The Campaign Builder's Guild

hi,    

i'm going to post the questions from the Fantasy Worldbuilding Questions to get some more ideas out of all of us.

Quote from: The World; Basics on non-Earth

Are there different human races, whether or not there are non-humans like elves or dwarves? How does the cultural and ethnic diversity of this world compare to the real world?
    *How long have there been people on this world? Did they evolve, or did they migrate from somewhere/when else?
    *How many people are there in this country? How does this compare with world population? What is considered a small town/large town/city in terms of number of people?
   

[/i]
[note] Just keep in mind that we don't actually have to answer all of these questions.  I'm just atempting to provoke thought.[/note]

How does this world differ physically from earth? Is it the same size (same density, same gravity), same ratio of land/water, same atmosphere, etc.? Does it have more than one sun or moon? Rings? Are there spectacular constellations/comets, etc. visible at night or by day?
    *Are there non-human inhabitants of this planet (elves, dwarves, aliens)? If so, how numerous? How openly present? What areas do they occupy?
    *How are the continents laid out? If there is more than one moon/sun, how does this affect winds, tides, and weather generally?
    *How much land is there, and how much of it is habitable?

[/i]

we should totally start taking submissions for world-maps too. ;).

if we had somethign to look at, it would help us decide how the world interacts with itself (due to the lcoationof resources and what-not).

I hope this thread will help us with some details, once we've officially agreed upon the major theme.

a just a really quick and simpe way to brainstorm quick continent layouts, i present this.
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~putn4403/Campaign_World/MapCreator.html

this is a random continent generator made by Areas from the wizards boards that he made when we we working on his "indistinguishable from magic" setting.

they are really rough continents, but they help to inspire basic layouts and proportions (i used them when making my setting)

as for those questions, i think we should stick with the laws of physics since the rules mechanics are already set for them. we should change the time measurements though (i.e. calendar, year length, maybe # of moons)

as for magic, we started to work on that over in the brainstorming thread a bit

A magic thread will be up soon, as well as a classes thread. If this thread is just here to discuss geography, I suggest we turn our attention to other topics first.
Túrin

It isn't just geography, though - Daggerharts original questions merit thinking, though alot of them are answered simply because we are playing DnD, and there are certian things that go with DnD.

Yeah, and geography is pretty important too.  For instance, I find that it makes much more sense to have a map first, and base events around that map, instead of creating a map based on events.  You get a much more realistic-feeling setting that way, one that feels as though it actually chronologically and geographically evolved, as opposed to just coming out of nowhere.

i trimmed the questions some more.

with geography, we can invent history (which is generally 'resource' driven).

i vote we have an archapelago  somewhere....
doesnt have to be big,   i just really dig them.

wonderful cultures develop in archipelagos. :)

.. and im not so sure the BFG and te CSs have to be seperated by mountains. ...

spread them out all over the place.  <-- my vote.

QuoteHow does this world differ physically from earth? Is it the same size (same density, same gravity), same ratio of land/water, same atmosphere, etc.? Does it have more than one sun or moon? Rings? Are there spectacular constellations/comets, etc. visible at night or by day?

How about a ring around the planet?  
im not sure this matters too much, but it would be pretty neat to have meteor showers randomly.

how do rings normally effect a world ?   can you see them from the surface?

QuoteHow much land is there, and how much of it is habitable?

I would say 30-40% of the world is land,   and about 50% of that is inhabitable, and about 40% of that is actually inhabited.

so,7-10% of the world is inhabited.  (that right ?)

gives us a good amount of wilderness and civilization.

You can definitely see the ring from the surface.  There's concept art all over the internet of "Views from Saturn," that generally have a pretty realistic feel to them.  The thing about a ring is, physically, the planet is generally extremely large to support a ring.  For instance, in our solar system, the four "gas giants" have rings, while none of the others do.  Now, that's probably not to say that a smaller, rocky-terrained planet couldn't have a ring (I honestly don't know 100%), but I think it's unlikely.  

I don't think you would notice any effects of the ring, though, except for shadoww (which I'll get to in a moment).  Most likely, it would be decoration and backdrop, though it really depends on what the ring is made out of.  This is a fantasy world, so the ring could be a solid ring all the way around that powerful mages build their homes on; or it could be where all the demons live.

The shadow could make some interesting things.  Any part of the world that has the ring between it and the sun is going to be almost constantly in shadow (depending, of course, on how wobbly the orbit of the planet is).  This could mean that there are parts of the equator that never see the sun, and suffer blizzards year-round, or it could mean other things as well.  

I actually like the idea of a ring, but I think we should figure out if it's astronomically correct (and thus, just decoration basically), or if it's a fantasy version of a ring, in which case, it could be anything we wanted.

(brainface may be able to expand a bit more on this issue, I'm not sure if he's kept up with his astronomy in recent years).

Quote from: daggerhart

QuoteHow much land is there, and how much of it is habitable?

I would say 30-40% of the world is land,   and about 50% of that is inhabitable, and about 40% of that is actually inhabited.

so,7-10% of the world is inhabited.  (that right ?)

gives us a good amount of wilderness and civilization.

You should take a look at this:

http://www.lysator.liu.se/~johol/fwmg/fwmg.html

Play around with it and see what you think of a world that is 30-40% land and the rest water.

The only problem with that program I linked you to is that it seems to focus all the land on pretty much just one contient... I'm having trouble finding any random patterns that have several continents spread across the globe.

Gaaar, figured it out... it's based somehow on the number of iterations you input.

(All the maps are a few posts down now so they can be compared to each other easily)

that totally looks like a final fastasy map...

I dig it .

please copy the coede for these if you get good ones.. ;-) .. that way we can recreate it.

where's the code?

i meant the random seed and the itterations and such...

that program can make it in a globe image, and a few other things.. just thought it wcould be useful to re-produce the maps you make.

Okay, here are eight maps I was able to create that I think all have a pretty good feel to them.  Maps B and F are my favorites, and I'll talk about them a bit later after I've run some errands.

Map A
(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World01.jpg)

Map B
(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World02.jpg)

Map C
(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World03.jpg)

Map D
(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World04.jpg)

Map E
(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World05.jpg)

Map F
(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World06.jpg)

Map G
(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World07.jpg)

Map H
(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World08.jpg)

Let's discuss some pros and cons of them... any of them you like, copy the url and post your comments with the image, so itll be easy to visualize whatever you talk about.  Also, feel free to try to make your own.  Here is the web page with the program:  http://www.bin.sh/gaming/tools/world.cgi

If you have one, PM me and I'll find a way to upload it.  Just keep it's  height to 250, and make sure you don't do any editing of it so that they all are the same quality.

Maps E and H are very nice too, for all the small islands and archipelegos, which rock for adventures (PIRATES!)

Im sure we're going to have someone re-draw these maps, if we choose one of these.

Anyone volunteers for Map drawing ?

I like map A.

I'll redraw, I draw maps all day long anyway (unless someone else can do better and would prefer to) and have fun doing it.

I like A, F, and G.

A offers three clear continents, giving room for one for the empire, one for the city states, and one for a frontier type area for either the Empire or the city states.

F has two main continents that are connected and one to the side, meaning we could put the Empire on the largest landmass, the city states on the smaller, and something else (a confederation of nation, a wildness ruled by monsters, a land of giants, a dark land of the Undead, whatever) on the landmass that is unconnected to the other two.

G is a single landmass with islands, meaning we could make the boundry between Empire and city states less definite, and put things onthe Islands - the large islands in the south could again, be an entirely different and interesting region.

Looking at it again, map H has alot of potential, with a large landmass in the north where the empire could fit, and smaller landmasses running south that could house city states and other things.

Oh, and one other thing I like about them, they all have the familair and comfortable north/south orientation.

EDI: DAMN YOU ISHY! I'm now addicted that map program.

Keep in mind that none of these have to be the world we choose; it could just as easily be a completely hand-drawn map (I have a few examples that I could show if I can make it to a scanner sometime).

With that being said, I don't think we would want to put the BTG on a separate continent from the barbarian frontier lands and/or the city-states.  If we did that then we would have issues explaining how all the lands were once under the rule of the ancient empire.  I think what we need to look at is picking one of the continents that the campaign focuses on, and the other continents on the map (whichever map is chosen) can be expanded upon later ... or not at all, they could just be left empty for DMs to play with.

Take for instance, Map A.

(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/World01.jpg)

Below, is a larger map of the central continent:

(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/Kingdoms.jpg)

Let's just assume for the sake of argument that the entire continent (all four of the colored areas) was once under the rule of our fantasy-ized Roman empire.  Now, the new empire is basically section A.  Sections B, C, and D all have some of the city-states, as well as many of the ruined cities of the ancient empire and barren wilderness.  The large NW continent and the East continent can just be backdrop for other DM stories.

(This is all just supposition, we haven't decided on a map yet)

I like having the city-states on closer islands but still clse to the empire continent.  It still seems feasible that they could have been previously dominated by an empire, but perhaps the new empire is unable to launch a proper attack on them as it is still too weak.

@ Ish's Example.

i dont think the BTG should have that much land.   I was imaging like, Italy + France + Germany ...  and the rest of Europe and Asia are wilderness.

imo, wilderness should def be 8 times larger than the BTG controlled area..    and the CSs should just be dotted within the 'unexplored' area.

In th at case, what if section "B" was the BTG, and the rest was wilderness and city-states?

thats mroe of what i was thinking ..
but thats just my opinion...

I am of the opinion that there should be city-states surrounding the empire.  Close enough that they could feasibly have been concquered previously, but also far enough away, or geographically remote enought that they can resist the new empire.  Like, a city-state hidden in a dense forest, or one in a desert oasis, one on an archipelago, etc.  This way, they all have a reason to stil be separate, there can be plenty of wilderness elsewhere, and other cntinents can be used for other ideas which have yet to be developed...  Just my thoughts...

QuoteThis way, they all have a reason to stil be separate

some of them can be unqunquered because the BFG just hasnt gotten around to it yet.;) we want the BFGA to be fairly recent, right?

I dont know how recent we're thinking, but my guess would be that they took over the surrounding lands within the last 2 or 3 centuries.

maybe that's something important to work out, how old does everyone think the bad-as empire is?  

I was thinking it was old enough to have decayed into a small country, which then went out and started rebuilding an empire because it had an inferiority complex.  not sure how old that is, but that's how I saw it.

how i saw:
1.big empire
2.decay inhto citystates
3. resurgence, BFG using traditions of old empire

from what history i know, normally a specific warlord decides to re-take ancient empires.

perhaps 100+ yrs ago, 'Tim, the Great' reunited like, 5 of the city-states politically, then started war with the others (since it was significantly larger than the others).

'Tim, the Great' was the first man to kill a totem god.

i dunno.

The first man to kill a totem god...  now that is a place to start...  That could explain what started the wars, the increasing insecurity od the city-states as they realize their gods are mortal, etc.

So I think it is time that we get a map for this setting. Anyone want to propose any alternatives to the ideas Ishy posted? Maybe Ishy wants to post more of them? I think we'll be wanting to vote on a map for the world soon...
Túrin

well, here's the thing... to be quite frank, I think I can hand-draw maps that would better suit our purposes.  I mean, they won't be as fancy-schmancy, but they'll be more cohesive for the ideas we already have, and then other ideas can be planned around the geography if we pick one.  I think planning the world around a map - as opposed to planning a map around a world - is the wiser way to proceed from this point.

Though I would normally favour the other way around, I think in a community project it will help many people to have a visual idea of the world. So are you willing to post one or more proposed maps (handdrawn or otherwise as you prefer)?

sure, I'll work on that for the next couple days and get a few ideas up by the weekend.

I have a few ideas to add to this thread. I hope it's still alive, because I notice there hasn't been any activity in quite some time here.

I notice that a few people have been talking about map A so here is my input.

The eastern continent
I think the large continent on the right side should be moved away from the main one, depending on the population:
Densely populated: This shouldn't need moving very much but obviously if it's populated at all, it will probably be populated all over, unless there is some other reason for a concentrated population (mostly desert or tundra, for example).
Sparsely populated: This would probably be easiest and would make sense if the continent was shifted east far enough so that travel is difficult, but not impossible. People would only travel here if they had nothing to lose (wanting to begin a new life) or if there were significant rewards to be had (there is a rich, untapped source of precious mineral).
No population: This is probably easiest because it's less work. Nobody has settled here because the continent has not yet been discovered or there is simply no means of getting there. It would probably need moving a good distance to the east.

The northern bit
Ishmayl's large colourful map makes sense, but only if the area north of 'D' is water or some other inhospitable environment. It would perhaps be easiest to change everything north and west of 'D' to water, although another alternative is to just separate 'D' and the other area with a body of water.

World scale
If you start messing around with the size of the globe compared to the Earth and you're using 'real' physics, gravity becomes an issue. If you use a globe the size of the Earth, according to Ishmayl's colourful map, region 'A' would be about 10,000km (6,250 miles) north to south and this is about 2.5 times the distance from Los Angeles to New York. If you halve the circumference of the globe, it becomes about 5,000km (3,125 miles) from north to south of region 'A' but this has the effect of reducing the gravity on the surface to 1/8 of the Earth's (these are really rough calculations). A few work-arounds:
Ignore it totally and continue as normal. Is it important that players encounter a world where all the laws of physics are obeyed to the letter? Does this mean that all magic needs a base in physics too? Has the concept of gravity even been introduced?
Change the density of the planet so that even though it has 8 times less volume (or whatever figure is decided upon to make the desired world size), it has 8 times the density so the mass and the gravity are unchanged.
There is no globe and the world is flat, waterfalls to endless oblivion at the edges, or some Pratchett reference involving elephants and turtles that everybody thinks is really witty until they realise it's been referenced about a zillion times already.

Civilization 4
Assuming map A above isn't set in stone yet, this game has a good (albeit tile-based) random world generator, the strength here being that as well as generating land shapes, it also generates terrain types based on climate and other features, so you automatically get mountains, deserts, jungles and resources like iron ore. The other advantage is that it is pretty customizable in terms of whether the world should be made of continents or archipelagoes, whether its climate should be wet or arid, etc. I would not advocate the use of a map that the game generates though; I'd still recommend some cartography based on its generated world. It doesn't even have to be Civilization 4; Civilization 3 and even 2 have perfectly good random world generators, although 4 is the one I own.

I wish every new user started with such a productive post.

Welcome aboard, fw190a8.  This project has fallen by the wayside, but that doesn't mean it can't be picked up again.  More than anything, we just need people (such as yourself) who will actually talk about it and participate in it.

Thanks for the compliment Ishmayl! I did notice more recent activity in The Aniga Project (http://www.thecbg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?5685) thread and considering I'm new, I think I'll divert my attention over there. :afro:

question:

are there any alternate explainations for the ring? if we go strictly by real-world physics, then the world MUST be several times the size of earth in order to have enough gravity to hold a ring. this, of course, brings up the obvious problems of weight and distance, as well as possibley even more issues that arent so apparent...

given that this is a fantasy world, i assume the possibility of coming up with alternate solutions. assuming we  can come up with alternate explainations for the rings,  should we? if we do, what are they?

You know what, I don't think we ever figured that out. I don't think an explaination is needed, any more than explaining a flat world is. The rings exist because they exist. Still, having a solution of some sort would be good. Two ideas that pop into my mind: The world magical field holds the rings in place, instead of gravity, or the particles that make up the rings are effected by gravity differently due to their magical nature.

no, im sure no explaination is needed, especially considering it might not even have any practical impact on any game in this world. that said, the questions 'who', 'what', and 'where' are the easiest, but as luminous crayon has shown, the questions 'how' and 'why' play a large part in the realism of the world.

other optional explainations for the rings:

its a demiplane, or even a completely different plane, visible from ours.
its an illusion, but so convincing of one that everybody thinks its real.
its the physical home to the gods. on par with olympus, or the firmament (mentioned early in the book of genesis).

i dont want to detract from the actual geography of the world, so maybe the ring should have its own thread?

edit- also, if all else fails, we can fall back on the world being larger, and then deal with the problems of gravity and distance when those come up.

I believe there is still some will on these boards to get this project going. I think the best thing to get the ball moving on this isn't the direction we have been going. Rather, I believe just a few more broad details need to be decided on and put into stone, and then someone needs to start a campaign.

I would, but my current project will be playtesting my MP system. I'd have the playtest take place in our world, but because of the bland nature of the playtest, I don't think it would really contribute to the world's creation.

So, who are the people most familiar with the setting? I think a group councel should be formed to put the final decision on important things such as:

*Old/New Empire's Name
*Technology/Culture level of the city states
*Major totemic gods
*Major saints within Empire's theology
*Alternate Planes
*The Nature of specific creature types (dragons, outsiders, aberrations).

If I were to run a campaign without these questions answered, I would be tempted to shape things too much in a direction I would like for the setting, rather than what has already been decided. I'm out of the loop, so I suggest a key thread be made, if one hasn't already, of the information that has been formalized.

I like Map B. It has a good mass of continentstowards the top and a good string of islands which could offer some wild adventures.

Guys, here is a limited time offer:

If you can agree on which of the maps you are going to use, I'll draw a vector-based map with Inkscape (http://www.inkscape.org/) for it, outlining the coastlines and mountains and adding major rivers to it. I need the practice before I draw a map for Urbis with it.

Inkscape is ideal for such a project because it is Open Source (i.e., freely downloadable), multi-platform, and freely scalable. And you can always create new layers for certain map features (cities, unique sites, and so on), making it easy to create specific maps for every opportunity.

And as an added bonus, the .svg format used by Inkscape can be viewed directly by the Firefox browser (though it's easy to convert the maps into PNG format).

But my time is limited, and I might soon be distracted by other projects. So I want to know which maps you are going to use as soon as possible - within the next few days at the latest.

So put it to a vote already...

Hey Jürgen,

Thanks for your very kind offer. Unfortuantely, voting is impossible at the moment: polling options are not working at the moment. However, it seems the last map posted by Ishmayl might very well be the one we'll use. I'd suggest you take that one as the basis and give it a go. Hopefully, if you could just wait a few days, people will read your and my post here and we could gather some support for this idea. Let's say: if three people other than me support my suggestion of using the latest map posted by Ishmayl in the next few days, we'll just do that and confirm things in a more official way later. Yay for pseudo-democracy, for it gets things done quickly! ;)

Túrin

The last map looks fine to me.

Agreed; in all honesty, anything to get this project moving again is fine with me :)

Ishmayl, can you also give me the exact settings and random seeds you used for those maps?

I'd like to recreate them for a height of 2000 before I trace them - it will get much more accurate this way...

Sorry Jurgen, I don't have that information :(  I'm sure I did at one time, but I can no longer find it anywhere.

Wow... this looks good... what I've got from the wiki and this together is basically that Cebegia has a big empire that's been slowly reforming, plenty of city-states, and two religions, Totem Gods and... Saints, was it?

Quote from: IshmaylSorry Jurgen, I don't have that information :(  I'm sure I did at one time, but I can no longer find it anywhere.

This complicates things.

To create a good vector map, I need bitmaps that are as high resulution as possible, and there simply isn't much detail in the 250 px height maps you provided.

I hesitate to create all-new base maps this late, but I'm afraid I see no other options. I've attached 8 new maps - numbered 1 to 8 - to this post. What's more, I'm listing the settings for each of these maps so that you can recreate them for yourself - blow them up to a height of 2000 pixels, and you'll see the difference.

The map details are:

All maps use Square Projection and 5000 Iterations

Map 1:

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map1.gif)

Random Seed: 30804867
%Water: 83
%Ice: 5
%Rotation: 207


Map 2:

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map2.gif)

Random Seed: 555669631
%Water: 65
%Ice: 23
%Rotation: 268


Map 3:

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map3.gif)

Random Seed: 1565957398
%Water: 26
%Ice: 31
%Rotation: 326


Map 4:

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map4.gif)

Random Seed: 1234478784
%Water: 44
%Ice: 5
%Rotation: 355


Map 5:

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map5.gif)

Random Seed: 2106066898
%Water: 85
%Ice: 8
%Rotation: 35


Map 6:

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map6.gif)

Random Seed: 1725544296
%Water: 46
%Ice: 9
%Rotation: 277


Map 7:

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map7.gif)

Random Seed: 526421886
%Water: 82
%Ice: 10
%Rotation: 157

Map 8:

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map8.gif)

Random Seed: 1540817243
%Water: 56
%Ice: 5
%Rotation: 168


So, which one do you prefer?

Map two and map six both have a lot of potential in my eyes.

I like 4 and 8 myself

4 and 8 work for me as well

I thought they had a bit too much landmass, personally.

Map 3 has too much land but otherwise I don't lean too strongly in any one way. Anyone with a strong preference should speak up now, otherwise we're going with map #8. Notice those two brown spot on the continent on the right side of map #8? The left one could be the new Empire, perhaps?

@ Golem011: Yes, you summarized the content we have quite nicely. See also the theme statement in the stickied thread.

Túrin

Whoo.

We don't actually have very much at all, do we... :P

We have a pantheon for the empire, which can be found in the religion thread...

6 and 8 look the best to me.  I particularly like 8, because it gives the option of both continent-spanning adventures and kingdoms, as well as island adventures and kingdoms.

Quote from: IshmaylSorry Jurgen, I don't have that information :(  I'm sure I did at one time, but I can no longer find it anywhere.

if you have the original .gif format images, you can find the seed and other info encoded as comments.  open the file in a text editor, and it should all be near the top.  if you've thrown those away and only have the .jpgs, then that won't help.

Well, unless there's objection until this evening, I'll go with map Nr. 8...

Incidentally, I just discovered that the Wiki doesn't permit uploading files. Should I just dump the completed map into a forum thread instead?

Well, we have a file upload section here that has received minimal usage.  Click Here (http://www.thecbg.org/upload.php) to upload files and I'll make sure I approve it so it's somewhere around here.... there's got to be a better uploading method...

Quote from: IshmaylWell, we have a file upload section here that has received minimal usage.  Click Here (http://www.thecbg.org/upload.php) to upload files and I'll make sure I approve it so it's somewhere around here.... there's got to be a better uploading method...

Can you also permit the uploading of .svg files? These are the default format for Inkscape, and it would be nice if others could edit the maps, too...

Just upload it in a zip file and there shouldn't be any problems... I think...

And now the website with the fractal generator seems to be down...

<Sigh>

EDIT: Apparently, this site (http://direpress.bin.sh/tools/world.cgi) has the same generator.

I'll create a large-scale image and start tracing it now...

Whew! There's a lot of detail in that large map - I've been at this for two and a half hours, and I've only traced two thirds of the supercontinent...

But it will be worth it - once I'm finished (I have great hopes for this weekend...), we'll have a 4000x2000 px map, which means that one pixel represents 10 kilometers (or 6.25 miles)...

Here's a good site w/ the generator as well:

http://www.bin.sh/gaming/tools/world.cgi

Well, I've at least managed to trace the big continent - here is a preview of what I've got so far:

[spoiler=Click on the image to see it large]
(//../../e107_files/public/1155143222_100_FT2568_mastermap_.png) (//../../e107_files/public/1155143222_100_FT2568_mastermap.png)[/spoiler]

It's blank in the CBG, but if you click on it you can see it properly.

Very nice... I can only assume you use a graphics tablet, right?   Otherwise, that was some serious mouse-work.

Yup. The tablet - a Wacom Volito 2 - cost me â'šÂ¬50 and it was worth every cent.

If I didn't have one, I wouldn't have attempted this in the first place...

OK, I've added all the coastlines - including those of the smaller islands.

My next step is adding more lakes. I'll deviate from the fractal maps for this - it only has "lakes" at sea levels, but none at higher elevations. Then I'll add mountain ranges, and then I can chart the major rivers.

In the meantime, you can think of where to put the various countries - and how large they are supposed to be. Ideally, you should load the map into your favorite graphics program and make a very rough sketch in the right area (even a circle will do) - I'll add a better one directly to the map later.

[spoiler=Same procedure as last time...](//../../e107_files/public/1155317826_100_FT2568_mastermap_.png) (//../../e107_files/public/1155317826_100_FT2568_mastermap.png)[/spoiler]

Wow...thanks Jurgen.

QuoteYup. The tablet - a Wacom Volito 2

hilarious[/i].

[/end derail]

quite a bit to move through, but which map did we decide on?

assuming we decided on a map, it might help to edit out all the excluded maps in previous posts....

if we havent decided on a map, i have one that i would like to tack on, a la FR. only one (unnamed) country is there, with lots of neutral landmass that might fit in from whatever map we decide(d) on...

I think there actually is a map that was decided on, considering that Jurgen has already traced it out (see his posts above).  I think it fits our needs well - needing a main central area, with slightly separated outside areas.

I agree with Natural20 that city states is a good idea. It gives a certain differant feel to the whole thing.

City-states, or barbaric nations to the empire, that border the Empire is a good idea.

 We should start thinking about the geography of the map that Jurgen has drawn.

so has there been any more progress on the map?

[spoiler=Same procedure as last time...](//../../e107_files/public/1155317826_100_FT2568_mastermap_.png) (//../../e107_files/public/1155317826_100_FT2568_mastermap.png)[/spoiler]


This is tracing of the map that was decided upon. You have to click on it to view it.

yea I got that much, but what i meant to ask is did we decide on locations for the empire/city-states and the like? any geographical formations (mountain ranges/rivers/forests etc.)?

(//../../e107_files/public/1154955171_100_FT2568_map8.gif)

Random Seed: 1540817243
%Water: 56
%Ice: 5
%Rotation: 168

This was the vector map that was traced. It was suggested that the Empire be in the location of one of the two dark brown spots. If you have an opinion now is the time to speak up.

We haven't discussed the scale of the map either.

As for geography, that hasn't been discussed yet. So the questions are:

How mountanious do we want the world to be? (I know Ishmayl wanted a volcano worshiping dwarven clan)
Lots of forests or mostly plains?
Has the Empire cut down most of the forest in its area, since it seems to be semi-anti nature, or did they leave them standing?
Deserts?
Arctic Circles? (Where would they end?) Only on one pole?
Anything else?

Personally I think it'd be more interesting if the Empire was situated on one of the two landmasses to the lower left of the dark brown spots and then have those areas be more of an "undiscovered frontier" where there would be more forest, mountains, volcanos for the dwarf clan etc. It would give more of a visible separation of the civilized and un civilized.

Ok I colored in Jurgen's map to make it easier to see the landmasses.
[spoiler=Map]
 (http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/8160/cebegialc2.jpg)  
[/spoiler]
Do you mean the left most landmass that is still connected to the larger landmass? I could see the empire starting there. The old empire conquered a some land past the landbridge, when it fell the wilds reclaimed it. Now the new empire is building to conquer it once again.

What does every one else think?

That works for me. I like the idea of the Empire having all the land around it and then rolling across the connecting areas to conquer more area.

Yes that's what I had in mind.

(http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/4448/cebegiavi2.jpg)


So something like this, were the orange is the old empire and the red is the new?

I'd say that the old empire should reach along the southern coast more, due to naval advantage.  Also, the core of both empires should be the "spiky" landmass farthest out to sea, spreading across both land bridges onto the mainland.  At least, that makes more sense to me.

It is good to have one of the older members on board, welcome back Crit.

So something like this?

(http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/6005/cebegiabm2.jpg)

The black dot would be the capitol. I didn't choose the northern most tip for that, because I like the idea of the Empire spreading in all directions not just south. (it's big because I wanted it viewable, and was too lazy  to change my brush size :) )

Once we've decided this I will post one with a couple of scale markers, and we can decide what scale we want to us for the map.

*throws the boat in, or oar... maybe... whatever*

That looks good to me.

That's pretty much what I was talking about, good job of reading my mind!  We can dally with the details later, but the general idea is much more of what I had in mind now.

EDIT: I think it's a good idea to keep in  mind that expansion increases along waterways, due to ease of travel and the relatively more fertile land along bodies of water.  A decision we might want to make soon is whether the empire is naval-based or land-based, as this can largely determine it's view of the sea.  To use examples, the empire from Chronicles of Narnia (can't remember the name) feared the ocean and avoided the coasts, whereas the real British empire mastered the ocean, and ruled from the coasts and ports.

And in response to your comment, it's good to be back.

hmmm land or sea? I wonder which I would pick.

I suppose at some point, if it hasn't been discussed, is the technology level we are shooting for. Especially if they are going to be a major sea force. Do they use cannons or magic?

Even if it's just flaming pitch and arrows, a navy can be awesome.  ie the Greeks didn't have magic.

Looks good to me! Although I would assume the empire would have  colonized the islands just to the south as well. They are relatively close.

Quote from: Natural 20Even if it's just flaming pitch and arrows, a navy can be awesome.  ie the Greeks didn't have magic.

Oh I know, that is why I was saying we should start discussing the technology level. Do we want Viking Longships, Dromons, Caravels, Barques, Galleys, Galleons, or even Ironclads (steam or sail powered)?

What I was thinking:

The Old Empire was a naval superpower with a decent military force. They were the first to develop Caravels, Galleys, and a handful of Galleons. The rest of the sea faring civilizations were still using Longships and Dromons. The civilizations near the shore were easily conquered, but as they moved inland, they found areas that had a stronger land based fighters (tribes with special fighters, armies, etc..). This is why they were only able to conquer a few [hundred] miles inland (this all depends on the scale we choose).

The New Empire still has the same level of ships, because of the downfall. They were not able to develop newer ships. They build more Galleons, with some lighter ships as support. The other civilizations are also sailing in these styles of ship. Some rescued from a fate of rotting on the shore, some were able to copy the design with maybe a few modifications. Because of this, the new empire has had a harder time expanding their territories. They still have the resources to build a bigger fleet than any the world can match, but it will take some more time.

Oh if you couldn't tell, I prefer a sea-faring nation. :)

Quote from: MittenNinjaLooks good to me! Although I would assume the empire would have colonized the islands just to the south as well. They are relatively close.

I was thinking about that. The map above was done quickly, I used the magic wand selection tool so I could paint the nation without going outside the lines (*sniff* :cry:  I failed Kindergarten). I will add those to the Empire when I make the various scales.

I agree with you here Poseidon. For a start, it'd be much easier to conquer those lands beyond the land bridge with ships... and would explain their reluctance to conquer too much further inland.

I wanted to add a few comments regarding the map (which is looking really good). The placement of the Empire is odd to me (and I know this is a fantasy world where the normal laws of climate and geography don't have to mean anything). All of the great empires on earth have occured (with few exceptions) at relatively the same mean distance from the equator. Off the top of my head I can only think of the Incan empire as having been close to the equator - the others, Roman, Mongolian, Chinese, Japanes, Hitties, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc all occured north of the equator. Climate is more conductive to large scale agriculture, which would be required to sustain an empire. Just something to think about.

As for the ring, nothing I've been able to find indicates that a world of the earth's proportions could not have a ring, and in fact there is some talk that Pluto may have a ring and that when the New Horizons probe reaches the area in 2015 we'll know for sure. A ring would be a great addition to the world.

Quote from: HangfireAs for the ring, nothing I've been able to find indicates that a world of the earth's proportions could not have a ring, and in fact there is some talk that Pluto may have a ring and that when the New Horizons probe reaches the area in 2015 we'll know for sure. A ring would be a great addition to the world.

Silly Hang, Pluto isn't a planet.  :-p

Quote from: MittenNinjaSilly Hang, Pluto isn't a planet.  :-p

I'm starting to show my age. Who do these guys think they are change planets to, what is it now, a demiplanet or some such garbage? Pluto will always be a planet to me :D

It's called a planetoid and/or a dwarf planet...  :-/

Yea I wasn't to happy that they changed it. But oh well, what are you going to do?

Question of scale, are any of these good? Smaller than the smallest one, or larger than the larger one?

(Those say 500mi)
 (http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/921/cebegiaen7.jpg)

Just to give some perspective to the measurements that Mustard put up, the Earth's equatorial circumference is 24,880.616 miles (40,041.47 km for my kinsmen). That would mean that there would have to be 49.76 of the represented distance markers Mustard used laid out end to end to equal the size of the Earth. They all appear to be quite large then, making the planet quite small. I don't have a problem with small. Consider this also, a Halfling in D&D moves 20'/round, so on easy terrain could travel 16 miles in an 8 hour day. He could travel the length of a marker in 31.25 days. On horse back the trek would take 15 days. I guess it really boils down to how long do you want it to take the characters to move from one area to another?

So you want smaller markers? I just made the m random sizes, to get an idea of what people wanted.

In some sense I like the idea of having to travel for weeks to get somewhere, but gameplay wise it's not very exciting. So I'd say go with a smaller scale.

I think if you used that smallest marker, and said it represented about 750 miles, it would make a decent-sized planet (possibly mercury-or-mars-sized).  Right now, though, the planet, using the smallest marker, is pluto-sized.  Using the largest marker, it's about Charon-sized, and both of those, I think, are too small.

I like small worlds, they're manageable.  Especially considering extra-palnar existences and hidden islands, and subterranean realms.  A Charon-sized planet would be fine by me.

Ok, I will make the scale smaller. While I am doing that, how many city-states do we want to have? 9, 12, 15, 23, 40, 512?

I vote for somewhere around the high single digits or low teens.

any other suggestions?

Once we have a rough number, I can make shaded areas on the map. This way people can start pick a region and submit a proposal for the civilization. This will help narrow down what totems are in the world, and how they interact with their people.

I'd say around 40 - alike to Greece, but more independent.

However, there might be other civilisations on the other side of the map, for example.

Forty would be a lot to flesh out. I was thinking something under twenty. (Even that many is a lot to flesh out, but it gives a lot of diversity as well.)

Twenty sounds good to me.

20 sounds good, but i have aquestion, how big are they going to be? If this is answered already on another part of the thread, then *slaps self viciously with mousepad*.

Quote from: Uranium-23820 sounds good, but i have aquestion, how big are they going to be? If this is answered already on another part of the thread, then *slaps self viciously with mousepad*.

Various sizes, some with only nomadic barbarians, others with larger city-states I would think.

Ok 20 civilizations may be an easier number to work with, but they would have been HUGE! So I mapped out 41 regions. Not all of them have to be inhabitable. As soon as the pantheon thread comes to a decision (which looks like it will be soon), I will start a new thread for civilizations.

Here is a Regional Map:
[spoiler] (http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/5325/regionalmapbk7.jpg) [/spoiler]

Quote from: PoseidonOk 20 civilizations may be an easier number to work with, but they would have been HUGE! So I mapped out 41 regions. Not all of them have to be inhabitable. As soon as the pantheon thread comes to a decision (which looks like it will be soon), I will start a new thread for civilizations.

Here is a Regional Map:
[spoiler] (http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/5325/regionalmapbk7.jpg) [/spoiler]

Nice work! I think a map always make is easier to work on a world since it helps you visualize everything.

Anybody have any suggestions? Make some regions smaller? Bigger? This is just an example of what it would look like, since Uranium asked how big they would be. (I still have to put the scale up. Trying to make it look good.)

Does anyone have a good looking compass rose that I can add to the map?

they all seem fairly large, save for the two tiny, tiny ones.

Here's a really nice looking hand-drawn compass rose, but it could use some touch-up work, if anyone is appropriately handy with a graphics program.

http://www.dragonlordsnet.com/comprose.jpg

Quote from: Uranium-238they all seem fairly large, save for the two tiny, tiny ones.

Yeah, I don't quite like their size either. I was going to shade about twenty regions, but they almost rivaled the empire. I have some ideas how to fix them, but I wanted to see what everyone thought before suggesting things.

1. Double the number of regions. This would halve most of the regions, and maybe cut the really large ones in thirds. Downfall many more regions to populate or describe.
2. Change the scale. Maybe this map isn't the whole world, just one small section/contintent. If this is the case, I can add some more regions to the areas that don't have any.
3. Keep the number of regions, but grow the Empire's conquered area. Which regions do I get rid of and make them Empire?
4.???
5.???

Well, first of all, how large is the planet itself?  The scale may not need to be changed.  If the planet is the size of mercury, or mars, instead of earth, then those country sizes are pretty similar to countries here on earth, just with a lot less room between to spread out.  Maybe we should figure out this planet's circumference real quick-like, and see if maybe those nations aren't too big.  I'm voting on a smaller-ish planet, possibly size of mercury, meaning the circumference (from one side of the map to the other) will be roughly 9,500 miles.  That still makes a majority of those nations very large (over 500 miles across for many of them, over 1000 miles for a few), but not abnormally compared to many earth nations (china, india, usa, russia, canada, brazil, a few others).

That could work. I tried to leave the civilizations where the old Empire had conquered relatively small, since they would've had to rebuild, or begin a new. Some may even be old Empire colonies that broke away (that is up to who ever picks the region :) ). The larger regions haven't been warring with the Empire (but maybe with each other). If there any regions you would like to see modified, speak up now. This map is just to help visualize the regions.

About the space to grow, not all of these regions need to be populated with a city-state or nation. Some could be desert areas, or other unihabitable areas. Some might just might no be areas of neutrality between warring nations. Or anything else you can think of.

A smaller type planet is fine with me. If this is a map of the entire world, I will post the size of the map that Jurgen sketched, and I colored (I've been reducing it to about 15 - 30%), when I get home. This way we can get a real inch to mile (cm ot Km) scale.

I thought the smaller (non-Empire) nations were supposed to be city-states (which seems to imply very small)? Or is that just 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5?

Either way, I'd suggest turning 6, 39, 40 and 41 into Empire territory and perhaps placing some mountains between 38 and 39.

Túrin (yeah, I'm still trying to keep up with this ;))

Going on what Turin just said, it may be wise of us to go ahead and outline some possible mountain ranges.  Just the major ones (such as the ranges that come from tectonic grinding, and such), and not all the little off-shoots.  That will help us figure out some other placements, I believe.

Does anyone have good techniques for adding mountains? I never like the way mine come out.

I think the decision for city-states came in before we had a large continent to work with. Some could be nation, that formed from city-states. It is quite possible also to have each region have a few city-states in them. For Example: region 7 could be a loose affiliation of city-states like Greece was. They could all worship the same r similar Totem or ideal. There may even be two or three Totems in this region. I don't know, I'm just throwing out suggestertons. It has been about 800 years since the fall of the Old Empire (IIRC).

It is almost time for me to go home. When I get there I will post the size of the map. I will also make regions 6, 40, 41, and 39 into Empire country. The question that comes to my mind though is why did they head across the land bridge and head north, before making sure they secured at the very least 2, 3, 4, and 5? Who ever plays with region 1 already has a fun time of explaining why the Empire hasn't conquered them. (You know all of this is going to cut into  my installing and playing Starcraft time :P)

I was deliberately not picking 2, 3, 4 and 5 so they could be the cool dudes resisting the Empire's influence. We could lower their number though. Having two or three of those might be enough.

If we're having larger nations, I'd say the nations would be closer to the Empire while the city-states would be farther off, for two reasons: small city-states would be more easily absorbed by the Empire (so there are no longer any near it) and the cultural advancement required to form nations would be more likely to occur near the cultural center of the world, which I assume is in the Empire.

Túrin

The Empire could also be using very bad tactics. "We don't need to worry about those to the south. Spread across the land bridge, let's conquer there first." Or someone was throwing a dagger at a map and conquering that area. :P I don't care where the Empire has gone it just seemed odd, so I pointed it out. :) Those to the south could be united against the Empire and thus harder to conquer. There are many options for them.

Two or three? Which one would you conquer 2, 4, or 5? Or should they stay the way they are.

The other question that has yet to be answered, is: Are we making the Empire a naval power, or army power, or a balance between the two? If they are naval, maybe the majority of their fleet is in the northern sea/ocean and that is why they went north along the coast.

The map is 20 inches by 10 inches. So if the map is about 9500 miles wide, then 1 inch would equal 475 miles. Here is a map so you can visualize the scale.

[spoiler=Map] (http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/8462/mastermap2di3.jpg) [/spoiler]

I kind of like the more regions to play with. If, as has been mentioned here, the different regions are picked by people to fill in then that gives us plenty of areas for members to choose from. The idea of a region consisting of multiple city states and multiple totems is a good one. I wish my mountains came out well as that will really help make some decisions about who the empire would have conquered.


I already have some ideas for various area so can't wait until we get to the point that we can choose!

As I was driving home, I grew more fond of the idea that some of the regions can represent city states that are friendly toward each other. Much like ancient Greece was. If they go to war with another region, they can ask other city-states in their regions to aid them in their war (like the Iliad :) )

I am going to make the civilization thread after the pantheon thread is finished, this way everyone works with the same set of world rules.

Until I can get some tips on a better way to represent mountains.

[spoiler=Not another map. He has gone map crazy.]  (http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/8176/mastermapmnttu2.jpg) [/spoiler]

Bump.


The map is 20 inches by 10 inches. So if the map is about 9500 miles wide, then 1 inch would equal 475 miles. The last two maps have the 1:475 scale. That is based off Ishmayls numbers. More? Less? Agree? Disagree? Suggestions?

Quote from: IshmaylHere's a really nice looking hand-drawn compass rose, but it could use some touch-up work, if anyone is appropriately handy with a graphics program.

I took the image and cleaned it up/reworked it a little. Still awaiting some finishing touches.
Whaddya think so far?
 [spoiler] (http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b276/MittenNinja/CompassRose.jpg) [/spoiler]

I likes it.

Any comments about the latest map? Scale? or other?

I like it a lot too, MittenNinja.  And, glad to have you back.

Quote from: PoseidonAny comments about the latest map? Scale? or other?

If my eyes don't deceive me that's pretty friggin huge. 1 inch on that map would be the same as the distance between cleveland and new york, making the main empire roughly the size of the united states. That must be one influential empire to be able to span that far. Not even ancient Rome had that much land. And well, look what happened to them...

You do bring up a good point, Mittens.  I think we may want to scale it back a bit, make it a smaller world.  I would think an inch should be around 300-ish miles, and that will still make the kingdoms pretty large, but not abnormally large.

I vote small world, as usual.  The smaller it is, the more detail we can create, and still keep the relation of people feasible.

EDIT: Poseidon, on your map, kingdoms still strecth the same distance, despite the presence of mountains.  Since borders are commonly formed along natural barriers, a large mountain range should have a significant effect upon the placement of a nation.

Finished cleaning up that compass rose.
 [spoiler=here it is] (http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b276/MittenNinja/compass_rose_cebegiacopy.jpg) [/spoiler]

I have it in PSD format as well so it'll be nice and easy to just pop onto existing maps. Once we get a map finalized.

... Rome controlled as much land as the US, man. Ever seen a map of Rome? Most of north africa, all of europe (pretty much, other than north germany) and sections of asia. I'd say that's at LEAST as big as the U.S.

Quote from: Wensleydale... Rome controlled as much land as the US, man. Ever seen a map of Rome? Most of north africa, all of europe (pretty much, other than north germany) and sections of asia. I'd say that's at LEAST as big as the U.S.

It appears just as big/larger because of the Mediterrainian Sea. If you look at just the land mass it's a smaller aera than the US.

Mitten, that rose looks great!  I think I'm going to use it for my campaign map as well!  I'm glad I found that, and I'm glad someone here was able to make it look nice.

Quote from: IshmaylMitten, that rose looks great!  I think I'm going to use it for my campaign map as well!  I'm glad I found that, and I'm glad someone here was able to make it look nice.

Thanks! Glad I could help!

Quote from: Rose Of MontagueI vote small world, as usual.  The smaller it is, the more detail we can create, and still keep the relation of people feasible.

EDIT: Poseidon, on your map, kingdoms still strecth the same distance, despite the presence of mountains.  Since borders are commonly formed along natural barriers, a large mountain range should have a significant effect upon the placement of a nation.

Which ones in particular?

I placed the mountains randomly, and most of them I used the existing borders. Some don't have the mountain going all the way through their region. I see 29, 30, 31, 33 can be changed, but are there any others? It would be nice if suggestions were made. This map is only a randomly divided (region and mountain) that was suppose to be an example. I put the numbers on it for easy reference.

Mitten, what do you have that saved as?

Also it seems that a part of region #2 is cut off by mountains.


I have the rose as a PSD and can pretty much get it to you in any format.

So it does. Now who gets te region 4(1) or Empire(2)?  [dice]1d2[/dice]



Cool. I'll send you my e-mail (if it isn't in my profile), and I'll put the rose on the map. I may need to put a background if it is going to be over the blue section, about where the temp scale is.

Ishmayl, you said you found it, is it going to be legal to use it?

You know, I 'll check that out...

Hmmm... it's possible we won't be able to :(

QuoteAll artwork on this site is copyrighted to the credited artist, and permission must be obtained from that person before the art may be used elsewhere.

Man, I hate that I don't think of these things before I find a great idea to steal :(  Think we should email him, or just forget about it and make up another one?

I can work on another one. Any preferences on colors?

Quote from: MittenNinjaI can work on another one. Any preferences on colors?

Empire color (not yet chosen)

I'd suggest we keep the Empire's size under the Roman Empire's. It is, after all, a smaller version of an older Empire.

If it is indeed the case that the old Empire controlled the entire continent, it would have been absolutely frickin' huge on the current scale.

Túrin

Right, the current empire should be probably half the size of the original empire, and the original empire probably shouldn't be as large as, say, the US, or USSR, or even China or Brazil.    I would put it to the equivalent of the southeast USA, possibly 1000 miles long by 600 miles wide, or so.

Of course, shortening the scale down to that size would make our planet extremely small - possibly moon-sized, so we may want to consider adding another continent on one side so that the planet gets more planet-sized.

Yeah having this be only one part of the world allows us to make the scale anything we want. What do we want? 1:300? 1:250? 1:100? 1:1?(Map is still 20 by 10 inches)

I guess the best question to help answer that would be how long do we want it to take to get from one side to the other?

Actually, I think the best question to help answer that would be, "how long exactly (or how large) do we want to the Empire to be?"  Giving us that will help us scale everything else.  I'm voting on roughly 600 miles x 600 miles (or slightly larger), so 360,000 square miles.

I'll second that.

As will I.

I'm not good with numbers, especially when we're talking size in miles.  I thought about suggesting a distance by travel-time, but even that I'm not sure about, so count me uninformed and non-voting on this particular element of the world.

So, going by that map, it looks like an inch should represent 125-150 miles or so.  Now, that does make the entire map extremely small, so we'll need to add to it if that's how we do it.  Or, we should make all the countries much, much smaller.

I say we leave room for a second continent on the other side of the planet. That way we can add some more truly "exotic" elements to the world without detracting from the environment of the mainland.

Agreed.

Ok, here's what I have thus far on the new Compass Rose

 [spoiler=Attempt 2] (http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b276/MittenNinja/CR2ndattempt.jpg) [/spoiler]

And just an idea. If we end up deciding that the world will have a ring I could do something along the lines of this.
 [spoiler=Rings?] (http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b276/MittenNinja/CR2ndattempt2.jpg) [/spoiler]

Anyways, this is in the rough stages and any ideas, comments would be appreciated.

I like the one with the ring. It could probably use something in the middle. What? I don't know.

I have a bit of an idea for that.  Once the empire is named, we could develop a standard for them, and use a symbol from their standard in the compass, kind of like the empire itself created this map and compass rose.

Quote from: IshmaylI have a bit of an idea for that.  Once the empire is named, we could develop a standard for them, and use a symbol from their standard in the compass, kind of like the empire itself created this map and compass rose.

That's kinda what I was thinking.

How about... an inch to every... uhr...

I'm bad with numbers. Ask the cartographer's guild!

I've changed the map slightly and brought the number of regions back to 40. I will post it later.

[edited because I'm stupid]

Just to give you an idea of what the Roman Empire was and a few city-states from Greece
Most sites say Rome was over 2 million square miles


Ithaca was about 37 sq miles
Sparta was about 3000 sq miles
Athens was about 165 sq miles


After looking at these numbers and the regions. I think most of the regions are going to be less than or about 5 sq inches. Which should be okay for city-states.

What do yall think?

Sounds good to me.

Quote from: WensleydaleSounds good to me.

:huh:

What part? The different areas comparisons are suppose to spark discussion.

...

Damn forumy thing. Cut off the rest of my post somehow... maybe I pressed a key or something and deleted it. Bear in mind it was 4:00 in the morning when I posted it. :P

I think 1:7500 sounds good - that's not TOO big, not Roman scale, but is huge enough to be a true empire.

Sounds good to me. :)

I agree with Wensleydale, that is.

[edited ME STUPID!!!]

I vote that size as well.

[edited ME STUPID!!!]

I know I haven't been helping design this, but I've been looking over the post and I have some 2 cents I'd like to throw in, if nobody minds.

With the 1 inch = 7,500 miles bit, your world is going to be huge.  The circumference of the Earth at its widest point (AKA the equator) is almost 25,000 miles.  With the 1:7500 scale, your map is going to be 105,000 miles long.  When you were thinking of making it the world have another continent or continents, then CeBeGia is quickly going to become the size of Jupiter.

I've taken a map of the Earth and laid it on top of the CeBeGia map at the proposed scale.  Unless I'm mistaken, that map could hold more than 12 Earths, fairly easily.  Your empire is also about twice the size of the Earth.  It should take a person about 8 months to walk across the United States.  When it starts to take 5.5 years, then you're going to run into huge problems.  No nation in a fantasy world could rule over an empire that big for long.

I also wanted to point out that your Empire, at any scale, is absolutely enormous next to any other nation.  With an empire that size and that many people all under the same banner, it could conquer the world in just a few years.  Certainly those bottom four nations under the Empire will be gone in a matter of weeks.

I would combine two nations, such as 24 and 35, and say that this new nation is standing up against the New Empire and ensuring that it doesn't expand further.  

Aight, I'm done, just some thoughts.

[spoiler]
(//../../e107_files/public/1180636658_244_FT2568_cebegia.gif)
[/spoiler]

EDIT by Ishmayl - Spoilerized for our convenience.

Wait, that's not right is it?  I mean, it wouldn't take 5.5 years to walk across Texas.  Did I vote for the wrong one?

Jharviss, I think he was using a different ration than inches-to-miles?

No I used funky math. I will recalculate based on real math.

At 1:7500 the Empire would equal 2010937500 sq miles. (only a slight difference)

Thank you Jharviss, for pointing out my massive brain fart.

Please spoiler that thing. It scares me. :)


It seems people want a texas size Empire, so I will figure out what the scale of that would be.

Here's an overlay of the Empire over Texas.  That's the scale I like.  Or at most, maybe the empire the size of SE America (Florida up to North Carolina, and west to Lousianna... MAYBE).  Notice the scale at the bottom.

(http://www.shadowfell.org/pics/TexasVsEmpire.png)

A Texas size Empire (including the water areas) would require a scale of 1:100 Giving an area of 357,500 sq miles.

Giving the widest part about a 650 mile stretch meaning about a 27 days walk across (using D&D rules) Texas is a 32 days walk by the same rules at the widest point.

Tallest part of the Empire is about a 22 days walk. Texas is 27 and a half days walk at the tallest point

The only problem with that overlay is that the maps I post are shrunk to about 15% of the original size. Unless you enlarge it, which it looks like you did. Is that scale an 1:200 or 1:100?

With a 1:100 we are back to a planet less than the size of Pluto... Unless we go with this is only half the planet. :) Then it is about the same size as Pluto.

Man, I don't know ;)   I'm thinking we should seriously consider either adding more to the map (on both the X and Y axis), or consider redrawing the nations and where they sit on the map.  I just don't like the empire taking up as much of the world as it does, on any scale.

Let's get the guys over at Cartographers Guild to chime in with their opinion. :)

Quote from: IshmaylMan, I don't know ;)   I'm thinking we should seriously consider either adding more to the map (on both the X and Y axis), or consider redrawing the nations and where they sit on the map.  I just don't like the empire taking up as much of the world as it does, on any scale.

Let's get the guys over at Cartographers Guild to chime in with their opinion. :)

Quote from: Core EthosIn the new world, there is a single large and stable country, most likely a tyranny of some sort, it's benevolence is questionable. This tyranny occupies the majority, if not all of a large landmass. This tyranny also possesses a "regular" fantasy religion, a polytheistic single pantheon of deities pictured as very powerful humanoid beings.

:P I'm just pointing it out. That one line is easily changed. How big were you thinking for the Empire? Not past the first land bridge? I can change the map as we see fit.


More input is always welcomed.

Quote from: IshmaylI just don't like the empire taking up as much of the world as it does, on any scale.

What, exactly, would be the problem with such a thing? As Poseidon pointed out, it is what we decided upon (though that doesn't mean it's set in stone, of course).

[spoiler=Nitpicking over definition of scale]Also, what's the deal with the scale? 1:100 means one inch equals 100 miles? That doesn't make sense! A scale is written as a fraction for a reason. 1:100 should mean one inch equals 100 inches, or one mile equals 100 miles, or, basically, that you'd have a life-size map of the world if you'd enlarge the map by a factor of 100.[/spoiler]

Túrin

I am writing the scale like that just as a short cut. :)

the correct RF would be 1:6336000. But for our layman purposes I am writing one inch is one hundred miles as 1:100, unless it is really a problem.

I'll survive :)

Quote from: IshmaylI'll survive :)

If you want to change something now is the time. The map is far from finalized.

Quote from: JharvissI also wanted to point out that your Empire, at any scale, is absolutely enormous next to any other nation.  With an empire that size and that many people all under the same banner, it could conquer the world in just a few years.  Certainly those bottom four nations under the Empire will be gone in a matter of weeks.

but the problem is keeping its territories.  it takes enormous amounts of resources to maintain an enormous empire.  that said, there is still the possibility of a resource surge into the military in the hopes of a quick and final conquest.  therefore there must be factors that prevent this from happening.

First, perhaps there was a recent all out invasion attempt by the empire, but it was not completely successful.  Say that the bottom four countries managed to hold out until a rebellion along a crucial resource line managed to weaken the empire's forces.  that is not to say that the invasion was a complete failure, as many new territories were added, just that it was not a complete victory, as free territories still remain.  Still, suppose that many of the newly conquered territory was once in alliance with the territories that managed to hold out, who are now smuggling resources to the newly conquered territories.  As far as the difficulty of this task, well,if the leaders managed to hold out and survive against the empire, they have a good idea of what they are doing and a lot of skill to go along with this.

As the empire does not have unlimited magical resources, but rather, merely have enormous and powerful military prowess, there will no quick and final solution (thinking of the magical "deathstar" solution), but instead a war where the empire is constantly putting out fires in its own home territories and merely keeping pressure on the free lands so as to wage a war of attrition

additionally, geographic factors could make an invasion very difficult, as well as magical factors.  for instance, the confederacy of free nations (which i think is a better alternative than combining countries into one big one, as it keeps a good variety of totem animals) is on the other side of a group of high mountains with many passes filled with exploding runes.  and the coast impossible to land on or is mostly dessert with magics that make most lost.

Okay, well I'm probably in the minority, but I really  picture this a bit differently.  Maybe my opinions have changed since we first spoke of the core ethos loooooong ago, or maybe I just didn't speak up when I should have.  

So, as far as the continent goes, I think the empire is fine occupying that much landmass as long as the world is much larger.  I just don't think we can justify saying the empire is "in decline" or "doesn't have the power it once held" if it occupies 1/4 of the world's landmass.  An empire of that size would either have pretty much absolute control over the majority of the world's resources, or would actively be trying to take control of said resources.  They would have a literally unstoppable army, in terms of pure numbers (China, anyone?), and they would not be having to fight for their borders.  Our empire, on the other hand, is said to be in decline, is said to be wanting more power than it can sustain, and wants to relive the glory days of Ancient Empire.  Our empire could not own 1/4 of the planet's landmass, unless they were on the verge of losing it as the campaign started, due to corruption, rivaling factions, and constant attacks against-and-from other countries (or city-states).

 Therefore, I propose that we keep the map as drawn, and say that the major continent we see is in the NW hemisphere of a much larger planet, much like North America in our world.  Then, we go ahead and set a planet size in stone.  Just for numbers' sake, let's say the planet's diameter is say, 3000 miles (about the size of Mercury).  Thus, that gives us a circumference of roughly 9400 miles.  Divided in half is 4700 miles, which would be the width of our map we have thus far.  That makes our empire roughly 1600 miles across at its longest point.  That's a pretty massive empire right there - taking into account the water displacing some of the landmass, you're looking at somewhere around 2 million square miles, which is a good bit larger than India, and a bit smaller than Australia.  If you include the water (which empires often do), it's about 2.5 million square miles.  Keep in mind that 2 million square miles is larger than the 10 largest states of the US put together (Alaska, Texas, California, Montana, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Oregon, and Wyoming).

So, with all that rambling and math aside, I'm just suggesting we consider enlarging the planet.  Let's say the map we have is the NW hemisphere of our planet, and there are 3 other hemisphere which have not been drawn (and for all I care, have not been explored either, meaning we don't need to draw them right now).

Just trying to think logistically here.

Trying to make sense of what you just said there. You're arguing to make the Empire smaller (at least relative to the size of the world) and at the same to make it bigger (in absolute terms: 10 states is much bigger than just Texas), right?

Alright, I agree with the former, and disagree with the latter. I think we should keep the scale that puts the Empire at Texas' size (I think that was one inch to a hundred miles?) and keep the map as is, but add other continents to make the planet Mercury- or Mars-sized.

Túrin

I am all for making this just one major continent among others on the planet. After crunching the numbers below I'm starting to like the bigger Empire. It would take longer for supplies and soldiers to get to the main force.

[spoiler= At 4700 mi across the map]

That would make 1 inch = 235 miles

Area : 1974293.75 sq miles A little less than the Roman empire.

Tavel times (walking):
Widest point ~ 67 days
Tallest point ~ 54 days

Tavel times (horse):
Widest point ~ 34 days
Tallest point ~ 27 days

Tavel times (cart or wagon):
Widest point ~ 95 days
Tallest point ~ 80 days

[/spoiler]

[spoiler= At 4000 mi across the map]

That would make 1 inch = 200 miles

Area : 1,430,000 sq miles

Tavel times (walking):
Widest point ~ 54 days
Tallest point ~ 45 days

Tavel times (horse):
Widest point ~ 27 days
Tallest point ~ 23 days

Tavel times (cart or wagon):
Widest point ~ 81 days
Tallest point ~ 69 days

[/spoiler]

[spoiler= At 2000 mi across the map]

That would make 1 inch = 100 miles

Area : 357,500 sq miles A little larger than Texas

Tavel times (walking):
Widest point ~ 27 days
Tallest point ~ 23 days

Tavel times (horse):
Widest point ~ 14 days
Tallest point ~ 12 days

Tavel times (cart or wagon):
Widest point ~ 41 days
Tallest point ~ 34 days

[/spoiler]
Those days traveling are straight lines across the widest and tallest points.

As for why the Empire hasn't conquered 2, 3, 4, and 5 yet there are many possible reasons:
1) Deserts divide the Empire from those regions.
2) The Empires fleet was in the northern sea, so the Emperor wants to claim the coastal regions up north first.
3) ... uuhhhh look over there *runs away*

Turin,
Yeah, I guess that was kinda confusing.  What I'm arguing for is making the empire larger or keeping it the same size, but in either case, making it take up less space in the total world.  Does that make sense?  I'm not really much of a formal speaker :)

Here you go Ishy.

[spoiler=THE WORLD!] (http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/4785/completeworldti5.jpg) [/spoiler]

Or at least the northern hemisphere.


New map with three new regions and corrected for mountain cutting off other regions

[spoiler=Map] (http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/6461/mastermap2hs1.jpg) [/spoiler]

Actually, that looks like it could be the entire world, both south and north hemisphere

Ok so how big do we want our planet?

Planet (circumference) = scale written as in:mi for convience
Pluto (4,494 mi) ~ 1:112
Mecury (9,525 mi) ~ 1:238
Mars (13,263 mi) ~ 1:332
----------------------------------------------- Anything beyond this point might be too big.
Venus/Earth (23,627 mi/ 24,901 mi) 1:600
Neptune (96,683 mi) 1:2417
Uranus (99,787 mi) 1:2495
Saturn (235,298 mi) 1:5882
Jupiter (279,118 mi) 1:6978


I'm a little partial to a planet somewhere between Mercury and Mars. Possibly closer to Mercury.

I like Mercury size as well.

This isn't a scale question (though I like mercury size as well), but rather a temperature zone question. Are we going to define zones for various temperature bands or are we waiting for scale to do that?

I like the Mercury size.  I agree with Ishy; that map is probably a good representation of the world, and the older map is good for one continent.

If we let the scale define the temperature bands, we should get a good range of them, so I think we should go that way.

Yes, this does mean I'm getting involved finally. :)

Welcome aboard limetom :)


So far that is 4 for Mercury size planet (1:230) and 2 for Pluto size (this is the Empire the size of Texas) (1:100).

Didn't think of the temperature zones. I added an equator to the world map so that figuring out the temperature zones. It may also be easier when we have the scale down.

[spoiler=World with equator] (http://img454.imageshack.us/img454/9861/completeworldsn3.jpg) [/spoiler]

I am wierded out by the flattish stuff around the equator and at the top left of the landmass. I'm not sure why.

Count me in for Pluto.

Yeah, the map was made originally off a fractal program that accounted for sphericals, so that's why parts look kinda funky.  Speaking of which, we may want to redraw a flat version to make it easier to set up borders and such.

Looks like the empire is going to be sub-tropical to moderately temperate (From South to North).  Lookin good so far.

Like Ishmayl said they are flat because the main continent that we are using was the entire planet from a fractal generator. The other landmasses were also from the same generator I just took them from three different maps I was working on. :)

So far
4 Mercury size
3 Pluto.

I'm in with Mercury.

i'll cast my vote for mercury

Quote from: WensleydaleI'm in with Mercury.

I had you down as one of the votes for Pluto (Texas size Empire) from one of your previous post.

So the new numbers are

6 Mercury
2 Pluto.

... oh, wait.

Well, whatever. Perhaps I should've reread before throwing my lot in again. My sense of scale is terrible.

Well which do you want? It is your choice. I'm not going to tell you, "you can't switch". I just keep the running tally.

 Here to give you an idea I am reposting the travel times for both planets sizes that are winning.

[spoiler= Mercury Size]

That would make 1 inch = 235 miles

Area : 1974293.75 sq miles A little less than the Roman empire.

Tavel times (walking):
Widest point ~ 67 days
Tallest point ~ 54 days

Tavel times (horse):
Widest point ~ 34 days
Tallest point ~ 27 days

Tavel times (cart or wagon):
Widest point ~ 95 days
Tallest point ~ 80 days

[/spoiler]


[spoiler= Pluto size]

That would make 1 inch = 100 miles

Area : 357,500 sq miles A little larger than Texas

Tavel times (walking):
Widest point ~ 27 days
Tallest point ~ 23 days

Tavel times (horse):
Widest point ~ 14 days
Tallest point ~ 12 days

Tavel times (cart or wagon):
Widest point ~ 41 days
Tallest point ~ 34 days

[/spoiler]

Mercury, then. :)

Yeah, Mercury's the way to go.  I'm officially throwing in a second vote ;)

Quote from: IshmaylYeah, Mercury's the way to go.  I'm officially throwing in a second vote ;)

HAL: I can't allow you to do that, Dave...

I really believe the new Empire shouldn't be too big on an absolute scale, especially given that it has been possible to run an even larger Empire that did actually work. So I have no problem with enlargening the world, but I'd really like to keep the Empire Texas-sized.

If you really want to do the vote-thingy, I suppose that's a vote for the "Pluto"-option.

I'd really prefer to have some more discussion though, as I haven't heard any reasoning for or against the Pluto or Mercury options.

Túrin

Quote from: TúrinI'd really prefer to have some more discussion though, as I haven't heard any reasoning for or against the Pluto or Mercury options.

Túrin

I like the 'walking' time for a Mercury size planet better than a Pluto sized one. If the widest point allows you to walk across it in a month then I think there would be a great deal more emeshing of various cultures while the Mercury size travel is doable, but will allow more of a separation of cultures.

This is precisely why I think the voting is too early. I think I would actually like to see a Mercury-sized planet, but with a Texas-sized Empire, which fits neither option.

Túrin

Well, I think we can figure a lot of things out if we set the empire size in stone.  For instance, if we decide that we want a Texas-sized empire, but then we want a larger world, we can keep the same map (no redrawing boundaries or anything), and just add on continents to fit.  We wouldn't have to say that our continent only takes up one quadrant of the world if that would make the world too big.. you know what I mean?  

So, let's get that empire down.  I'm personally for larger than Texas, but not necessarily as large as the old Roman Empire.  What if we double the size of the empire from Texas-sized to ... well... something that's twice the size of Texas. :)  Or maybe just a bit larger, maybe Alaska-sized?  That's 663k square miles, and 800 miles across at the widest point.  I think that would set us a decent sized empire without being globally massive.

Then, for the ancient empire-that-was, what about something India-sized? 1.2 million square miles.  That's twice the size of Texas, but only about 3/5 the size of the old Roman empire.  At it's widest point, India is a bit less than 1200 miles across.  That's pretty large, and would give a pretty large walking time, giving rise to such claims that "One could walk for many moons the stretch of Ancient BFG."

That sounds like a great way to handle things. Lets see if I have it right

Current empire- about the size of Alaska
Old Empire- about the size of India
Add continents to world if need be to make sizes above fit scale of world.

Exactly.  So, if we decided on a scale similar to those I mentioned above, but then decided we wanted a smaller, Pluto-sized planet, we could just add 2 more continents that would fit into the space provided to make a Pluto planet.  And if our main continent takes up more than one quadrant on that sized planet, then so be it.

As I see it, the new Empire has recently been growing quickly and is now running into some problems, possibly in terms of organization or logistics or maybe support from the masses. Being a bit more lawful-oriented than the old Empire, it is trying to use forced order or something like that to regain control. I see Cebegia as being written with a current date where there's a turning point: the order vs. chaos conflict reaches a height, and if the Empire wins it will expand and possibly rival the old Empire in size, if the tribes win the new Empire will crumble as quickly as it has risen. To me, this means that the Empire is not yet a huge power, even though it is currently the major power on the continent. I remain very much for the option of making the Empire approximately Texas-sized (using the 1:100 scale or something similar). The advantage here is that we can say that the old Empire actually covered the entire continent at some point, which makes sense: if it was successful, why would it have stopped growing after two-thirds or three-quarters of the continent were conquered? If we make the scale much bigger, a continent-spanning (old) Empire becomes unrealistic.

Túrin

I am just keeping a running tally at this point. When there is a majority leaning toward an idea and discussion dies down I then give a week for anyone to change their decision or continue the discussion (since the polls are not working). This one is still going strong.

I like the bigger than Texas Empire, because it allows for slower growth. The larger distance means it takes longer to get supplies to the armies. The Empire also has to take time to make sure that the land they just conquered is under control. So this expansion could have been going on about thirty or forty years now. This way the Emperor is making sure that the Empire is stable before continuing the expansion. Unlike the Old Empire that spread itself too thin and crumbled.

As for being too big to support itself, many peolpe have brought up one point to me when I say things are too big. The world has magic. If the Roman Empire could survive for many years without magic, magic should be able to help support a large Empire. :)

Quote from: Turinif it was successful, why would it have stopped growing after two-thirds or three-quarters of the continent were conquered?

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/6005/cebegiabm2.jpg[/img]

I can put it back to where the New Empire hasn't passed the second land bridge and make a few more regions. That way the Empire isn't as large, but we can have a bigger scale.
[spoiler] (http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/5325/regionalmapbk7.jpg) [/spoiler]

That map looks good.

Ok I think I'm going to drop the planet size references. I thought they may help, but they seem to be causing more trouble than they are worth. I am going to post 2 (maybe 3) maps of just empire territory. This should make choosing a scale easier. (I hope)

I say make the Old Empire larger-- approximately 1.25x what you have now.

Making the New Empire approximately the size of texas sounds like a good idea. If it needs to be any bigger at all, I say the absolute maximum should be about 1.5x TX.

[spoiler=Continental Map (UPDATED)] (http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/1416/mastermap2qz5.png) [/spoiler]


Here are a few tables to show what the size of the empire would be if a certain scale was selected. I also listed the number of days it takes to travel in a straight line at its widest (w) and tallest (h) points by walking, horse, and wagon/cart.

A Smaller empire:

(http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/9676/empiresmallua7.png)
[table=Smaller Empire]
[tr][th] 1in= mi [/th][th] Width [/th][th] Height [/th][th] Sq mi [/th][th] Walk (w) [/th][th] Walk (h) [/th][th] Horse (w) [/th][th] Horse (h) [/th][th] Cart (w) [/th][th] Cart (h) [/th][th][/tr]
[tr][td] [/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th] [/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[/table][/font][/b]

The Empire the way it is now:

(http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/3446/empire2hh0.png)


[table=Larger Empire]
[tr][th] 1in = mi [/th][th] Width [/th][th] Height [/th][th] Sq mi [/th][th] Walk (w) [/th][th] Walk (h) [/th][th] Horse (w) [/th][th] Horse (h) [/th][th] Cart (w) [/th][th] Cart (h) [/th][th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[/table][/font][/b]

This table is to give the members an idea of what some of the scales mean in terms of the regions. I chose one small, medium and large region.


 [table=Regions][tr][td] [/td][th colspan='3']Region 21[/th][th colspan='3']Region 22[/th][th colspan='3']Region 32[/th][/tr]  
[tr][th]1in = mi[/th][th]Width  [/th][th]Height  [/th][th]sq mi  [/th][th]Width  [/th][th]Height  [/th][th]sq mi  [/th][th]Width  [/th][th]Height  [/th][th]sq mi  [/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr]
[tr][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][th][/th][/tr]
[tr][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][/tr][/table][/font] [/b]





Just to give you a point of refrence here are some real life Countries and States:

Region sizes:

Ithaca:______________ 37 sq. miles
Athens:_____________ 165 sq. miles
Sparta:___________ 3,000 sq. miles
Conneticut:_______ 5,543 sq. miles
Vermont:__________ 9,614 sq. miles
West Virginia:___ 24,230 sq. Miles
Mississippi: _____48,430 sq. miles
Utah: ____________84,899 sq. miles

Empire Sizes:

Texas:________ 268,601 sq. miles
Alaska:_______ 663,267 sq. miles
India: ______1,269,368 sq. miles
Australia:__ 2,940,521 sq. miles
Brazil:_____ 3,265,075 sq. miles

I am tired of looking at these tables and numbers right now, so I leave it to you guys to discuss, and I will post my thoughts after I take a break.

Excellent work Poseidon!  :whoa:

I think this will get the debate solved in short order since we have everything to compare right there. Personally I like the scale of 1 inch equal 175 miles. That just feels right to me for either of the empires that is listed. Just over alaska size or india sized.

As for which one. I like the bigger one because, well it is bigger and an empire. But I am leaning towards the smaller one as the empire is just getting back into its groove and that is a good spot to stop and consolidate power.

Quote from: RavenspathExcellent work Poseidon!  :whoa:

Quoted for truth


I think the 1 inch = 200 miles is my favorite, and I like the first map (the one where the empire doesn't quite cross the land bridge).

My favourites would be the second map and the 1 inch to 100 miles scale. This gives us an Empire slightly bigger than Texas. Quite big enough, if you ask me.

Túrin

I like the second map with the 1 inch to 150 miles scale. Medieval population densities are probably going to be like Alaska is today, so I think it would be a pretty decent size; something that could realistically be controlled.

*THUD**THUD**THUD**THUD*.....

I just realized I forgot 1 inch is 125 mile scale.


I like the smaller empire with the 175 or 200 scale. The traveling times for these scales don't seem too short or excessively long. The 100 scale allows a supply cart to get across the Empire in about four weeks, thus reinforcing and suppling an army could be done quickly. The almost double scale makes it that much harder to get supplies to the military and towns that may need them. This make the Empire growth slower, because it would take supplies about 9 weeks to get to the troops or a town in desperate need. The larger scale also makes the Empire seem like it is overstretched.

The smaller map has the Empire stopped at one choke point. This gives them the chance to crush the regions to the south, or spread across the land bridge. The larger map has the Empire stopped at three choke points, but for some reason they have already decided to leave the regions to the south alone. That doesn't make sense to me, but there could be reasons (Only the fleet in the northern sea is seaworthy, thus making the conquering of the northern coastline easier (lawful) or the empire was throwing darts at a map and said conquer here (chaotic)). I prefer the smaller Empire, but I don't hate the large Empire either.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) the table for the regions shows that the larger regions(22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, and 36) are probably too large and regions 6, 7, 9, 10, and 13 are borderline. the larger regions are about an eight of the size of the Larger Empire and about a sixth of the smaller empire. Now I can cut most of these regions in half or into thirds. This would make more regions to populate, but the regions wouldn't be the size of Utah or greater. I can also leave some for larger nations. What are your thoughts? (If changes are to be made I will use a few dice rolls to see which regions get changed, because some members might be partial to a certain region (I.E. they want it when the hold is lifted.). Random selection makes it a little more fair.)

I added in the 125 scale that I missed. Now my head hurts again. If you can stand pure unadulterated evil hit qoute and look at the code for one table. It's ugly...

There is not much of a discussion if people don't discuss

Unfortunately (or fortunately) the table for the regions shows that the larger regions(22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, and 36) are probably too large and regions 6, 7, 9, 10, and 13 are borderline. the larger regions are about an eight of the size of the Larger Empire and about a sixth of the smaller empire. Now I can cut most of these regions in half or into thirds. This would make more regions to populate, but the regions wouldn't be the size of Utah or greater. I can also leave some for larger nations. What are your thoughts? (If changes are to be made I will use a few dice rolls to see which regions get changed, because some members might be partial to a certain region (I.E. they want it when the hold is lifted.). Random selection makes it a little more fair.)

So far we have
1 for 100 scale and large map
1 for 150 scale and large map
1 for 200 scale and small map
1 for 175 scale and leaning toward small map
1 for either 175, or 200 and small map.

if we agree on a scale I can be that much closer to lifting the hold.

Well, honestly, it appears that there are still minimal people really participating, which means you may not get more votes.  You could always make an executive decision.  I'm not going to be disappointed in any direction we go, I would just prefer to work with the 200 scale with the small map.  If you decide on the 100 scale and large map, I'll survive, and start working on the next part :)

If I have to make a decision about the scale, then I will roll the dice and let it choose between 100, 125, 150, 175, and 200.

What about the map? Pros/Cons of each
What about the regions I pointed out? Are they too big, just right or small? Should I cut some into smaller pieces?

The reason why I prefer large map and 1:100 scale is that it keeps the regions at a reasonable size (not too big) without having to create too many of them.

If we have too many regions, we won't be able to populate them all (or at least not in any reasonable space of time) which stagnates the project.

In the current setup, even with the 1:100 scale, some regions should be cut into pieces IMO. If we choose an even larger scale, we have to cut even more, making the Empire even more powerful relatively and, more importantly, increasing the number of regions that need to be filled even further. This would also make the setting seem fragmented, IMO.

Túrin

I vote for 1:150.

I don't like the 100 scale, because it makes the Empire too small.

If all the regions are not populated, is that a bad thing? Maybe there are a few vast areas that have not been colonized or a neutral zone between civilizations.

I have been thinking about the large regions more as well. Perhaps there were a bunch of ctiy-states during the time of the Old Empire. Some have had 400 or so years to unite and form a nation (through marriage, conquering, alliance, etc..). Others have form an alliance recently because of the threat of the Empire. It would also explain some of the funny borders. This would be up to the person making the region, but I am begining to see that the bigger regions aren't that much of a problem.  It would also be a good reason why the Empire hasn't conquered more territory. Because these regions are about an eighth of the size of the Empire, they are able to hold the Empire at bay for a little longer than the smaller nations.

That's a good point... there actually should be some areas that are considered rugged wilderness or some such.

Some of the regions simply declared uninhabitable and that's it? Works for me.

Basically. For example 33, 38, and 29 could be harsh frozen tundra if nobody picks them.

Quote from: IshmaylWell, honestly, it appears that there are still minimal people really participating, which means you may not get more votes.  You could always make an executive decision.  I'm not going to be disappointed in any direction we go, I would just prefer to work with the 200 scale with the small map.  If you decide on the 100 scale and large map, I'll survive, and start working on the next part :)

I think we are to the point that an executive decision needs to be made. I agree with Ish that while I have preferences I will work with whatever is chosen.

I think it was also Ish who said that we can set the Empire size then the world size (but I couldn't find it to quote it.) It seems we are all voting pretty evenly for scale, about 2 for each the 100, 150, 175 and 200.

I say set the Empire (Texas or Alaska sized), set the map (I still like the small one.) and then set the world scale.

Some areas can be very sparsely populated or completely uninhabited, while other regions are very populated.

Poseidon, I say make the call so that we can move and start populating regions.

( :yumm: Ready to post at least one Region!)

I don't want to make executive decisions. I shouldn't be the one that makes decisions, it's not my setting. It is a community setting. :)

What I will do is, if a decision can't be made on something like this a roll will be the deciding factor. Unless we want a truely random setting, these rolls should be kept to a minimum.

Unless someone is extremely against this in a few days, if there is no more conversation about the scale, I will roll for the following.

1.) Scale using values 100, 125, 150, 175, 200.
2.) Large or small map. (it is about 50-50 on this so I will let this be random as well).

I agree that it should be everyone's decision, but right now, everyone who is participating has already given their opinion, and it seems to be quite the tie.  Hopefully some other people will get in on it, but right now, the thread is so large that I think it's probably intimidating to people who want to be interested, but don't want to read 9 pages (plus the dozens of other pages in related threads) to catch up.  Poseidon, do you think we should start a new thread called "World Summary So Far - Read Here First if Interested in Helping" (or something along those lines), and just copy and paste all your info from the Progress Report in to it and sticky it?  That may be a good way for other people to get interested.

yeah, I've been thinking about that. I probably should. Expect it up some time tomorrow.

*phoom*

I guess I'm the first arrival from the FAQ. Hi.

I've looked over the last two pages (you really need to add a link to the beginning of whatever discussion you're on at the moment on the first post), and I'm throwing my hat in for 1:175 and 1:200; It makes horseback communication a 2-4 week affair cross-country, which seems good. If we're going for magic equivalent of semaphore towers, or even a pony express, that'll be cut significantly, but not enough to really tie the empire together. At this scale there's still possibility of communications playing a factor.

I also like the bigger empire. From what I've seen so far (which is not much), it looks like your playing empire vs. everyone else. You need the bigger empire to make them difficult to defeat; if you go small then the players (should they want to) need only to unite a couple of the provinces to make a good attempt at conquest.

There was also some discussion about divvying up the provinces, and whether some should be uninhabited. I defy you to find a large tract of land (other than antarctica) that's completely uninhabited, both permanent and temporary. Humans are adaptable critters, and with other, perhaps specialized races, the point is even more valid. I agree that it all shouldn't be england-dense, but a large area inhabited only by a few thousand nomadic tribes seems to strike a balance.

My god that was a lot of talking. I hope it all makes sense.

Well i have to throw down my vote for 1:200 scale, and i really like the empire map where it doesnt quite pass over all the land bridge

Also the current map, is it the whole world or just one continent?

Quote from: PoseidonI don't want to make executive decisions. I shouldn't be the one that makes decisions, it's not my setting. It is a community setting. :)

The following is quoted from the original "charter" that eventually made me the first Project Leader (posted on page 2 of this thread (http://www.thecbg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?989)).

Quote from: TúrinYou know, I think I want to help giving this a shot. In fact, I think I'll throw in myself as a candidate for leadership/guidanceship/whatever. A few of my ideas regarding the topic:

1. These things regularly fail, so a dedicated leader and a focused project is a must. If I get to run things, any content must pass my veto before getting in, though I will use this veto as little as possible, unless we get far more input than I expect.

I still subscribe to everything I said there, which was mostly written around the central point that a completely democratic community world just wouldn't work: it'd fall flat eventually. A benevolent dictatorship is a must: most ideas are taken from the community, but someone has to have ultimate executive authority.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: at this point everyone is waiting to continue and this discussion has already seen all relevant arguments. This is the point where you propel things forward by making a decision (which, for all I care, doesn't even need to have a single vote from any of the other contributors) or ground things to a halt by requiring a consensus that will not magically appear.

So, no offense, but I disagree. This is your setting, at least in the sense that you have to make executive decisions where they are required to keept the project going.

Túrin

Quote from: ~Kalin~Also the current map, is it the whole world or just one continent?

Just one continent. It started as the whole world, but we found that the planet would be too small with the scales we were planning on using.

Quote from: TúrinI still subscribe to everything I said there, which was mostly written around the central point that a completely democratic community world just wouldn't work: it'd fall flat eventually. A benevolent dictatorship is a must: most ideas are taken from the community, but someone has to have ultimate executive authority.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: at this point everyone is waiting to continue and this discussion has already seen all relevant arguments. This is the point where you propel things forward by making a decision (which, for all I care, doesn't even need to have a single vote from any of the other contributors) or ground things to a halt by requiring a consensus that will not magically appear.

So, no offense, but I disagree. This is your setting, at least in the sense that you have to make executive decisions where they are required to keept the project going.

Túrin

I suppose you are right. I will look over the thread again and re-read all the arguments. Then I will make a decision.

Woot!  I'm sure it will be a fine decision Poseidon, you've already done a good job with everything else CeBeGia-related.

Quote from: Stargate525There was also some discussion about divvying up the provinces, and whether some should be uninhabited. I defy you to find a large tract of land (other than antarctica) that's completely uninhabited, both permanent and temporary. Humans are adaptable critters, and with other, perhaps specialized races, the point is even more valid. I agree that it all shouldn't be england-dense, but a large area inhabited only by a few thousand nomadic tribes seems to strike a balance.

My god that was a lot of talking. I hope it all makes sense.

Though humans and other races may be adaptable and living in such a region they may not have the resources to become a city-state/nation/civilization. They may just be nomads, or tribes of nomads living in the region. What kind of cultures are living inthis region would be up to the DM running a game in this setting, allowing them to add customized elements to the setting. If all of the regions are used by the members and there are no slow downs, there may not be any regions that are "unihabitable".



Now after reading this thread and a few posts in others, I have come to the conclusion I still do not want to make a decision... just kidding. I have looked over the posts though and read the pros and cons presented by the active (and some inactive) members. Going over them again and again (and not getting much work done, but that was mostly because our server went down. :) ). So without further ado, the scale will be  1 in = 150 mi with the Empire being the larger Empire (crossed the landbridge). With that [hopefully settled] I will be lifting the hold on region creation within the next few days. I will try to get a map up with MittenNinja's Compass and the scale.

EDIT: Ok, so I should read all the threads before I post.  x.

Anyway, I like the scale and the larger empire. :) Are you still considering cutting up some of the larger regions, or is that a moot point with the larger empire?

Your questions are answered here Discussion: Other Civilizations (http://thecbg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?31211)

I just found that. Okay, I'm going to go catch up on everything before I post anymore to avoid asking easily answered questions. >.<

Good job Poseidon.

Also, originally, I didn't post that those other tracts of land would be "uninhabitable"(that word came from someone else). I simply said that certain tracts of land would not be ruled over by anyone, meaning nomads can live there, barbarians, other people, etc.

Cheers!

Ooo, nomads are fun. I'm a huge fan of untamed tracks of land, where people don't have a centralized government.

If we wanted to, could we make a regionless culture - a traveling people that aren't bound to a particular geograph area?

@ Xathan: I say why not. I suppose you'd have to ask for permission to have them reside in lands created by others though (and by "reside in" I mean "have on their traveling routes").

@ Poseidon: Thanks for the decision! I suppose once you've finished the map the hold will be lifted? I can't wait to see what people will come up with now. :)

Túrin

Yes, I'm pretty excited about planning some areas as well.

*Is totally stoked*

Could someone do something with this blanket and these throw pillows please?

so much for being comfy.

Big scale it should be.  we got macro ideas and macro imagination...macro world.

(though now that i think about it...i want to create a small city this way....divy up guilds, businesses...(thieve's world, eat my dust).  that would ba a different thread.)

[spoiler=Map] (http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/1484/mastermap3vo5.png) [/spoiler]

MittenNinja, I'm going to have to have to get that compass rose from you at some point. I had to put something behind it so the letters would be visible. Can you make then a little stronger/thicker? Maybe bigger? It is still hard to see the letters.

Yea np. I'll send you a new file sometime tomorrow prolly. I won't have any time to work on it tonight.

Names! Okay now that we have the world set and regions starting to be formed I think we need some names for the geography of the land. Seas, major lakes, oceans, mountain ranges.

I have taken our map and added to it letters for the main things that I feel need named. I did not label bodies of water completely surrounded by one region.

I know I also missed some smaller ones, near T I think, but I thought we could those as one set.

Please feel free to make any changes or suggestions on what needs to be named.

 [spoiler] (http://img466.imageshack.us/img466/5973/mastermap3vo5rcopymr4.jpg) [/spoiler]

Edit, will try again to get map loaded.

i think the lake in region 23 should be eehrtaaz Lake.

For H we should combine the names of region 13,14,and 15 to make the name then add ocean to the end

... That could be a heck of a long name.

no not putting them one after another but using small parts that stand out such as mixing africa, asia, and europe: Eurafsia

Eurafasia? :P

that is europe, africa, and asia. its just an example.

By which point I think we should wait until we've got the example names before choosing.

I disagree with the idea of combining country names to name geographic features. Countries changes, features don't. Different cultures/nations may call something by a different name, but for this purpose we need some set names. I want to put a specific near the mountain range in one of my regions and I would like the name of the mountain range which spans a number of regions. Same thing with a lake that borders both of my regions and a third region.

Having those names will help me get further development done. And since they border multiple regions I believe it should be a joint effort.

I guess we can go with the rule that if no one else has taken regions that border whatever feature the person who does have a region can name it? If more then one person has regions along the feature they that group of people can name it?

Thoughts?

[blockquote=Ravenspath]I guess we can go with the rule that if no one else has taken regions that border whatever feature the person who does have a region can name it? If more then one person has regions along the feature they that group of people can name it?[/blockquote]

Depends on the languages spoken on the parts bordering the geographic feature.  If they both speak the same language, the odds are good it shares a name.  If not, the odds are actually better that there are 2 seperate name for that feature.  The Nile River, for example was known as Nil, in Arabic, Iteru in old egyptian, Piaro in the southern language.

Also, how long do the pointy-eared folk live?  they tend to name anything that isn't moving, and a lot of things that are.