Extreme Global Warming [Quenched]

haoala · Post by **haoala** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:32 am

logically, Antarctica shouldnt even exists since it was the melting of it that contributed to the rising of sealevels. But of course this map would be unthinkable of without antarctica, so i guess theres no choice, but perhaps you could make just little islands in place of the large territories there are now.

just a suggestion

pepperonibread · Post by **pepperonibread** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:21 am

haoala wrote:logically, Antarctica shouldnt even exists since it was the melting of it that contributed to the rising of sealevels. But of course this map would be unthinkable of without antarctica, so i guess theres no choice, but perhaps you could make just little islands in place of the large territories there are now.

just a suggestion

That already was covered a few pages back.
Pretty much, Antarctica is a landmass, so it wouldn't disappear, but the ice on top of it would melt, yielding something like my first update.

MonkeyCrazy12321 · Post by **MonkeyCrazy12321** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:10 am

I think it will draw a lot of awareness to global warming plus it looks as if it will be a really fun map! plz get this map up and running asap.

haoala · Post by **haoala** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:13 am

o sorry i thought it was made entirely out of ice! <blushes> haha just shows how ignorant i am. but is it a whole landmass covered by ice? or a few little bits here and there connected by ice

pepperonibread · Post by **pepperonibread** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:10 pm

Antarctica would basically look like that without its ice.
If you look at an elevation map, Antarctica would look like a big plateau because of all the ice.

RobinJ · Post by **RobinJ** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:42 pm

pepperonibread wrote:It... died.

What? It's still there on the first page...

However, I've just realised that you've also blurred some of the writing, which has made some bits more difficult to read. How about you change the text colour, the text size or make it more defined?

pepperonibread · Post by **pepperonibread** » Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:18 pm

RobinJ wrote:
pepperonibread wrote:It... died.
What? It's still there on the first page...

However, I've just realised that you've also blurred some of the writing, which has made some bits more difficult to read. How about you change the text colour, the text size or make it more defined?

Nah, the OTHER death zone.
Just look at the beginning of pg. 6.

haoala · Post by **haoala** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 3:14 am

i think all the bonuses in this map are perfect, only for africa.
I know its really hard to get, but once you do get it, you only have to defend 3 areas.
i feel that africa should have less bonus instead of 7.

pepperonibread · Post by **pepperonibread** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:07 am

haoala wrote:i think all the bonuses in this map are perfect, only for africa.
I know its really hard to get, but once you do get it, you only have to defend 3 areas.
i feel that africa should have less bonus instead of 7.

Yeah, I agree. The update, which should come out today or tommorrow, will use Samus's bonuses on pg. 7.

Shacekenhall · Post by **Shacekenhall** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 2:48 pm

Hi this map looks cool,

When it'll be ready

Greetings

Shace

Greycloak · Post by **Greycloak** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:49 pm

As an aside, from a geological point of view it's kind of arbitrary that you chose to show the current coastline rather than the actual continental margins.
I guess it makes a better story to show a bunch of land that is currently above sea level under water but the reality is that 25 million square kilometers have flooded already since the end of the last ice age when the oceans rose 100m to their current levels...
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Elevation.jpg
Basically, anything in light blue has already been flooded by presumably non-anthropogenic climate change.
Nice map though but I dispute the idea that the tropics will be uninhabitable even if average temperatures soar by 5 or 10 degrees. I think people are stubborn and resourceful enough to work around that.

~Grey

pepperonibread · Post by **pepperonibread** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:25 am

That's the map I used as the basis for the continents.
Are you sure that the light blue isn't just the continental shelves?
Or is that what you meant?
Anyway, the Uninhabitable Zone is there because this is extreme global warming (the seas wouldn't have risen 300 m in real life).

Greycloak · Post by **Greycloak** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 11:40 pm

The "continental shelves" mark a sharp slope break where continental crust (on average made of the same stuff as granite (quartz and feldspars)) slopes quickly down to the oceanic crust (mostly made of the same stuff as basalt (pyroxene, olivine and plagioclase)).

The point I was trying to make is when sea levels were much much lower at the end of the last ice age, the shelf margins (the light blue from that link) were the shorelines and the fact that shorelines are always in flux - moving in response to climate (somewhat); isostatic rebound as the crust gains elevation slowly after the weight of melted glaciers is removed; tectonic flexing of the continental crust, and changes in continent spreading rates (which makes for larger or smaller mid-ocean ridges, depending on how fast the spreading is occurring).

It is the folly of man to expect that the shorelines should remain static when in geologic history, they have been much (100's of metres) higher than they are now and much lower (at the end of the last ice age).

As for the uninhabitable zone comment, I was challenging the premise that any latitudinally defined zones would be uninhabitable as a result of global warming, especially given that the tropics see the least effects of that warming, compared to the polar/sub polar zones. On our modern map, one could designate a true uninhabitable zone at greater than about 60-70 degrees latitude...

~Grey

1st chair flute · Post by **1st chair flute** » Tue May 01, 2007 3:15 pm

Wade.
WHERE IS THE NEW MAP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it would be an eaiser refrence to all of us if we had a new map to gripe and quibble,(hey!, a spelling word!) at.

RobinJ · Post by **RobinJ** » Tue May 01, 2007 5:24 pm

Everyone say thanks - just got the problem fixed

pepperonibread · Post by **pepperonibread** » Tue May 01, 2007 6:37 pm

pepperonibread wrote:Yeah, I agree. The update, which should come out today or tommorrow, will use Samus's bonuses on pg. 7.

I guess I'm a liar.
The map didn't come out today or tommorrow.

aceage · Post by **aceage** » Tue May 01, 2007 8:01 pm

Greenland needs to be drastically smaller. WHen global warming happens greenland will lose all of its ice.

jnd94 · Post by **jnd94** » Tue May 01, 2007 8:56 pm

also, should antarctica even be there? maybe a little chunck, but global warming will take out most of it, and what you have is still a lot more than it should be. same with the norhtern islands near greenalnd. maybe they shouldnt be there?

plysprtz · Post by **plysprtz** » Tue May 01, 2007 10:43 pm

jnd94 wrote:also, should antarctica even be there? maybe a little chunck, but global warming will take out most of it, and what you have is still a lot more than it should be. same with the norhtern islands near greenalnd. maybe they shouldnt be there?

REALLY???

i dont think that this should be based *AS MUCH* of a geological theory but more of a creative design if you take out antarctica some islands here and thee.. then WHATS LEFT? i think its perfect anyone else agree

Coleman · Post by **Coleman** » Tue May 01, 2007 11:31 pm

You're going to hate me, but chances are good that Keyogi, Andy, or both will beat you up over this on the same level as he who must not be named was:

Some of the army circles have to move. <- PERIOD
And some of the territory names need to be made more visible somehow, I don't care how you do it.

To help (and to torture) I am listing every single thing that is blatantly graphically frustrating to look at.

Circles
Western United States needs to move up a couple (or few) pixels.
Brazil could be down one pixel.
Argentina probably should be a bit more west.
Western Europe needs to be right one pixel.
Eastern Europe is tolerable where it is but I'm sure there is somewhere better.
African Peninsula needs to nudge right one or two.
Angola needs to be up and right one.
Far East needs to be up one.
Incana down.
Maudmark down.
Wilkesmark up.

Names
I could list each one individually, but essentially every name that is on or touching a border is hard to read. They all need to move or change colors slightly, or something.

Both
Victoria's name and army circle could both be moved to be inside that territory and not over the edge and in the ocean.

Sorry for being overly critical, but the map won't look like final forge material to the mods until these slight graphical issues are ironed out.

pepperonibread · Post by **pepperonibread** » Wed May 02, 2007 6:37 am

Coleman wrote:You're going to hate me, but chances are good that Keyogi, Andy, or both will beat you up over this on the same level as he who must not be named was:

Some of the army circles have to move. <- PERIOD
And some of the territory names need to be made more visible somehow, I don't care how you do it.

To help (and to torture) I am listing every single thing that is blatantly graphically frustrating to look at.

Circles
Western United States needs to move up a couple (or few) pixels.
Brazil could be down one pixel.
Argentina probably should be a bit more west.
Western Europe needs to be right one pixel.
Eastern Europe is tolerable where it is but I'm sure there is somewhere better.
African Peninsula needs to nudge right one or two.
Angola needs to be up and right one.
Far East needs to be up one.
Incana down.
Maudmark down.
Wilkesmark up.

Names
I could list each one individually, but essentially every name that is on or touching a border is hard to read. They all need to move or change colors slightly, or something.

Both
Victoria's name and army circle could both be moved to be inside that territory and not over the edge and in the ocean.

Sorry for being overly critical, but the map won't look like final forge material to the mods until these slight graphical issues are ironed out.

Thanks for all the feedback. Most of that should be in the next update (after this one).

Anyway, here's the new update:

New Stuff:
-Made Uninhabitable Zone lighter
-Asia a little lighter and South America a lot lighter
-Submerged areas less visible
-Revamped legend
-Changed bonuses to the suggestions Samus posted a while back
-I think I got everything

P.S.: The jpeg isn't as high quality as I intended it to be, I'll change that and edit this post tonight with the higher quality image.

Edit - The jpeg is now higher quality.

RobinJ · Post by **RobinJ** » Wed May 02, 2007 7:26 am

Looks

- love the legend

wrightfan123 · Post by **wrightfan123** » Wed May 02, 2007 2:48 pm

All hail Wade. All hail Wade.

1st chair flute · Post by **1st chair flute** » Wed May 02, 2007 2:57 pm

personally i think europe has to few territories... it has like 4 may want to up that a little

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Wed May 02, 2007 4:35 pm

I vote for the "Make the submerged areas a darker blue than what they are now" option.

Extreme Global Warming [Quenched]

It's a...

I like this map