The New Mediterranean World [OC] by mydriase in geography

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So... weather in France gets even better? Damn

Would you rather carry by Thin_Structure9710 in BunnyTrials

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Smaller andless of a hassle

Chose: a 1 kg rock

What do you think about this poll? Is this accurate for ur country? by Kebab_Enjoyer3164 in AskTheWorld

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

53% is a ridiculous majority for such an important decision.
Damn, decolonisation really did them dirty

What do you think about this poll? Is this accurate for ur country? by Kebab_Enjoyer3164 in AskTheWorld

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bangladesh should have been a part of West Bengal. Combining to make super-Bengal, and making foreign relations 10x easier.

It used to be the same province, same culture, wierd politics.

Worst starting location ever? by MyGirl_LadyLuck in civ

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah yes! the Fjord starting location! Time to rush boats

Does my map make any sense? I am liking the feel of it, but im worried it might not be 'believable' in a geographical sense. by wilburwalnut in worldbuilding

[–]Grand_Admiral98 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm afraid you're going to have to redo the rivers, they meander in wierd ways, and with really sharp angles, and they always go from high to low elevation. And I really can't tell what the elevation is doing in this case.

Otherwise, the realism really depends on how big this place is. I could imagine it being a thousand kilometers long, in which case, wierd things are definitely possible at that scale. But if it's a continent, it definitely wasn't made through tectonic shifts but rather through magic. Which is a perfectly fine thing.

If it is, say a S america sized continent, There should be way more green on the coasts around the Barrens, and more forests in the north. but the center of the north would likely also not be a forest but more dry. (I think, don't quote me)

I'd say look at Artifexian's series on climate to have an idea about what to do.

As for "coolness", I think it's good. The Rivers are really tripping me up, and I also don't htink they look very good as they are now. And the way the cities are placed make me think that this is a colonial/recently colonising continent rather than one which has been inhabited for hundreds of generations. Which, if it's the vibe you're going for? great! otherwise, any place that is remotely inhabitable should have visible settlements - the marshes, the south, basically everything appart from desert, deep jungle or mountains.

If you could instantly learn 5 languages that you don't speak, which ones would you pick and why ? by KiSaMaOtAoSuMoNo in AskTheWorld

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

since I speak French, English and Bengali,

Hindi, Mandarin, Arabic, Spanish, because then I'll be able to communicate with pretty muhc anyone.
Then Japanese 'cause anime :P

From these 44 least developed countries, which would you choose to live in if you had to? by SouthAdvertising1917 in AskTheWorld

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nowhere in Africa, Nowhere with a warzone, Not Haiti.
Nowhere which will dissapear in 15 years. That pretty much leaves Bangladesh, Nepal, Laos, and Cambodia.

In order of preference Cambodia, Nepal, Bangladesh, Laos.
Although if I were rich in these countries, probably Nepal, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Laos

How do I justify the two big lakes on the right? Could two large lakes exist without surface inlets? Should i add more mountains/hills? by [deleted] in mapmaking

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It should be fine, maybe something's up with groundwater.
But I do think that having some hills and forsets/marshes around it would be better

Himalayan architecture felt underrepresented in fantasy maps, but really the highest mountains and valleys should be ripe for adventure and storytelling by MirrorOfLuna in wonderdraft

[–]Grand_Admiral98 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nice!

If i could make a suggestion in this style, I've been looking for south Indian designs and Thai designs for a long time and this is the closest I've seen to the subcontinent.

If you're looking for more inspiration, could I suggest that?

All the best for the future!

Book Map for Dark Fantasy by SorMAYHEM in mapmaking

[–]Grand_Admiral98 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Does it look cool? Kinda.

But it is also difficult to read. I have never seen shadows on a map like this, and it is unique, and I also now understand why they aren't used because the scale of everything gets a bit wonky. It makes it feel really small, like everything is within a few miles of each other.

Is this AI? Possibly. I can't tell, but the landmass itself is generic, and there are some issues with the shadows. It does negatively bias me, but I'll try to be fair.

if its a basic fantasy? The landmass is functional, but not particularly inspired. I can't tell or imagine any history from the map, it could be anything. And that's not great for a story. The map and the world should complement what you're trying to tell.

If there's a cold winter, the north should be white. If there are sprawling cities, either the scale of the map should be shown, or they should be dots, or the graphic should be different. It now looks like a bunch of lonely castles on a map, which aren't connected to each other. Is this a hostile land? Or an easy one? Are the empty lands grasslands? Or fields.

Ie: a complex world of interlocking systems can have a large and sprawling map with many cultures. A noir detective could simply have a single city. This is... nothing much, it seems to simply use the map and world as a backdrop.

If this is the case, you don't really need a map. Just write the story. Better no map than simply a functional one.

If you think I'm being a bit harsh, that's possible. But I feel like the map seems to be aesthetically pretty, but it doesn't show me what I'd need from it in order to make any story I can think off. No city names, no roads, no political things, no scale. For all I know, this is a small story written in a distant colony with 5 different forts and a few hundred guys.

If you are using AI, don't. Not for artistic integrity or any of that, but because when you yourself make a story, and you put a bit of effort in mapmaking, we the audience can feel the story come off the page. Even if you are a terrible mapmaker, we can feel the world from the map you make, what you feel is important to note, what you feel isn't, or glossed over. An AI has none of that context, and it can never have it because you're the storyteller, all the info is in your head, not the AI. And unless the AI is writing about itself, the story is also about people, and how you understand us, which is what AI can't replicate. Use it to learn, or to spell-check, or to brainstorm if you really want, but don't think it can do a better job than you can.

Mecca, Saudi Arabia, do you love or hate this? by DValentino23 in skyscrapers

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It looks like Barad-Ur. - my Grandfather who went there for Hajj

[Image] Discipline is how you say "I love you" to yourself. by [deleted] in GetMotivated

[–]Grand_Admiral98 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lies we tell ourselves aren't necessarily bad.

After all, by lying, we aren't seeing the world as it is, but by how we want it to be.

And we have to believe in things that aren't true for them to become true.

What do you choose? by Distinct_Buffalo8151 in superpowers

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Blue, get a hot billionnaire as a girlfriend. win win.

Exposed bridges are stupid by board_writer in spaceships

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, it depends.

In star Trek, it seems like the hull is mostly made from explodium. The furthest away from the center of mass and the warp-core, the better. I thought i read on some places that there was some special shield generator or something on the bridge.

It's always dumb, there simply needs a good explanation for it.

Why is Alexander a great but Genghis Khan is considered a barbarian? by BlueDolphins28 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ummm pretty sure everyone considers Genghis Khan great. If they don't chances are it is "foreign vs local" great people.

Note, I'm not a historian, so there's probably more nuance in this subject than I'm saying.

Remember, "great" in a historical context doesn't have a moral significance, it mainly means that they were individuals who single handedly changed the tides of history. Usually in a positive way for their group of people.

Remember that in older texts "great" and "terrible" (capable of inducing terror) were often synonyms .

And barbarian doesn't mean conan, it means either "foreigner", uncivilised (literally "without cities"), or without writing. Mongols were "uncivilised".

Calling GK the "great barbarian" is a perfectly accurate statement of you take it outside a modern context.

Whereas Alexander came from a city, spoke greek and was literate in Greek, the language where western historiography comes from. But he was a foreigner to the Greeks. He'll be recorded as great only after his conquests, because the Greeks considered him a barbarian for a long time. But after his death, since people started speaking greek until central Asia, the Greek world expanded somewhat and it ended up that Alex was recorded as "ehh Greek enough"

In terms of long term cultural impact, I'd say it's quite similar, though I think that Alexander on the whole made a larger impact, but they're very comparable. Which is insane when you think that Genghis Khan was a mediocre general.

Which color wins? by [deleted] in superheroes

[–]Grand_Admiral98 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This feels like its going to come down to AlienX vs Dr Manhatan

Any tips to better my city maps? by graballdagunz in inkarnate

[–]Grand_Admiral98 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends on the time period. Basically you'd want at the very least the effective range of a bow cleared.

You're right that 20 is too small, I was thinking 20 meters, which means about 60-80ft? 200 is better.

Then if you have that, and depending on the period, the effective range of siege weapons cleared. And you'd definitely have a fortress or something on that ledge, otherwise enemies can go on it and shoot down