North America Buildup

[TexanCowboy]

Ugh.

Displaced Frenchmen, perhaps; or maybe I got Dar's share...

[ctwaterman]

The First French Trading Fort at the Mouth of the Bayou was established in 1690 and the City in 1718 ???  

The City was promptly whiped out by a Hurricane and then rebuilt.

After France lost the 7 Years War New Orleans and the Louisianna purchase were given to Spain in compensation for the loss of Florida and other territories East of the Mississippi to the British.  Several Fires then destroyed large parts of the city and it was rebuilt with brick in the Spanish Style including the Cathederal which is how the City pretty much looks today.

As a note the last Yellow Fever Outbreak was finally suppresed in 1905  :o :'(

The City is a major trading port and realistically is as Important to the North East Players as it is to Me.  All Commerce from the US North East west of the appalacian mountains until the building of the Erie Cannal traveled down the Ohio or Tennessee Rivers to the Mississippi and from there to the Sea.

Honestly...  looking at Tex's time line he doesnt need to Hold the City of New Orleans he simply needs my nation not to deny his free booters the right to use it as a port.  Considering many of those Free Booters were probably citizens of my Country at the time well I guess I owe Foxy an appology for them stealing half of his country.  ;D

In 1870 New Orleans annexed the City of Algiers Louisiana which was on the opposite side of the River...:)

I Have New Orleans you have Algiers :)

[TexanCowboy]

Not...particularily. According to my more detailed naval timeline, it's the capital and one of the major port cities of the Republic du la Texas (Tejas?).

I'll offer a compromise. You get the parts to the north of the Mississippi, and I'll get the parts to the south. I'll then open up another major port, maybe New Bordeaux, at the location of Bell Chasse, in 1740 or so. We'll both get about equal traffic, and by the 1880's, a sense of interconnectedness between the cities should have arisen, but you still get the majority of Orleans.

[ctwaterman]

The City of Algiers was directly across the Mississippi from New Orleans.... and was absorbed by New Orleans in 1870...  so that should not be a problem.

The Problem I saw with your time line is that prior to 1817 and the establishment of Texas New Orleans would have belonged to Either my CSA or a Unified [United States] prior to a break up durring the Hartford Convention.

Speaking of the Hartford Convention-  I have read some on the subject and the Federalists were quite careful to not push the radical agenda of some of their delegates.  Of course the number of delegates was quite small and did not represent states such and New York, or PA.   But then they also made sure nothing was ever written down and when it was all notes of the discussions leading up to the findings forwarded to the US Congress were kept.  They were all burned prior to the end of the convention.  So conspiracy theorists can have  field day with this.

I think we need to sit down and discuss some things First with Guinness [England], Jefete [Iberia], and with France.   The Major Colonial Powers of the America's.  Because I think that there squables and colonial efforts directly lead to the Formation of at least 4 of the Powers on the Continent of North America.

French North America, Mexico, North East US, South East US...
Texas is logically an out cropping of Expansion possibly by both the US North East and South East.   A bunch of land speculators and Free Booters that we ran out of our country that ran off and became Mexican Citizens only to later revolt and form their own country.  That would make at least three of our Countrys and England nations seperated by a common Language.

Charles

[Blooded]

Hello,

Here are some of my ideas for SW map borders as proposed before. This time with a map. I am not aware of why the borders had been placed where they were. These make more sense based in recent events(OTL 1847ish timeframe) Almost completely based on the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Tried to incorporate the older Republic of Texas map as well.

Texas-California border is at 108 parallel. California-Mexico border as treaty(looks like I messed up the arizona area border-based on wrong river-I'll get it back if this gets used). New Russia eastern border would be moved back to the Rocky Mtn divide(would need to move it west a bit more), gaining better land to the south and more coastal turf. ROT north border follows arkansas River, the 106 parallel, and then north platt river. Indian confed would probably get pushed north a bit as well.

http://home.comcast.net/~navalism_blooded/Navalism/Namerica-carth-1d.PNG


Indian Confed gained most. New Russia, California and Texas remain about the same. Mexico lost most(though it is still very large).

Whatcha think?

[Carthaginian]

I don't like the straight-line borders.
Better to use landforms and terrain features so as to give something 'concrete' to recognize.

[Blooded]

Noted and I agree to a point. But with a lack of Rivers in some areas, using latitude or longitude makes it easy. plus most western US states used this method in OTL. This helps us figure out where we are on modern maps(Google Earth/Maps).

The New Russia/California border really existed(well it did have tiny bumps and dips). The only one I made up was the Cali-Texas one(108* longitude).

I tried very hard to figure out what the original map lines(provinces as well as main borders) were based on and couldn't some/much of the time(depending where). So how do I KNOW where California's border lay EXACTLY.

I spent most of the time and work on Cali borders. It would still need work, as I dont want to waste time on something not to be used.

[Carthaginian]

Part of the original map, Blooded, was to remove most recognizable 'modern/historical' boundaries and create new, but believable ones. That was part of why I sacrificed Acadia proper when I constructed the boundaries for Acadia.

[Blooded]

Son of a.... I just deleted a 20 minute response somehow...  >:(   I hate that!

Anywho... the basics...

Part of the original map, Blooded, was to remove most recognizable 'modern/historical' boundaries and create new, but believable ones.

I have not been able to find any reasoning for the borders out west. If it is around please show me. Why does mexico have that bulge to the north? why does Texas have one up and over that?

I thought we did not want a fantasy map so we could use Google Earth/Maps? I also thought I saw that our maps were based on Victoria(the game) or somesuch then modified by miketr. I cannot properly define my borders using real maps as these one seem random.

I tried very hard to figure out what the original map lines(provinces as well as main borders) were based on and couldn't some/much of the time(depending where). So how do I KNOW where California's border lay EXACTLY.

I cant see any rivers/mtns/features that most of MY borders(interior or exterior) are based on. perhaps in your area it is easy to tell, but that is simply not the case in the SW. For me at least, it is important to know if 'Bobstown, Utah' is located in Cali or Mexico. I dealt with too many vague border issues in N3.

My borders have some reasoning and provide a OTL POD to help make things easier. I still cant reconcile too much since the US/CSA history is still vague or nonexistant.

[snip]

I think that the issue of finding boarders has some merit to it. You have no idea how long it took me to find a sutable list of canadates for a northern base for my navy. That being said, I like the changes to the map that you made. My only request for New Russia is the restoration of the two provences in west Montana and the one that is north of the boarders of the Jeuno Alaska area. Just to make things look more natural. I will take a crack at it when I return from lunch. *runs away and holds onto Juno and/or Sitka for northern Naval bases*

[snip]

Ok, here we go (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/684/sversionmodifide.png/)

Changes.

Made the New Russian boarder follow what i think to be the Rockies

Fixed/moved a few province boarders in New Russia, Cali and Mexico that were distorted or made very small by Blooded's and my changes.

Made all the province boarders black (that had been bugging me for a while).

Thoughts?

[TexanCowboy]

*Texan casts spell of angry disapproval upon the new map...ok, maybe disgruntaled disapproval*

Ok, it's messing up a couply of things I want with my nation. First, you're giving me that land to the West of the Rio Grande, which is a biggggg no-no. All that stuff in New Mexico on the West part should belong to Foxy, or someone else, cause I don't want it.

Same problem with Colorado. I want that part to the east of the Rio Grande, not to the West. I don't care who that part belongs to, but it's not going to me. On a similar note, I want that part to the east of the Rio Grande back, all the way to the Colorado border, and I want those parts back in Wyoming.

Personally, I prefer the older map MUCH more than this new one; on a somewhat related note, we need someone to remove that New Orleans providence from me and give it to Charles.



As you can see on this new map above, I've restored Texas to my "ideal" view of it, and gave it a more appropriate color. :)

I adjusted the borders on my eastern front a bit, so that Charles gets New Orleans; and I cut a little bit off of his dominance of Missouri for a more logical river boundary then the flat-lined 21st parallel one we had going there.

The West is back to where it was; I don't mind adjusting, but I'm not at all in favor of the straight-lined boundaries. I'm getting the impression that Foxy absolutely has to have Arizona, in the same way that I would "absolutely" have to have parts of Texas.

The simple matter is that I don't think that me and Foxy find the new "California" boundaries acceptable. It screws up a bunch of our storyline for our nations creation; and beyond that, they just look funky...

Oh, and Blooded. Foxy has that bulge there because Mexico historically had it, and didn't have a "SUPA AMERICA SWARM ASSAULT" to defend it against. Texas has that bulge over it because it's what it sorta had as an independent nation, except we pushed that to the Rockies for a natural boundary.

[snip]

Well...I will wait on seeing what does get the final nod until I fiddle with my boarders again. The only changes I am going to make is to make the eastern boundary follow the Rockies and to poach the island that Sitka is on for a northern base that has a good harbor (as it is one that I have been to and Jeuno is way out of my reach at the start of things). As the only PC nation that shares a direct boarder with me is Cali to the south, I dont think these should cause to much greif. Blooded and I can horse-trade over the New Russia-Cali boundary. Thoughts?

m getting the impression that Foxy absolutely has to have Arizona, in the same way that I would "absolutely" have to have parts of Texas.

And the reason why I must have the Willamette river vally

[Blooded]

Hello,

So sorry you are taking massive offense to my suggestion...  ::)

What is with all the attitude with most everyone lately... this 'game' is starting to sour fast...

As asked twice before... Where are these discusions stating the 'must have' reasonings? I have not been present the entire time haven't caught up with it all and have honestly not seen them.

Oh, and Blooded. Foxy has that bulge there because Mexico historically had it, and didn't have a "SUPA AMERICA SWARM ASSAULT" to defend it against.

Mexico had alot of the western US... until it didn't. Considering that the Mex-American War dealt with small units out west(in total around 3,000 men on both sides-?- and under a half dozen ships), 'supa-swarm' seems to be overstating it a bit.

Texas has that bulge over it because it's what it sorta had as an independent nation, except we pushed that to the Rockies for a natural boundary.

The loop over the top goes far past the rockies, continuing the rio grande line up is in line with the rockies. The OTL ROT border is hard to discern but was a tiny sliver in comparison. Barely passing into wyoming.

The simple matter is that I don't think that me and Foxy find the new "California" boundaries acceptable. It screws up a bunch of our storyline for our nations creation; and beyond that, they just look funky...

Where are these stories?

I'm getting the impression that Foxy absolutely has to have Arizona

I thought Foxy had to have Mexico...  ::)

[Valles]

I didn't get the impression of any particular 'real' irritation on Fox and Tex's parts, just disagreement. Even Tex's comment seemed more snarky than irritated.

That said, and recognizing that as someone who's not playing an American state I am at best kibitzing, my understanding is that California's origin is not colonial. That being the case, and not giving a damn about the relative square mileage or particular areas involved, I favor TexanCowboy's map precisely because it has only the bare minimum number of 'straight lines drawn on a map in Europe' borders.