Author Topic: A proposal to change the map grid system  (Read 1221 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SupremeKommandant

  • Basically New Zealand
  • **
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: New Derusmia
A proposal to change the map grid system
« on: February 17, 2019, 04:05:15 AM »
I would like to propose a change to the current ‘Six plots each nation’ system. To replace this system, is a somewhat similar one.

The way it works is every 10 million population in RP is equal to a plot on the map (the number of population per plot is subject to change.) I have made a list of pros and cons.

Pros:

More realistic RP map

Cons:

Map will have to be expanded and overhauled
System is subject to abuse

Feel free to reply with your pros and cons, and your opinions.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2019, 06:20:28 AM by Franfish McGee »

Offline Tamora

  • Global Superpower
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,013
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: Tamora and Elania
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2019, 08:10:14 AM »
I am not necessary sure the proposal adds to realism. I mean the population of Canada and Australia combined is about the same as the UK's despite having huge areas. So is Japan and Russia. Your proposed system favors the idea that the larger the area, the larger the population. So I'm not really convinced about the benefits. I agree with the cons though. It's a lot of work to shape the map and could potentially affect established RPs. While most player will have an incentive to claim larger population in order to claim a larger area on the map.

I don't want to hijack the thread but I think that if we are going to make some changes to the current map then just adding more islands is the way to go. They seem popular among players.
Also, I would maybe change the limit for the first/main nation to 6+2 or 4+2 which means that while initially you can have only 6 or 4 provinces and though RP you can add two more to your country. That would incentives players to RP expansion.

Offline DaveIronside

  • Roleplay Magistrate
  • Global Superpower
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,878
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: East Moreland / Royal Seleucid
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2019, 09:11:41 AM »
The maps several years old and has contained a lot of lore. I think any radical change to it Will be impossible as it effects that history. As for expansion it's something to consider however the issue I've seen with other regions that do it is the RP of it is awfu and requires RP with a fixed outcome. I do like the idea of maybe more islands.

Offline Norgeras

  • Regional Power
  • ***
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: Neu Uburzis
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2019, 09:26:59 AM »
if i recall right, the biggest overhaul we really need is adding more oceans and more define north and south pole areas ;)

I did a little roundup a while ago and from a landmass standpoint we have about the right amount for earth, but way to little ocean. So adding Oceans and some more Islands and fixing the North and Southpole areas from the ugly blobs we have (No dave, not removing, just defining them a little better :P) should do the Trick imo.

Leave the Landmasses in place, add more oceans and some islands.



PS: Only thing i think we might bit by bit adjust is the Plotsize in Aranya. Ardia follows the small to big system, while ardia has a ton of tiny plots right in the middle, making it very unattractive.

Offline Achkaerin

  • Lord Chief Justice
  • Global Superpower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,948
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: the Holy Empire of Achkaerin
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2019, 12:00:38 PM »
1) "every 10 million population in RP is equal to a plot on the map"

Absolutely not. It creates a huge number of potential problems and carries with it the possibility of becoming the foundation for how RP is driven, rather than it being our story writing it would simply come down to stats. To even implement such a proposal would require a map reset to avoid prejudicing against players whose nations are already on the map but that's not the biggest issue with it. At present Achkaerin for example has 73 million people so would be entitled to seven map plots, which as it's only one more than I'm presently allowed isn't too much of an issue however a nation such as East Moreland which has a population of approximately 100 million would be able to claim up to ten plots and the six it presently inhabits are surrounded so assuming it was surrounded by active nations where are the other four territories coming from without disrupting established RP history?

Another way of looking at it further to the point above is that when I joined this region almost five years ago Achkaerin had an initial population of 280 million people (still on the small side for the time), the downsize to 73 million came with the map expansion. Now with a population of 280 million a nation would under the quoted proposal be able to claim 28 plots - Alba Karinya is 27 plots so under the proposed system that old Achkaerin could essentially occupy the entirety of that continent. You then also have to bear in mind the population cap of 500 million means that nations could in theory have up to 50 plots which in turn makes a 700 territory map look incredibly small. The big concern would be that any such system like that would skew the RP in favour of very large nations and essentially set us back to where we were five years ago before great strides were made on the realism front.

2) More islands

Doable but I'd caution against too many - it's very difficult to RP interactions if you've just got a bunch of islands, though TUNA may be the exception to this. The only issue would be placement because we'd have to consider not affecting the history of RP so we'd be looking probably at those going towards the map corners, the GNO and the Karifan.

3) Plot Size

The same principle governs every continent, small territories on the coast with larger territories further inland it has always been that way obviously the larger the continent the harder this is to do. It looks more obvious on Aranye because when the map was last expanded it was the continent that had the most work done to it as it was expanded both to the east and the north by a great amount. By comparison Alba Karinya had no work done to it while Albion and Ardia were both expanded to the south with Ardia also being expanded to the west. In terms of plots in the middle of Aranye those pre-date my being the cartographer.

4) Expanding

Map as a whole bit of an issue - we have a lot of IC organisations that are dependent upon geographic position to expand the map as a whole outwards to create more ocean space may require adjusting the position of continents, thinking mainly of Ardia and Albion here because of TUNA.

Expansion as per what Tamora said, worth considering but actually RPing the expansion would have the issue of an RP with a predetermined outcome and I can't think of more than a handful of ways such an RP could be set so it would carry the repetitive concern, RP is far more interesting when you don't know how it's going to end.

My major issue with the map comes in the form of orphan territory i.e. territory between two nations (usually a single plot) that no one's going to claim, on the present an example would be W92 - the example isn't much of a concern given that the two nations it's sandwiched between are inactive and therefore in the removal cycle. However if we had a situation where we had two active nations sandwiching a smaller piece of territory in this way then that is something to be concerned about.


Offline Tamora

  • Global Superpower
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,013
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: Tamora and Elania
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2019, 12:50:36 PM »
In regards to orphan territory, maybe we could allow the players sandwiching the territory more control over it? While no player can annex it, the two players neighboring it could be allow to define the culture, background etc and RP in it as contested territory or something else. It would be a third entity, defined by the two players and anything done to it should have the consent of both. 

Offline Major Jaws

  • World Power
  • ****
  • Posts: 563
  • Hallo, Ich bin eine Filipino.
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: Quintelia, Socram and Sarandib
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2019, 12:55:46 PM »
1. 10 million population = one plot

This is highly unrealistic looking at our own map and our real world. Look at Bangladesh, way smaller than California but it has more than twice the population; and look at the Philippines, way smaller than the Democratic Republic of Congo, but has 20 million more people. Plus, us people with 100 million plus people in their country would have to claim a lot of plots, giving our map moderator a lot of work..

2. Islands

Dafuq you say it's difficult to rp islands? I personally think more islands is better, looking at the scarcity of such natural structures in our map. Look at the real world, you got island nations like Japan, Philippines, and Indonesia having a fairly high nominal GDP (not per capita), while nations like Madagascar, Caribbean nations, and Pacific nations that have low nominal GDP but would be fairly interesting to rp. The only active nations that I see claiming islands are Biseam, Paracambi, Lodjia, Xaeth, Bakermayya, and Socram. As for the history, come on guys, if we can make a panda love story, then we can probably make a decent timeline on these with minimal retconning.

3. Plot Size.

Plot sizes of Albion, Ardia, and AK seems alright. Aranye on the other hand needs to have less inland.

4. Expansion

I don't agree with Tamora's suggestion. Just like what Achkaerin said, having an rp with a pre-determined outcome would make the rp itself feel fake; like watching Infinity War but knowing who will be snapped (or the fact that Thanos succeeds in snapping, trust me, the experience of a movie being spoiled to you is crap). I also think that players should only have a maximum of 9 plots to play with (even though I'm playing with 15 plots) as to give chance to newcomers and to those wanting to have a decent secondary nation.

5. My Suggestions

Expand the ocean between Albion and Ardia on both sides. How do you expect typhoons/hurricanes, a relatively common thing to occur in coastal tropical areas, to take shape in those small ass bodies of water. Also, don't you think that the tip of Albion is too close to the Hygelac?

PS I agree on what Tamora said on the sandwiched territories

Offline Norgeras

  • Regional Power
  • ***
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: Neu Uburzis
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2019, 04:48:05 PM »
Considering Orphan Territory

Quote
(10) The cartographer may reject a map claim if:
(a) A member does not, at the time of the map update, fulfil the requirements;
(b) It ‘double parks’, meaning that it fills a position that makes it difficult for other members to reasonable claim around it;
(c) The claimed territories are unreasonably separated so as to be unrealistic to form a single state;
It violates the roleplay rules; or
(d) It coincides with portions of the map already occupied.


Note point 10 b) i'd say the sandwich is already covered here. You do have the power to Reject claims in this Case Achk.




Quote
3) Plot Size

The same principle governs every continent, small territories on the coast with larger territories further inland it has always been that way obviously the larger the continent the harder this is to do. It looks more obvious on Aranye because when the map was last expanded it was the continent that had the most work done to it as it was expanded both to the east and the north by a great amount. By comparison Alba Karinya had no work done to it while Albion and Ardia were both expanded to the south with Ardia also being expanded to the west. In terms of plots in the middle of Aranye those pre-date my being the cartographer.


Which means you'd agree with my point that this Area is in desperate need of a clean up.


Quote
Map as a whole bit of an issue - we have a lot of IC organisations that are dependent upon geographic position to expand the map as a whole outwards to create more ocean space may require adjusting the position of continents, thinking mainly of Ardia and Albion here because of TUNA.


Have to disagree, the only Nation really affected is Bakkermaya and even then they have space around the globe as it is. I also Disagree that the continents - aside from the Poles - need adjustment to where they are in perspective to each other. I do not see any reason we have to move them if we give a little more space left and right.




Over all: the Map needs to be functional, not hyper realistic. I understand that. But i do think a map that /feels/ more realistic would help. The Map is our to-go when it comes to first Impression.


Also:

Should we maybe start adding the Map to our Region factbook? Seems like a good place to glue it and make it look less Dreadfull.

Offline Rhodes

  • Noble
  • Regional Power
  • ***
  • Posts: 294
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: Seaforth
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2019, 05:46:13 PM »
I agree the 10 million per plot wont work and will encourage pop cap nations.

I would support the addition of sensible small islands. I would also support a +1 or +2 plot cap increase subject to good RP and approval by a reactivated RP council. The idea behind that would be to do your RP with the understanding that the result is not pre determined and the RP council will vote a yeah/nay in whether you sucessfully annex or whatever the plot in question. Expansion of a plot should also take minimum 6 months Real Time.

Offline SupremeKommandant

  • Basically New Zealand
  • **
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: New Derusmia
Re: A proposal to change the map grid system
« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2019, 08:33:38 PM »
I can agree with all of you that the system I proposed actually might not be realistic because of population density, but maybe we could still change the map a bit? Maybe make some inland plots bigger in Aranye(?) like in Ardia, and adding a +2 plot cap. Also, the orphan territory idea seems interesting.