisith influence
* The aftermath of the Italian campaign in Egypt before Operation Compass should be represented : namely the conquest of some coastal points up to 80km from the border.
* Fight on Sudan should be pointed out, probably trough a red line.
* Vichy controlled colonies should be coloured with Vichy colour (protectorate shade for some), without influence from Germany to highlight the larger autonomy of Vichy in Africa (that is, without direct German interventionism)
* Free France should include French Camerun mandate, Congo and Gabon.
You`re still using the old, false internal borders of Germany? Since 2 years, there is a fixed version of this.
Not from Nazi-Germany, but from the Kaiserreich (pretty similar to the Gaue-borders)
I would have thought showing Iceland as a solid colour was showing Iceland as being occupied. After all Denmark and Norway are shown as German occupied in the correct way (solid colour, no outlining).
Iceland being solid colour with the British pink doesn't show it as being part of the UK anymore than Denmark is shown as part of Germany, just that there is no land border between the UK and Iceland to definitively show that Iceland remains external to the UK. It's tough, but that how it is with the islands (in a similar fashion, Isle of Man and Channel Islands are also technically not a part of the UK but are shown in British pink because they are in essence British with a shared nationality, monarch, etc and British government having some role).
Technically, yes : but colouring it entierly, which is depicting it just as UK is, can either show UK annexing the island.
Giving that Groenland is shown as occupied with an outline, and being in a similar situation, there's a precedent and a reason to make occupations in this area consistently modelled.
With a solid distinction, tough : Danemark's borders are there to point it's a different country, being occupied. (Actually, giving the autonomy Danemark kept during this part of the way, it should be represented with protectorate rather than occupation)
Furthermore, at the contrary of ongoing invasions and occupations (say, Eastern Front in 41/42/43), the occupation of western Europe at this point is essentially a matter of settled truces.
Outlines, in this matter, can be pretty useful to distinguish (for exemple) that while bind to Belgium for occupation military matters, Nord and Pas-de-Calais are still considered part of France (unlike, say, Alsace-Moselle).
Actually, in Alex Richards and mine, they're shown as light pink : being obviously in the SoI of UK and sharing a same sovereign, but being politically and institutionally distinct.
Basically, I don't disagree with you on the basic stuff, but a more consistent use of outlines could lead to a better modelling.