We need a better Canada map

[Hugiboo]

I must say, I think we can do better. The existing Canada map looks nice, but it's got a lot of issues. As a Canadian, I can't bring myself to play it. There's just so much wrong with it. For example:

Ontario has 38% of Canada's population & 37% of Canada's GDP, while Quebec has 24% & 20% respectively; yet Quebec is worth 6 reinforcements while Ontario is only worth 5? The weights are all off. British Columbia is worth half the Territories, yet it has roughly 40 times the population & 25 times the GDP. It just doesn't seem right.

Secondly, there are vast regions of wilderness in Canada & mountains. N Saskatchewan should only connect south, there are no roads going anywhere else. Manitoba should not connect with the Territories, except by sea from Churchill. Even the two regions in N Ontario are virtually unpopulated. Likewise there should be very limited access to N Quebec & none to the Nunavik area except by sea. Labrador is not part of Quebec, it is part of Newfoundland, & there is a major mountain range splitting it from Quebec. Any connection between the territories should be via sea or air, other than N Alberta to Yellowknife & N BC to Yukon. I could go on.

Third is the naming. I'm from Alberta, & Manning is a little town in N Alberta on the road to Yellowknife. There are a number of bigger, more important centres it could have been called.

I think the Canada map looks great, but it could be so much better. I would like to see a new map that does a better job weighting regions, that has accurately marked impassibles, and better region divisions & names. It would have to have a significant increase in territories. I would be willing to work on this, but someone else would have to head up graphic design. Is there any interest?

[MarathonMax]

The biggest issue with this map is that it is linear, East to West, rather than a more rounded one. As for bonus values (Ont vs Que) it has nothing to do with GDP but with size.

[owenshooter]

The biggest issue with this map is that it is linear, East to West, rather than a more rounded one. As for bonus values (Ont vs Que) it has nothing to do with GDP but with size.

3 years later, a response... i guess you don't realize there isn't much activity in the foundry now, huh... thanks for the response!!!-Bj

[MarathonMax]

LOL

I used to visit the Foundry more often.

[Symmetry]

LOL

I used to visit the Foundry more often.

Careful, I posted once here 6 months ago and just got told off by the mods for spamming because of it. That's not a joke, or even an exaggeration.

[iancanton]

The biggest issue with this map is that it is linear, East to West, rather than a more rounded one. As for bonus values (Ont vs Que) it has nothing to do with GDP but with size.

canada itself is somewhat linear. how many other countries can display all of their provincial flags from the front of a building in a logical geographic order?

ontario and quebec both have 9 regions, so are the same size. however, if we were designing the map today, then ontario would be worth more because of its central position (which makes it more exposed to attack) and distance from an easy bonus.

while some of the region names are not necessarily what most canadians would choose, they are at least reasonably logical, especially when compared with the downright misleading canadian region names on the north america map, for example british columbia and vancouver are neighbouring regions that are both part of the canada bonus, which excludes quebec and the atlantic provinces.

ian.

[riskllama]

the rocky mountains are my biggest annoyance w/the NA map...