I found that, but Its use is really kind of limited since I used counties of norway rather than regions for the territories on my map. I suppose I may be able to kind of get a rough idea from it, but it's not something I'm really looking forward to.

By the way, here's the new version I'm workign on with GDP:

https://www.warlight.net/Play?PreviewMap=53200

About Naminig territories, name Constanta -> Bucharest , and Bucharest->Cluj Napoca (cause the position of Bucharest territory is a bit odd .

Is this a continuation of your previous attempt of Belgian Gentleman's SVG?

The only way I could think of balancing China and India is to cap the income per territory at 15, although you still might have to mix in GDP and military.

No, I'm redrawing mine completely from scratch. I was partially inspired from Belgian Gentlemans map, but other than that it's a completely original work as far as me drawing the SVG.

I'm currently working on doing it based only on GDP rather than population using a 9-tiered system of bonus values. I posted the link above so you can take a look, but I have only done the UK, Ireland, Belgium, and the netherlands so far.

Desertfox, I'm planning to completely redo romania, so let me know what you think after I do that tonight :)

Omega said:

The only way I could think of balancing China and India is to cap the income per territory at 15, although you still might have to mix in GDP and military.

---

There are several other options:

1) You can decline to create a single national bonus for China OR India... not ideal.

2) You can still take into account land area, uninhabited land, sea access, coastal zones, etc.

3) You can create bonuses for other militaries: Nato / EU, the African Union, as examples, that don't represent true nations, but would form a counterweight to the bigger military nations...

4) You can use real world / artificial barriers for nations with huge bonuses:
the Artic Ocean limits Russia and Canada in the real world, as do the Himalayan Mountains for China, India, and others.

5) You could ignore the real world treaty saying that Antarctica will only be used for small scale scientific research, and instead give portions of it to each of the Southern Continents.

As for the map bonuses in general:

You could base the bonuses off of military, or GDP, or population, or military resources, or the amount of milk chocolate that they produce in a year...

but the thing about war in the real world is that it exposes the weaknesses and the strengths of the nations involved, as well as the accuracy of those measurements,
both for the nation in question as well as it's adversaries...

I doubt that can north korea feed it's people long enough to conquer much beyond south korea...

can india and china feed their people through a war without the risks of a significant drought? let alone with their immediate neighbor of comparable muscle?

Personally, I think that bonuses should focus on playability...

Perhaps extra distribution modes could help somehow? :)

Edited 2/14/2016 14:38:24

I suggest you do the bonus names as the English exonym, and the territory name as the autonym.

Poland still looks terrible, especially the middle territory. At least make the shapes a bit more regular, really. No need for administrative correctness, just make them look aesthetically, please.

Poland looks fine to me.

I suggest you do the bonus names as the English exonym, and the territory name as the autonym.

Pretty sure the word you're looking for is Endonym, not autonym...

I can probably do this, but It may be a bit troublesome for places that don't use Latin-based alphabets. I'd have to look into it more later, but that's the first thought that comes to mind.

Poland still looks terrible, especially the middle territory. At least make the shapes a bit more regular, really. No need for administrative correctness, just make them look aesthetically, please.

The reason I pretty much need to use administrative divisions is to be able to collect statistics and use them as Bonus values. It's pretty hard to find the GDP of "This random spot I drew in the center of Poland".

Edited 2/14/2016 14:50:21

I know what you mean and see your point, but please, please make them better-looking. They're really awful currently.

This maps look really cool, but for the specific Bonus i would argue that the most fair thing should be nominal GDP...
i already look forward in using it in some scenarios

I know what you mean and see your point, but please, please make them better-looking. They're really awful currently.

Silesia and Pomerania are too important in (german) history and are very different from the rest of Poland, culturally and geographically, in pretty much every period of world history that is not post-WW2.

One territory OCD is fine in exchange for lovely accuracy.

I suggest you do the bonus names as the English exonym, and the territory name as the autonym.

That could be interesting Juq, but non-latin alphabet regions would be annoying as hell.

oh, and Imperator, thanks for your efforts... and your results!

It makes the game so much better to have sooo many nice maps,
but I really appreciate the efforts of map makers like yourself too. :)

As far as the irregular boundaries...
I like the accuracy of them, I really do,
but in a game, smooth edges make it more easily playable. :)

Edited 2/14/2016 15:27:41

Bonuses who are in relationship with GDP would be best.
Small countries with high GDP will be overpowered, but that will only make for better and more realistic gameplay.

Pretty sure the word you're looking for is Endonym, not autonym...

Both words mean the same.

I can probably do this, but It may be a bit troublesome for places that don't use Latin-based alphabets. I'd have to look into it more later, but that's the first thought that comes to mind.

That could be interesting Juq, but non-latin alphabet regions would be annoying as hell.

A transliteration for the non-Latin alphabet sites. But Cologne really bothers me for example - it's Köln, not some Colog.

Both words mean the same.

It is my understanding that "Autonym" refers to a persons real name, as opposed to a psuedonym, while an Endonym refers to the name a group of people give to themselves or their homeland, as opposed to an Exonym; The name outsiders give to said group of people or their homeland.

They are similar, but not exactly the same, and Endonym is more proper in this case.

A transliteration for the non-Latin alphabet sites. But Cologne really bothers me for example - it's Köln, not some Colog.

I can transliterate stuff, but IMO it's subomptimal. Most people on wl, including myself, speak english and are familiar with english names.

Most Transliteration, Especially from arabic, but also to a lesser extent from cyrillic and hebrew, return names that are pretty unrecognizable to any native english speaker. Just some examples:

Москва́ = Moskvá (Moscow)
دمشق = dmshq (Damascus)
القاهرة = alqahrة (Cairo)
תל אביב-יפו = tl abib-ifv(Tel Aviv)
القُدس = alqُds(Jerusalem)
יְרוּשָׁלַיִם = iְrvּshָׁlַiִms(Jerusalem Again)

And then there are the ones where they transliterate literally into the english names everyone knows, and then I just wasted some time transliterating it.

Астана - Astana
Улаанбаатар - Ulaanbaatar

Edited 2/14/2016 17:23:08

Luxor is the largest city in the region, which is what all the territories on the map are named after. For example, London doesn't make up very much of the land area of the southern portion of england named london, but it is the most populous city in that portion.

The case with Luxor is doubly confusing since there is also a region of egypt called luxor, which is also named after the city. The territory on my map is named after the city however, not the region.

I think using a ranking system for GDP/Population could have promise. You could use any metric really. For instance, without looking at localities, the top 10 GDP's in the world make 12 apt, 10-20 make, 10, or something. That way, there isn't as bad a disparity between Togo and the USA. For localities, just make the ranges larger

I just finished redoing the values based on nominal GDP and it only took around 5 days lol. I've already completely redone the bonus values for the map 3 times and each cost me a whole bunch of time, so I doubt I'll be doing that again anytime soon.

Like I said though, I'm finally back to development after all that time doing bonus values, and I'm expecting the map to have around 1000-1700 territories when I finish, which is really exciting imo. I'm working on integrating some of the changes zephyrum and ox suggested, although I only have redone romania and poland so far. They both gave me long, long lists, and I'll try to do all of them, although some are a bit unrealistic.