Vikings of Scandinavia

Title: Vikings or Vikings of Scandanavia Size: 54 territories Here's a few days effort.. brushing up on map making. forgot that there was another viking project, but this was fun to try. [spoiler][img]https://i.imgur.com/2iEcgQT.png[/img][/spoiler] [url=https://i.imgur.com/2iEcgQT.png]100% view[/url] some added stuff from the map dabble edits. Filling in some blanks. added viking ships. a viking map needs a ship! an extension of the title. *territory names were googled. there is probably some better options, i'd like to hear from history buffs. chur

Nice. One quick thought while checking it out. I think you take away the ship by Prussia as there is no "nautical connection" in that area like there are by every other ship. It looks nice, but it may cause confusion.

thanks. i think i agree, i believe i added it so as to have another ship face that direction. ill omit it from the next edit

[spoiler=latest edit][img]https://i.imgur.com/hAlKXhM.jpg[/img][/spoiler] [url=https://i.imgur.com/hAlKXhM.jpg]100% view[/url] spell fix. Scandanavia to Scandinavia, some pixel fixes.. added a connection from sutherland to perthshire after having going through capitals selection options and movements. omitted that prussia ship.

player @@vikingo1337 made some suggestions. renamed viborg to jutland - and moved some circles around to relevant port spots. another suggestion was to add a connection from newly named jutland to northumbria. any opinions? if it's significant historically, then that's cool, otherwise i prefer not to draw long connections through the ocean. at this point, cap selection tests were selected with the current connections. [spoiler=latest image][img]https://i.imgur.com/P5lelGM.jpg[/img][/spoiler] [url=https://i.imgur.com/P5lelGM.jpg]100% view[/url] current region names werent given much thought, so there are some better ones. currently they are [b]Ánslo[/b] (Agder, Hedmark, Hordaland, Oslo, Trondheim) [b]Baltic Finns[/b] (Ostrobothnia, Tavastia, Vanaia) [b]Balts[/b] (Estland, Lats, Livonia, Osel, Prussia, Yotvingians) [b]Danes[/b] (Pomerania, Roskilde, Uppakra, Jutland) [b]Dyflin[/b] (Aileach, Connacht, Mide, Mumha, Ulaidh) edited to [u]Northanhymbra[/u] [b]Northanhymbra[/b] (Boroughs, East Anglia, Jorvik, Mercia, Northumbria, Wessex) [b]Franks[/b] (Brittany, Flanders, Normandy) [b]Goths[/b] (Birka, Kopingsvik, Kvenland, Linkoping, Paaviken, Skara, Varmland) edited to [u]Götaland[/u] [b]Picts[/b] (Dalriada, Hebrides, Perthshire, Picts, Shetland, Sutherland) [b]Saxons[/b] (Bohemia, Frisia, Lotharingia, Saxonia, Selavania) [b]Welsh[/b] (Cornwall, Dyfed, Gwynedd, Powys) edited to [u]Mumha[/u]

Big fan of this map, for obvious reasons. But you gotta have a sea route from Denmark to England. The Danes conquered and settled vast swathes of England after all, starting with The Great Heathen Army's invasion of England in 865, which led to the establishment of the 'Danelaw'. Eventually, all of England was conquered by a Danish king, Sweyn Forkbeard, in 1013.

This map is just beautiful beyond belief! I genuinely think it could be released straight away as it currently exists! Having said that, there are a few things I'd like to discuss, just for absolute perfection's sake :) - What is the year? I'd like to give the source map a good look, just because I'm not familiar with the territory/region shapes, and I'm curious :) Denmark, England and Wales, Sweden, Scotland... I guess all these countries, I've never seen these borders. So a year stamp would definitely be a good addition. Assuming the source is a good one. - Territory names can surely be improved. I'm no expert in the viking era but I'm sure a lot of these places didn't exist until much later. Same probably with region names. - Personally I'd connect Wessex to Flanders and Jorvik to Jutland. I agree that Denmark should definitely have a sea route to England, as Vikingo mentioned. - I like the boats, I just think that they don't look like drawings on a map, they look very much photoshopped in (which I know is the truth, but it shouldn't look like it ^^) - For me, the bright green regions are a bit too bright. I'd like to see them in a dark green, just to see. But they're alright as they are if I'm the only one :) Sorry, that turned into quite a lot of points! The map is honestly stunning, I just got carried away :)

[quote]What is the year?[/quote] Probably somewhere around or between 800 and 900 AD See the map of [url=https://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/800/index.html]europe in 800 AD[/url] and [url=https://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/900/index.html]europe in 900 AD[/url]. (These maps may also give you inspiration for region names btw). And yes, this is an amazing map. Looks absolutely beautiful and has a very cool theme.

latest changes. based on feedback from here and also from messages with viking map stuff darker green suggested by virt. also viking let me know that it's an island Anglesey on the tip of Wales. new name suggestions. mide to dyflin and oslo to Anslo connections..i went with a mix of suggestions i think. it's good to know the relevance. trade routes etc. we also know that gameplay is a factor, so it won't be perfectly based. also some region name changes..edited in the above post. [spoiler][img]https://i.imgur.com/fAgFDJR.jpg[/img][/spoiler] [url=https://i.imgur.com/fAgFDJR.jpg]100% view[/url]

what about completing the dotted white line from Paaviken to Kopingsvik? (nevermind on this, I see the Circle of troops takes up this space) Also, maybe just me, but the dotted line from Roskilde to Uppakra upon glancing appears it goes to Pamerania, when Rokskilde does not connect to Pamerania. Maybe adjust the line from Uppakra to Pomerania so it more clear?

[quote=God_of_War]what about completing the dotted white line from Paaviken to Kopingsvik? (nevermind on this, I see the Circle of troops takes up this space) Also, maybe just me, but the dotted line from Roskilde to Uppakra upon glancing appears it goes to Pamerania, when Rokskilde does not connect to Pamerania. Maybe adjust the line from Uppakra to Pomerania so it more clear? [/quote] good point. it looks deceiving. i have changed it

[quote=Hoodlum][quote=God_of_War]what about completing the dotted white line from Paaviken to Kopingsvik? (nevermind on this, I see the Circle of troops takes up this space) Also, maybe just me, but the dotted line from Roskilde to Uppakra upon glancing appears it goes to Pamerania, when Rokskilde does not connect to Pamerania. Maybe adjust the line from Uppakra to Pomerania so it more clear? [/quote] good point. it looks deceiving. i have changed it [/quote] Much easier to see how the connection works. Moving on to other small things... the Troop Circles are sometimes covering the edges of a territory when there is plenty of space within the body of the territory to put them? I'm not sure if this is on purpose or not. Examples... Pmerania, Jutland, Dyflin, Birka, Tavastia, Sutherland, Jorkic. Some of these are way more nit picky than others so I'll let you use your experience with map making and won't bring issue up again if none of them are shifted. Just an observation that you can see on the "test" maps we had going vs the map I can see above in this post. Overall though, this one looks like a lot of fun to play on. Can't wait to see it in rotation. You should make Round 2 of the Pairs Tournament this map.

there will likely be some circle adjustment. it's just a drag movement in the cartography panel and i will fine tune it at some point. some circle placements are due to viking letting me know where specific armies..etc are. otherwise, mostly i am just putting it in space

That map looks awesome!

Perhaps the western sea route, Mumha ---> Brittany, should be changed to Dyflin ---> Brittany, as Dyflin was a Viking stronghold and base of operations at the time.