Altered Maps VII: Making the World a Better Place

Status
Not open for further replies.
So France, Canada and Iraq are the only US Allies (and puppet)?

I would include a later Russian intervention on behalf of the US, only to be nuked to hell by China.
On second though, India would fit in better ("Just the French and a quarter million Indians" "I thought there was a billion of them" "There was").
 
I haven't decided yet how it will end (the original film was rather vague about the outcome of the war). In the original scenario Russia was the #1 enemy and China was an ally, so it could be interesting to switch their roles in this scenario. Hmm.

France is the only US ally besides Canada (Iraq is a sort of dependent state). I find the idea so amusing that I've had to include it.
 
In the original scenario Russia was the #1 enemy and China was an ally, so it could be interesting to switch their roles in this scenario. Hmm.
Yeah, you need someone to fill the China role. Russia for role reversal and it seems closer to 1980s China in the diplomatic sphere, but having China nuke them to hell seems weird. India fits that dialogue better, but would presumably be strongly anti-American due to protectionism, but it could seem like an opportunity to stick it to China.

France replacing britain is a nice addition.
 
Yeah, you need someone to fill the China role. Russia for role reversal and it seems closer to 1980s China in the diplomatic sphere, but having China nuke them to hell seems weird. India fits that dialogue better, but would presumably be strongly anti-American due to protectionism, but it could seem like an opportunity to stick it to China.

I think I'll go with Russia. They surely understand that if China wins over the US, they're next. But there won't be nuclear war. Nukes will be used, but in a very specialized, limited role.

France replacing britain is a nice addition.

I figured that France wouldn't take the loss of French Guyana and its islands in the Caribbean lightly, so it will join the US in hope of recovering the lost territories. French help will actually be quite important, especially in the Atlantic.
 
Attacking Alaska actually makes sense for Russia of course.
 
Groß-Schweiz. You really can't accuse the right wing in Switzerland of modesty:

topelement.jpg


Watch out, France, Germany, Austria and Italy. Something tells me your people wouldn't really mind...
...I played a HoI2 game like that.
 
Now for a distorted map:

Spoiler :
295.png


Territory size shows the proportion of carbon dioxide emissions in 2000 that were directly from there.

And another one, this time for nuclear waste:

Spoiler :
304.png
 
That map has changed a LOT in the last ten years.
 
I got from worldmappers.com. The site has many world maps distorted for different data, but the data in general is a bit old.

But for comparison, here is the map for the carbon emissions in 1980. Much of the change that occurred in the last 10 years is a continuation of the trend.
Spoiler :
296.png
 
I got from worldmappers.com. The site has many world maps distorted for different data, but the data in general is a bit old.

But for comparison, here is the map for the carbon emissions in 1980. Much of the change that occurred in the last 10 years is a continuation of the trend.
Spoiler :
296.png



I bothered to fix that for you ;)

Anyway, another Worldmapper:

The population two thousand years ago is estimated to have been 231 million. At this time North and South America were sparsely populated, as was Asia Pacific. The estimated population of New Zealand was zero. Southern Asia, Northern Africa, China and Southern Europe (parts of the same land mass) had relatively high populations. Colder Northern latitudes tended to have lower populations.

The territories that now encompass the Ganges, Tigris, Yangtze, Nile and Po rivers were the most populous.
7.png



"
At the time of Spanish conquest in South America, and when Christopher Columbus was exploring Central and South America, the combined population of Mexico and Peru was greater than the total of all other American countries.

The regions with the largest populations remained Southern Asia and Eastern Asia. Together these contained more than half of the world's population.

Worldwide population distribution in 1500 was roughly similar to that in year 1, despite the numbers almost doubling over this period."

8.png


"The world population tripled between 1500 and 1900, to an estimated 1564 million. In that period, the populations of the United Kingdom and the United States increased more than ten-fold, the population of the Netherlands increased five-fold. For most of this time the Netherlands were known as the United Provinces; whilst neither the United Kingdom, nor the United States, had been formed.

In 1900 much of the world was under imperial rule, new territorial boundaries were being defined and contested. The borders of Africa shown in this map were mostly drawn at the Treaty of Versaille, in 1919."

9.png



"The world population in 1960 was 3 039 million. As is the case today, the populations of China and India are (independently) more than twice as big as that of the next largest territory.

South America has increased its proportion of the world's population living there, since 1900. The Western European proportion of the world population began to decline in 1900 when it was 15%, to 11% in 1960 and then 6% in 2000."


10.png



"By 2050 it is estimated that the earth's human population will be 9.07 billion. 62% of the people will live in Africa, Southern Asia and Eastern Asia - numerically this is the same as if all the world's current population lived just in these regions. In addition another 3000 000 000 will be spread across the rest of the world.

All numbers shown here are estimates - estimates are never perfect."


11.png



"By 2300 the United Nations forecasts that the global population will be just under 9 billion. World population is expected to rise, peak and then decline slightly between 2050 and 2300. The highest long term population growth is predicted for Africa. Africa is currently underpopulated and has the lowest life expectancies. Other regions' populations are predicted to stay level or decline. Between 2050 and 2300 the areas currently known as India, China, the United States and Pakistan maintain their ranked order as having the world's highest populations. The numbers shown here are estimates - based on predicted future behaviours."

12.png
 
The 2050 and 2300 maps are too similar! I can't believe it much. At least migration flows should change that more in 250 years.

In the other maps, many different dynamics. One interesting is Brazil, that multiplied per 10 its population between 1900 and 2000. And now Brazil is the 5th largest population.

And the size of Africa in the latter maps is just a bomb exploding, there cannot be a population of that magnitude in a region so poor. It just spells trouble.
 
Trying to predict the world population in 2300 is stupid anyway, there's no way of seeing that far ahead. Tons of things could change in 300 years. It's like if you tried to predict the population of the world today in 1650.
 
It's life expectancy at birth, so it's obviously an estimate.

Its only worth is as an indicator of how bad/good a country is at a certain thing, and is pretty worthless in actually giving an accurate estimate at how long a person will live, then?

I mean, a lot of stuff can happen in 80 years
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom