OpenGeofiction
Why are the awkwardly placed countries like Slavonia, Florescenta, Scandmark and Swaldia so empty?
I thought a mapper was only allowed to work on 1 project, and when he/she works on one for considerable amount of time, and maps it out in enough detail, then he will be allowed to work on other territories.
Meanwhile @Andy breaks the rules, somehow aquires 5 territories, and leaves them half finished. Also i would like to know why he used multiple real place names in his mapping(Ljubljana, Zagorsk, Hastings, Königstein)
This is not an attack on @Andy, rather just constructive criticism.
Discussion
Comment from niels20020 on 18 December 2016 at 14:43
I’ve thought about this as well and I think it’s because these countries were one of the first in OGF. Maybe those rules were not yet made in that time?
Comment from Myrcia on 18 December 2016 at 14:51
Those countries provide a much-needed foundation for much of OGF’s history and language as the ‘Western Europe’ of OGF. They were some of the first nations to be ‘fully mapped’.
I don’t think they are awkwardly placed at all, in Europe there are different languages across national borders and that doesn’t seem awkward. You move from France to Germany to Poland to Ukraine and the languages and place names change.
It’s also unfair to say that they are empty because they aren’t. They’re not mapped to the same level of detail as other nations but if we all mapped to my level of detail there’d only be about 200sqm mapped on the whole planet. This doesn’t look empty to me.
When I’ve messaged Andy about setting up ferry routes and using Ingerish and Scandic history in Myrcia he’s been very obliging.
I really don’t see the problem with these countries and I’m thankful that they have been mapped as I think they add a much needed sense of stability and foundation to Uletha and OGF as a whole.
Comment from Myrcia on 18 December 2016 at 14:54
As for names, if you’re using German, English, Portuguese etc as your base language and creating such huge nations with 100s of placenames you’re bound to duplicate some real-life ones. I think there are much more pressing problems with OGF than the use of some real-life names.
Comment from Luciano on 18 December 2016 at 15:03
a) Andy received only one territory. This was divided into 5 countries. You could do the same. Voila, now you have 5 territories.
b) the complaint is moot. Andy has been a memeber of ogf since before there were rules. He is a “founding” member, uploading most of his work almost 3 years ago. As such, he is basically exempt from the rules - it would not be fair to hold him to rules made after he joined.
c) that said, there’s no denying verisimilitude issues. We all have them. I have recently struggled with this too. How shall we solve this in a way that is fair to long term users who joined before a given rule was made? My own approach is to voluntarily try to comply. Not everyone may be so comfortable with that.
Comment from Thunderbird on 18 December 2016 at 15:04
You wouldn’t believe the number of times I’ve seen the name “Fairfax” used in names of towns on OGF. It’s not a very original name, and it is the name of a very well county of 1,000,000 people on the east coast of the US.
Comment from Myrcia on 18 December 2016 at 15:42
It’s possible to go too far the other way. There is verisimilitude in having a number of places with the same name Fairfax has a number of immitators. Look at Newport, Weston and Oakwood just to pick three common place names at random.
Comment from Litvania on 18 December 2016 at 18:02
@Luciano this is not a complaint.
Comment from eklas on 18 December 2016 at 18:17
I really don’t see a problem with these countries- actually I’m glad we have them.
The only thing bothering me is that the names in Slavonia are apparently mixed from many Slavic languages, which makes Slavonia seem very random and unsystematic to me (as a Slav, other users probably find it okay.)
Comment from Litvania on 18 December 2016 at 19:25
@eklas I think Slavonia is the one bothering me the most for that very reason.
Comment from Ūdilugbulgidħū on 19 December 2016 at 12:07
I’d agree with most of the above: these countries have been bound into OGF, so to make a world that is in any way coherent they need to be part of it. For example, a country that speaks Ingerish must have some connection - however indirect - with Ingerland. But you know that already. That’s not to say that places in these countries can’t be or won’t be change: @Andy is very easy to collaborate with and whenever I’ve approached him has been open to ideas. So if you feel very strongly about a particular place or name, it might be worth following it up.
I was intrigued by the name ‘Fairfax’. Its a distinctive name. This is what I found on https://www.houseofnames.com/fairfax-family-crest. Fairfax first found in Northumberland and derived from Anglo-Saxon words ‘foegr’ (fair) and feax (haired), meaning fair-haired. Numerous spelling variations: Farefacks, Furfacks, Ferfax, etc. From the homelands many settlers emigrated to North America, resulting in many placenames and family names ‘Fairfax’.
So not a generic (i.e. unrooted/easily translated) name like ‘Newport’ or ‘Bridgetown’ but one that must have links with the ‘Old World’ (or maybe even Myrcia). Take from that what you will. But not very OGF - its such a common real world place name, as Thunderbird says. I would probably be more interested if one day I came across a place like ‘Brunfax’ or perhaps ‘Eorpfax’ (assuming I’ve got it right that that would mean dark-haired, or something along those lines).
Comment from No Way on 19 December 2016 at 19:12
I have towns and places with those names. Fairfax, Oakland, Weston and Newport as well.
Comment from Andy on 19 December 2016 at 20:25
I want to add a few remarks on the issues. In fact, originally I took 3 small adjacent areas and divided it into 5 countries - at that time there was no rule of one area. But now I would prefer to have only one, the smallest )))
Regarding the development of the territories I adhere to the following strategy: from the general to the more detailed. Currently, my plan includes the development of capital regions to the zoom level of 12. Four areas ([Porto Real] (http://opengeofiction.net/#map=11/56.3962/32.1371), [Erihents] (http://opengeofiction.net/#map=12/55.9560/25.4835), [Winburgh] (http://opengeofiction.net/#map=12/58.1034/24.6612), [Steingart] (http://opengeofiction.net/#map=13/58.3094/29.4983)) out of 5 are almost done, and then turn comes to the other major cities.
As for geo names I try not to use real ones at least for large settlements. By the way, someone, not me, added Ljubljana on the map of Slavonia, and Zagorsk doesn’t exist anymore on the real world map ))) Slavonia is one of my favorite countries and I imagine it as a kind of Slavic fusion. As being born in Czechia and living now in Russia I use Czech and Russian origin in the names of towns as well as invented “sounded like slavic” roots.