OpenGeofiction
Canclaret and I were hoping to do a bid for the 2016 Winter Geolympiad that is to be co-hosted between Palmerston City, Ismikk and Sono, Inretsk (the latter of which is currently under development, although we’ll probably get it done on time). Is it alright if we could start our bid early (if there is going to be one soon)? We’re not going to have as much time to get things done from September 1st onward, but we still really want to do this.
Discussion
Comment from Luciano on 2 August 2015 at 01:24
Firstly, I too have been planning on putting together a Winter Geolympiad bid - for my city of Rewk Mahhal. That is going to take a long time, however - since that city is developing very slowly.
Secondly, however - I had been thinking we should parallel the Earth custom which moved Winter Olympics to alternate years: i.e. Summer Games are e.g. 2008 (Beijing), 2012(London), 2016(Rio), while Winter Games are 2010 (Vancouver), 2014 (Sochi), 2018 (Pyeongchang)…
If we do this, we have quite a while before the 2018 games.
Alternately, we could do “retroactive” as we are beginning to do with the Summer games. How about we set up a bid process for 2014?
You have a bigger problem, however. Palmerston City is on the east coast of a continent at 28 degrees south latitude. This is the same as Curitiba, Brasil or Brisbane, Australia or Durban, South Africa - none of these places ever receive snow, and would be pretty lousy hosts for winter olympics. Even supposing the events were held in high-elevetion mountain locations (e.g. above 4000 meters) that might be cold enough, there might be resistance by athletes to holding events at such altitude, due to reduced oxygen.
Comment from Asparagus on 2 August 2015 at 03:42
This can probably be fixed - Palmerston City would host the indoor events, such as ice hockey and speed skating, while the outdoor skiing events would take place in Sono. The ski area is supposed to be at around 30.6 degrees south, and would be at a fairly high elevation, but that still sounds like it is pushing it. By all means, we could try doing it further south in Inretsk, but even that probably won’t do too much.
However, there are a few outdoor ski resorts in some locations at a similar latitude, such as a handful of ski areas on Kyushu, Japan, at 33 degrees north, Los Penitentes, Argentina, at 32 degrees south, and Selwyn Snowfields, Australia, at 35 degrees south. Apparently there is one ski resort in Taiwan at around 23 degrees north as well. If it still isn’t south enough, we can still use snow cannons, if can they supplement it enough.
Either way, there still seems to be some disagreement about climate in the OGF world, as everyone has different ideas for their respective countries, and it is hard to universally accept any of the maps that have so far been drawn. Neither Ismikk nor Inretsk were meant to have subtropical or desert climates when Canclaret and I first claimed them. I should also point out that Karolia also has winter games in its mountainous areas, despite being substantially further north than us, yet I don’t really see too much of a problem with them personally.
Anyway, I still think there’s ways to work this out. Being Canadian, and having been to the Vancouver 2010 Olympics, this means a bit more to us than the Summer games, but I can’t help the impracticalities if they are too great.
Comment from Luciano on 2 August 2015 at 04:13
I wasn’t trying to suggest the problem was insoluble.
In fact, there is a ski resort at Drakensburg, northwest of Durban, South Africa, which I mentioned. However, it is at almost 3000 meters, and they rely on snow making extensively.
Your points about Kyushu and even Taiwan are well-taken - the climatological situation in east Asia is unique, and allows colder weather at latitudes much farther south - as a resident of South Korea (37 degrees), I can attest to this - in winter, it is colder than one former place I lived in Alaska. This is because of Siberia (blame the Russians). Because Siberia is a landmass that essentially overlaps into the arctic, it allows the formation of super-cold high pressure systems such that even latitudes as far south as 35 degrees can experience “Siberian cold.” The same situations pertains, to a lesser degree, in eastern North America - but note the absence of any similar pattern in the southern hemisphere.
In looking at the map, this type of climate would be possible for eastern Uletha because it is big enough and extends far enough north. But for Archanta, the southern ocean would moderate the climate, preventing such high pressure systems. Thus Inretsk, because of its positioning, would probably most likely resemble America’s gulf-coast or Southern Brazil. Now if there are mountains, there could be snow - cf. western Carolinas or Tennessee or the Andes in Argentina, which you mentioned (although those mountains are VERY high). Your problem is not impossible, certainly. I am merely trying to encourage everyone to think about it.
Your point about other people making mistakes with climate is valid. But I don’t see that as a justification for ignoring it, moving forward.
In fact, I too experienced grave disappointment when I realized how close to the equator my country Ardisphere was. I almost cried. I had to delete a bunch of glaciers and ski resorts. It was one reason I took my second country at Mahhal - it is far enough south that I have the opposite problem - which is trying to justify any vegetation at all! Fortunately, it’s much easier to hypothesize warm sea currents than continental high pressure systems to rescue this.
I know you have actually put a lot of time into climate issues. So… one thought is to take a second country more in line with your climatological interests. There’s nothing wrong with this, and at least for my part, as an admin, I would support this. JOSM allows people to move entire cities, etc., quite freely. I have even moved an entire country once. Paxtar moved his country, too. That was a major project but seems to have worked out quite successfully.
If our more finalized climatalogical map forces me to accept a desert climate for the Ardisphere, I would quite probably do exactly this, myself - as painful as that would be. I am still supposing, however, that some kind of monsoonal pattern, as hinted at in isleño’s climate map but not Danny11’s, at least permits some eastern-slope rain on the mountain chains through the country, keeping it wet. If my neighbors to the east build giant mountains, however, Ardisphere will die in the rain shadow desert, because of its latitude.
Of course it’s all a learning experience.
Comment from Asparagus on 2 August 2015 at 04:53
Hey, no offense taken about the insoluble part :)
As for the climate maps, as much as the work put into them is appreciated, I don’t think we can really say that any of them are “right” until we can actually come to a consensus as to which countries have what types of climate, which is kinda why I made those graphs, but it seems like it’s going to be a while before that happens :(
Anyway, the mountain range in the northwestern part of Inretsk is supposed to be fairly steep, and the ski mountain could be high enough if we wanted it to be, and we would definitely be using snow cannons.
I can’t say that I’m ready to start on a second country yet, as I still have a long way to go with Inretsk. Canclaret is my one of my best friends, and I’d rather our countries be next to each other. He’s put plenty of work into Palmerston City, and I don’t think he’s planning on moving any time soon. Inretsk’s in a pretty nice spot anyway, so I think I’ll stay where I am for now…
Either way, it would be useful to know how to move an entire country :)
Comment from Luciano on 2 August 2015 at 05:40
Just to clarify - I wasn’t so much proposing you start a second country but merely that you could take a second territory and move Inretsk there, and subsequently release the current territory - much as Paxtar has done.
But yes, if you did that, you and your friend would have to coordinate, etc. It would be a rather big job, I guess.
One thought about your climate tables … it seems like what you’re proposing is a kind of “bottom up,” crowdsourced climate map - i.e., ask everyone “what is your country’s climate?” and then put that information together to make the climate map. I guess that’s a possible approach, but it seems unlikely that that would lead to a scientifically plausible world climate map.
What the admins have been discussing (at least a little bit, and mostly with respect to the new continents for now) is creating a master climate map that would be more “top down” - attaching a climate to each country and saying: “if you want this territory, here’s your climate - deal with it.” That leaves existing countries in a bit of a lurch if they don-t have scientifically plausible climates, however.
Comment from isleño on 2 August 2015 at 14:23
A small ski area was once built atop a mountain in Taiwan, but was dismantled because there wasn’t enough snow. And this video/article on South Africa’s “ski resort” shows what Luciano mentioned about the snow-making there. For example:
This place can barely maintain a few acres of snow… it doesn’t even come close to being able to host an entire Winter Olympics.
If it was up to me, I might suggest a minimum latitude for Winter Geolympiads somewhere around 34°N/S (which would allow a bid from the southernmost corner of Inretsk, if it was at very high elevation). I mean, sure, there are a handful of places closer to the equator where skiing is possible to some degree, but it takes a lot more than that to successfully stage the world’s most massive winter sports extravaganza.
I use our own planet as a model here, simply because it’s the easiest way to develop a world climate that’s coherent, familiar, and intuitive… And I think most OGF users have shared that mindset and tried to select climates that would be at least plausible for their terrestrial latitude. There are only a few countries that fall outside this pattern, but if any of them would like to fit better with it, there are definitely options (as Luciano pointed out). Or, for those who want to play in a different climate on a small scale, requesting a microstate is another option. For example, if anyone wants an alpine country the size of Liechtenstein or Andorra, just send a message to admin. Might be a fun place to build some ski resorts. :-)
Cheers,
isleño
Comment from Asparagus on 2 August 2015 at 16:18
Ya, you guys are right. Just looking at the Durban ski resort makes me less inclined to do this. However, like isleño said, I may still be able to make a ski resort in the southeast corner of Inretsk. Would 33.7 cut it, or should it definitely be south of 34?
Anyway, as for the charts, I figured, as mentioned, that we could determine the climate by consensus and then come up with the science behind it afterwards as an experimental alternative, rather than the other way around. For example, the OGF world climate does not necessarily have to match that of the real world, and there could be other factors such as the distance of the planet from its sun, its tilt axis, and having a different level of atmospheric pressure could all be changing factors, whether the community prefers it or not. Of course, I’m not suggesting that we all follow my charts, but simply to get and idea of what people were actually intending when they started their countries, and I’m not suggesting that we make huge geographical changes just to make a few countries in a certain area have their preferred climates all the sudden. (Not that anyone here mentioned anything like that, I’m just stating the reasons behind the charts)
Anyway, this is just something being thrown up into the air for now, and we may not have as much time as we thought to finish the Geolympic Bid in the end. It is still very possible though.
Comment from isleño on 2 August 2015 at 22:47
Well, 33.7° rounds up to 34° so it’s fine with me, haha… ;-) Seriously though, I don’t think we could draw an absolute line, but… the closer you get to the equator, the more a Winter Games would seem out of place. The ski resort in South Africa is just under 31°S, for example.
You’re right that we don’t necessarily need to use Earth as the climate model, but… I think most people have done so out of convenience. It’s sort of like how we use Earth years. They help us (and newcomers) to understand the OGF world more quickly and easily. If you say “1600” or “1850” or “2015” it has a meaning. Same with “20°N” or “40°N” or “60°N.” These aren’t just coordinates… they actually tell us something about a place.
If “2015” or “60°N” no longer have the same meaning as they do on Earth, okay, but that creates an additional barrier to understanding this world. Instead of simply saying “2015” or “60°N,” we’d have to ask, well, what does “2015” or “60°N” mean in this world? So… I’m not too keen on that, and I’d definitely want to move my country or adjust its climate if I found that it really didn’t fit the Earth pattern. Anyway… just sharing my train of thought. Hope it makes sense. :-)
Comment from deltanz on 3 August 2015 at 06:19
Hey, is the an OGF climate map? I’d love to see it, can someone attach it here?
Comment from Luciano on 3 August 2015 at 06:52
There are two.
Danny11 made one:
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6737/51351719.14/0_a6251_4389e0dc_orig
Then Isleño made one:
http://i.imgur.com/cGhMUQJ.jpg
I like the second one better… mostly because it takes into account monsoonal patterns - which rescues Ardisphere from being a desert.