World 2.0/1 Map [Quenched]

[zim]

Marvaddin;

Let me make sure I've got it before redrawing. Your recommendation is to keep the Andes subcontinent but to adjust it to include Chile, Bolivia, Peru, and Colombia. Ecuador would become 'neutral'. Second sub-continent is Plata with Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and 'southern' Brazil (currrently Brasillia but to be renamed Parana. Northern Brazil (Amazonas), Guyanas and Venuezuala would be neutral. If I've got it, I like it. Let me know if I've got it right and I'll update the borders.

My recommendation, if two continents, is Plata and Amazon. If you want to maintain Andes, it should be Argentina (but it will be in Plata), Chile, Bolivia, Peru, Equador and Colombia. Plata is Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Southern Brail, but not as it is now, if so we need change Brazil split. If you want Amazon, it needs Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, Amazonas, Bolivia, and I will confirm if Ecuador will be part too.

Marvaddin, I think two is the right way to go; so Plata and Amazon it is.

Plata with Arrentina, Uruguagy, Paraguay and a newly drawn Southern Brazil called Parana.

Amazon with Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Amazonas and Ecuador (I checked and whether we use the extent of the forest or the river basin both touch Ecuador). As an aside, if we choose the river basin as the definition Venezuela becomes neutral, do you think this is better or worse?

Can you let me know how you'd recommend drawing the Amazonas/Parana split?

I still think it would be good to have the Tawantinsuyu.

Happysadfun, I'm not wedded to the Amazonas/Plata split, however my current thinking is to defer to Marvaddin's local knowledge. If you think Tawantinsuyu is a better answer let us know how you'd split things into it and a second subterritory leaving some 'neutrals' and we'll see if we can find a consensus.

Cheers,

Zim

[Marvaddin]

Im all up to know happy' suggestion of how to split countries.

Im suggesting Amazon (or Amazonia, your choice - is it really called Amazon in English, right?) and Plata (i can look for name alternatives) also because Andes would be a poor designed continent, with many many borders, almost all countries, in fact.

I think we should use the forest to create that subcontinent, and so Venezuela is in.

About the Brazilian division, there is no a good way to split the huge territory in 2 regions only.
3 main regions are:

Amazônia:
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regi%C3%A3 ... _do_Brasil
Center-South (this is what I call Parana, or Paraná - accented in Portuguese):
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regi%C3%A3 ... _do_Brasil
Northeast:
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regi%C3%A3 ... _do_Brasil

This last region is not alike to any of the others, so more correct is not include in the others, and create another territory. How about it? If you dislike, well... its more to Center-South than to Amazonia, you can put the major part in Center South (Parana) - but again consider the idea of a new territory.
One more word: well, even if you use 3 regions for Brazil, the borders looks artificial (specially considering Center-South), maybe you can make minor changes to give them a more realistic aspect. This is a problem of this Wikipedia map, but I couldnt find another one better.

[maritovw]

Im suggesting Amazon (or Amazonia, your choice - is it really called Amazon in English, right?) and Plata (i can look for name alternatives) also because Andes would be a poor designed continent, with many many borders, almost all countries, in fact.

How about calling it South Cone instead of Andes or Plata?? that name is actually used to refer to that region.

[ZawBanjito]

I'm completely lost in this discussion, but I just wanted to pipe in and say that I'm salivating to play this map. I haven't been this excited about a new map in ages. I also want to applaud zim for his dedicated work ethic that is really driving it forward. He's listening to all the input and the map is just looking top grade, man, just totally A+ Double Stuf. Keep up the good work!

[zim]

Updated small(ish) maps in two flavours (with and without waves).




and

i dunno how decided it is, but i wanted to say that i think the white background aids legibility, while the water negates it.

Dublin; I'm with you that the waves I've tried so far are less clear than the white (though I'd still like to find a set that works because in my head they look really good). That being said a white background prevents me from using white text on any country name the spills over a border. I've posted another waves version and one with a flat blue background. I think the flat blue achieves the clarity of the white while letting me use white as a text colour. Let me know what you think...

Im all up to know happy' suggestion of how to split countries.

Im suggesting Amazon (or Amazonia, your choice - is it really called Amazon in English, right?) and Plata (i can look for name alternatives) also because Andes would be a poor designed continent, with many many borders, almost all countries, in fact.

I think we should use the forest to create that subcontinent, and so Venezuela is in.

About the Brazilian division, there is no a good way to split the huge territory in 2 regions only.
3 main regions are:

Amazônia:
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regi%C3%A3 ... _do_Brasil
Center-South (this is what I call Parana, or Paraná - accented in Portuguese):
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regi%C3%A3 ... _do_Brasil
Northeast:
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regi%C3%A3 ... _do_Brasil

This last region is not alike to any of the others, so more correct is not include in the others, and create another territory. How about it? If you dislike, well... its more to Center-South than to Amazonia, you can put the major part in Center South (Parana) - but again consider the idea of a new territory.
One more word: well, even if you use 3 regions for Brazil, the borders looks artificial (specially considering Center-South), maybe you can make minor changes to give them a more realistic aspect. This is a problem of this Wikipedia map, but I couldnt find another one better.

Marv; I think this version captures your suggestion. Let me know if I've missed anything and what you think of the three way Brazillian split. I'd love an alternate name for the North East Brazil region though I understand if there isn't one that is both accurate and interesting.

Im suggesting Amazon (or Amazonia, your choice - is it really called Amazon in English, right?) and Plata (i can look for name alternatives) also because Andes would be a poor designed continent, with many many borders, almost all countries, in fact.

How about calling it South Cone instead of Andes or Plata?? that name is actually used to refer to that region.

Maritovw, I presume you mean for the Plata area as currently shown? If so I think Plata is a more interesting name and but I'm open to persuasion, show me a reference or two for South Cone and I'll think on it.

I'm completely lost in this discussion, but I just wanted to pipe in and say that I'm salivating to play this map. I haven't been this excited about a new map in ages. I also want to applaud zim for his dedicated work ethic that is really driving it forward. He's listening to all the input and the map is just looking top grade, man, just totally A+ Double Stuf. Keep up the good work!

Zaw: Thanks for the kind words. I'm dieing to get beta testing too...

And to save Andy the trouble he will (rightly) say:

When it's ready, and not a minute sooner.


--Andy

Cheers,

Zim

P.S. Does anyone know if it's possible and if so how to create another poll in this thread or do we need to create a new one? I'd like to get the "Wisdom of Crowds" on a title; "Real World, Modern World, World 2.0, Zim's World, Your Suggestion Here" (guess which one I think is best) and on the waves/no waves questions.

P.P.S. Just notices that Bolivia's title is messed up, will fix it in the next version.

[ttocs]

all i can say... is that it is completely awesome, and if there were that poll you mentioned, I would vote either modern world or world 2.0.
Thanks for pursuing this idea

[DublinDoogey]

I like the flat blue background, it achieves the clarity that's needed along with a background that doesn't look unfinished (if that makes sense)

[AndyDufresne]

As for the poll, you'd need to delete/edit the poll and make it different. Unable to have two polls running in the same thread.


--Andy

[happysadfun]

This is how i would split south america, if three subbonuses would be possible.

[reverend_kyle]

I like the flat blue background, it achieves the clarity that's needed along with a background that doesn't look unfinished (if that makes sense)

[zarvinny]

besides alaska to kamchatka and the antartica connections, i belive there should be at LEAST 1 more connection from east to west. Perhaps australia to argentina, or japan to united states. I think that this would increase the mobility on the map

[ttocs]

Yeah, i would like to see another east west border too, mabye add a hawaii territory linking us to japan (pearl harbor)

[losrivas]

Would there be a way to make Egypt part of the Middle East AND Africa? Egypt is ideologically and geographically close to the Middle East, and it would create an interesting dynamic, like in the Space map, where opponents must perpetually go back and forth on a territory since it belongs to two continents simultaneously.

I also agree that another East-West connection is necessary.

[ttocs]

Would there be a way to make Egypt part of the Middle East AND Africa? Egypt is ideologically and geographically close to the Middle East, and it would create an interesting dynamic, like in the Space map, where opponents must perpetually go back and forth on a territory since it belongs to two continents simultaneously.

I also agree that another East-West connection is necessary.

I do agree with you on the idea of east west, but the egypt border thing would probably mess up the africa bonus, because then it makes the middle east part of africa, which we probably dont want.

[zim]

As for the poll, you'd need to delete/edit the poll and make it different. Unable to have two polls running in the same thread.


--Andy

Andy; appears that once people have voted I can't edit the poll though a moderator can. Unfortunatel it also appears from my reading of the phBB FAQ that the votes cast in the previous poll stay i.e., you can change the question but not the ballots. If I'm reading this correctly I'll just have to ask people to reply in the thread to express their opinions on the *key* questions:

1) What's the right name for this map; current front runner is "It's Zim's world, we just live err, fight in it...", other less popular suggestions are "World 2.0", "Real World" and "Modern World"

2) Flat blue or waves?

This is how i would split south america, if three subbonuses would be possible.

Happy; Let me make sure I've got your suggestion. Plata remains as currently drawn (Parana, Paraguay, Urugauy, and Argentina). Amazon shrinks to Colombia, Venezuala and Amazonas (and not sure if you mean to include Guyanas?). Tawantinsuyu is added containing Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador and Chile. Leaving NE Brazil, TdelF (and maybe Guyanas) neutral. If I've got the plan correct let's see what people think versus Marvin's suggestion (which is what is currently in the map). If we were to go forward with your approach I'd argue for Guyanas to be neutral given that it doesn't contain much of the Amazon forest and isn't part of the river system. I'd also maybe keep Chile as a neutral given the it was only the northern part of it was ever Incan and then only briefly (25 years or so). What do you think?

besides alaska to kamchatka and the antartica connections, i belive there should be at LEAST 1 more connection from east to west. Perhaps australia to argentina, or japan to united states. I think that this would increase the mobility on the map

Yeah, i would like to see another east west border too, mabye add a hawaii territory linking us to japan (pearl harbor)

I think Hawaii could be done, it would wind up being aligned with Mexico in the east and Tawain (or less accurately Japan) in the west. Comments?

Would there be a way to make Egypt part of the Middle East AND Africa? Egypt is ideologically and geographically close to the Middle East, and it would create an interesting dynamic, like in the Space map, where opponents must perpetually go back and forth on a territory since it belongs to two continents simultaneously.

I also agree that another East-West connection is necessary.

I do agree with you on the idea of east west, but the egypt border thing would probably mess up the africa bonus, because then it makes the middle east part of africa, which we probably dont want.

We discussed territories being part of multiple continents (or sub-continents) earlier in the development of the map. While I think we were all intrigued by the strategic possibilities overall we decided that given the existing degree of complexity in the map it wasn't the right thing to add this twist as well.

Cheers,

Zim