C is yours. I'll export it for you and provide it in a short while. But could I ask you to do it in Imperial? While I am a metric person myself, all the other maps are in miles, so it would be more consistent.
Sorry, but D is already taken by Tonnichiwa. B, E and F are still available. (I know Barliman was thinking about B, but he didn't want to commit at this point, so it is technically available)
There are very likely dungeons and other ruins that could be elsewhere on my islands' map. The mountains particularly. Dwarf Hold needs to be done as well. The elf forest, well, I leave that up to whomever does it as to style.
Posted By: MonsenSorry, but D is already taken by Tonnichiwa. B, E and F are still available. (I know Barliman was thinking about B, but he didn't want to commit at this point, so it is technically available)
And I won't for the foreseeable future, so, "B" my guest.
Just a question on what styles we can use for the Continent mapping. I know Mike Schley and CC3 (?including CC3 Vector) are OK. What about SS1 (Fantasy A and and the CSUAC, and Bogie additions?
Herwin Wielink's style is also available. It was released as a free update to the core set so everyone gets it. I believe that you have to buy the SS1 separate.
Posted By: QuentenJust a question on what styles we can use for the Continent mapping. I know Mike Schley and CC3 (?including CC3 Vector) are OK. What about SS1 (Fantasy A and and the CSUAC, and Bogie additions?
For the Continent Maps we agreed that they should be openable by anyone with CC3+ without any add-ons at all. So only stock CC3+ styles for those (CC3 Standard overland, Mike Schley overland, Herwin Wielink, Overland Hex, Overland Vector BW, Overland Vector Color and CCPro Overland). Mixing elements from those styles are fine though, you don't need to stick to one of them.
This will only be for the continent maps though, later detail maps will allow all add-ons, including the community ones.
Posted By: MonsenBut could I ask you to do it in Imperial? While I am a metric person myself, all the other maps are in miles, so it would be more consistent.
If you insist, I'll do it in non standard units, but I wonder about the consistency argument. Maps will be done in different styles, on different scales, some will be very realistic, some more abstract, some will look like a top view, some like a rendition from someone who lives in this world, with his own culture, his own biases, his own units.
I hope to see several maps of the same regions, and I hope that they will not match. Because of ignorance or mistakes made by the in-world mappers, because of the accuracy of the measure systems, because of patriotic biases, because of the desire to trick people, of raise founding for some expedition. As they say, the map is not the territory.
If you look on our own good Earth, early maps are really not consistent with each others, the land shapes are totally different, the representation systems too. I hope we will be able to have the same wealth with this project.
One final argument, before I stop arguing and start mapping: One of the goals of this project is to allow external people to reuse the maps for their own purposes. Why imposing on 95% of the world population a measurement system they are totally unfamiliar with? This is creating a barrier to adoption of those maps. I don't want to impose any system to people using any other system, but I know that if I stumbled on such a project, and I wanted to select one of the maps to re-use for my own purposes, the unit system used in the map would be one important element I would use for my choice.
No, I don't. It was just a question, but I won't enforce anything in this regard.
My reasoning behind the consistency argument is when using multiple maps from the atlas, which I do hope some people will do. If all maps follow the same units, the measurement tools in CC3+ will also give consistent results when measuring the same things on both a regional and local map for example (like the length of a road). While people will make maps in a variety of different styles, they should still keep to the correct scale. If an island is 5 miles/8 km wide on a regional map, the detail map of the island should still depict a 5-mile/8 km island. If the maps use different scales, the CC3+ measurement tool would then give different results (Of course, results are still correct, you just need to convert one of them to the others scale)
Posted By: GatharI hope to see several maps of the same regions, and I hope that they will not match
Initially at least, the goal is to map as much of the world as possible, not provide alternate maps for the same region (Edit: This is obviously only partially true, since we will be making detail maps from areas on other maps, but not several maps of the same are at the same rough map level). There will definitely be maps of wildly different styles for two neighboring regions for example though, but people will be mapping new regions for each map.
Posted By: GatharIf you look on our own good Earth, early maps are really not consistent with each others, the land shapes are totally different, the representation systems too. I hope we will be able to have the same wealth with this project.
Some mismatch between the maps will always happen, but I do hope to have a certain degree of consistency, so that people who use a regional map in a game can also "trust" the local maps of the areas from that local map, and vice versa. This project is not just about creating a bunch of maps, but creating a bunch of maps that make up a connected and believable fantasy world. In my opinion, these maps are the authoritative maps of the world, not the error-prone maps of early explores. However, these are fantasy, and mostly symbol-based maps in a variety of styles, so we are not looking at the accuracy or consistency of modern maps either, just a rough general consistency of features.
I've attached the FT Export in Imperial units. Simply rescale the entire map by 1.60934 using non-visual scale to get it in km. Have fun mapping.
Posted By: QuentenThanks for your work as coordinator. Glad to see my Map up there. Would have liked my Map culture notes to be included, even as a download.
Since I love to tinker, I've now added buttons for downloading individual .fcw files and map notes from the online map browser. I still generally recommend people downloading the full atlas though (Obviously, the full atlas doesn't contain very many maps yet, but in time it will)
My thoughts is still that the main access to everything will be through the use of the full atlas, and not through the online map browser (although I am quite pleased with how it turned out, and how easy it is for me to add new maps to it)
I love all the styles of the maps. For me it represents all the determined explorers slowly making their way through dense jungles, blistering deserts, frozen wastes and exotic foreign lands.
Whether using standard or metric for measuring, I do believe that it would be best to maintain scale and the general shape of the lands.
Actually, I did the export for him. Don't remember what projection I used (although the Azimuthal one should be a good one), but I did spend some time measuring in FT both horizontal and vertical to distort it back to the proper shape. It fortunately isn't as big as your first continent, which means it doesn't have quite the same variation of distortion over the size of the landmass. I did go with the approach we talked about earlier, trying to get it "reasonably well" without obsessing over perfection.
Quenten just accepted what Monsen gave me (both G and F). However, it seems that Monsen changed the map of F to take into account the distortion at the polar ends. You can see the shape of F is different to the shape on the world map.
As I have been reminded, perhaps it is time to decide on a name for our world.
Please provide your suggestions for world names here, and in a few days, I can put out a poll to allow us to vote on them.
So far the following has been suggested: LoopySue: "Seesi 3", "Profantasia" Shessar: "Profantia", "Choralia"/"Choralus" (A Chorale is a song sung by many voices. This is a world drawn by many hands.) Wyvern: "Communia"
Suggested names could either be pure fantasy names, or names with a meaning or play on the atlas project itself like some of the above. The vote will show what kind of name the majority prefer.
I'll recommend that people don't submit more than one or two choices. Basically, pick the name you like best and suggest that, not all the good names you can think of. The reasoning behind this is that too many options serves to water down the vote list and reduce the chance that the one you like best get picked. We can all come up with a hundred fantasy names, but having more vote options than people voting isn't really helpful.
Posted By: Quentenassuming the Elves were the first race on the planet.
Interesting. You just reminded me that there are a ton of different assumptions when it come to world name (Every race/culture/continent combination would have their own name for the planet - of course, this really goes for any other names as well). So, just to clarify, I think we should find one name we think is good, without any assumptions or regard for who might be using this name. This is not to discourage people posting the etymology of their chosen suggestion, because that is quite interesting, but more to clarify so this doesn't end up in a discussion on which culture named the planet.
Comments
However, I don't have FT, so if someone could export it to me (in a metric template, please), I'd be very grateful.
Thank you!
But could I ask you to do it in Imperial? While I am a metric person myself, all the other maps are in miles, so it would be more consistent.
This will only be for the continent maps though, later detail maps will allow all add-ons, including the community ones.
I hope to see several maps of the same regions, and I hope that they will not match. Because of ignorance or mistakes made by the in-world mappers, because of the accuracy of the measure systems, because of patriotic biases, because of the desire to trick people, of raise founding for some expedition. As they say, the map is not the territory.
If you look on our own good Earth, early maps are really not consistent with each others, the land shapes are totally different, the representation systems too. I hope we will be able to have the same wealth with this project.
One final argument, before I stop arguing and start mapping: One of the goals of this project is to allow external people to reuse the maps for their own purposes. Why imposing on 95% of the world population a measurement system they are totally unfamiliar with? This is creating a barrier to adoption of those maps. I don't want to impose any system to people using any other system, but I know that if I stumbled on such a project, and I wanted to select one of the maps to re-use for my own purposes, the unit system used in the map would be one important element I would use for my choice.
BTW I do not have FT, is that a problem?
Cheers
My reasoning behind the consistency argument is when using multiple maps from the atlas, which I do hope some people will do. If all maps follow the same units, the measurement tools in CC3+ will also give consistent results when measuring the same things on both a regional and local map for example (like the length of a road). While people will make maps in a variety of different styles, they should still keep to the correct scale. If an island is 5 miles/8 km wide on a regional map, the detail map of the island should still depict a 5-mile/8 km island. If the maps use different scales, the CC3+ measurement tool would then give different results (Of course, results are still correct, you just need to convert one of them to the others scale)
Initially at least, the goal is to map as much of the world as possible, not provide alternate maps for the same region (Edit: This is obviously only partially true, since we will be making detail maps from areas on other maps, but not several maps of the same are at the same rough map level). There will definitely be maps of wildly different styles for two neighboring regions for example though, but people will be mapping new regions for each map. Some mismatch between the maps will always happen, but I do hope to have a certain degree of consistency, so that people who use a regional map in a game can also "trust" the local maps of the areas from that local map, and vice versa. This project is not just about creating a bunch of maps, but creating a bunch of maps that make up a connected and believable fantasy world. In my opinion, these maps are the authoritative maps of the world, not the error-prone maps of early explores. However, these are fantasy, and mostly symbol-based maps in a variety of styles, so we are not looking at the accuracy or consistency of modern maps either, just a rough general consistency of features.
I've attached the FT Export in Imperial units. Simply rescale the entire map by 1.60934 using non-visual scale to get it in km. Have fun mapping.
No worries. I'll prepare a CC3+ export for you.
Remember the scale, it may look like a nice little Island, but it is actually a fair bit larger then the entirety of Europe in land area.
My thoughts is still that the main access to everything will be through the use of the full atlas, and not through the online map browser (although I am quite pleased with how it turned out, and how easy it is for me to add new maps to it)
Whether using standard or metric for measuring, I do believe that it would be best to maintain scale and the general shape of the lands.
I was entertaining the thought of doing it myself, but I haven't had the time yet, so I am happy to see someone pick it up.
You know all about map projections, so you know how to deal with the rather severe distortion of a landmass that far south.
Please provide your suggestions for world names here, and in a few days, I can put out a poll to allow us to vote on them.
So far the following has been suggested:
LoopySue: "Seesi 3", "Profantasia"
Shessar: "Profantia", "Choralia"/"Choralus" (A Chorale is a song sung by many voices. This is a world drawn by many hands.)
Wyvern: "Communia"
Suggested names could either be pure fantasy names, or names with a meaning or play on the atlas project itself like some of the above. The vote will show what kind of name the majority prefer.
I'll recommend that people don't submit more than one or two choices. Basically, pick the name you like best and suggest that, not all the good names you can think of. The reasoning behind this is that too many options serves to water down the vote list and reduce the chance that the one you like best get picked. We can all come up with a hundred fantasy names, but having more vote options than people voting isn't really helpful.
This is not to discourage people posting the etymology of their chosen suggestion, because that is quite interesting, but more to clarify so this doesn't end up in a discussion on which culture named the planet.