Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:39 pm
I am in a quandary about maps. I want to make a map that can include both elevation and terrain (temperate forests, flat plains, high mountains, swamps etc.). Is this possible?
Because sometimes even national leaders just want to hang out
https://forum.nationstates.net/
Greater Allidron wrote:I am in a quandary about maps. I want to make a map that can include both elevation and terrain (temperate forests, flat plains, high mountains, swamps etc.). Is this possible?
Greater Allidron wrote:I am in a quandary about maps. I want to make a map that can include both elevation and terrain (temperate forests, flat plains, high mountains, swamps etc.). Is this possible?
Prosorusiya wrote:Any suggestions for a small European nation when it comes to getting into nuclear power? I am assuming I should go to the Russians for reactors, maybe the Slovaks for guidance and Western control systems?
The Soodean Imperium wrote:Semi-related question while we're on this topic: is there any precedent for a municipal government converting ground-level railways to elevated ones because the city has grown around them? Or would there be another solution to this? Either way, how would it be done to avoid disrupting rail traffic during construction? As I mentioned earlier, the main passenger lines in both cities were originally laid down in the 1870s-ish as a multi-purpose ground-level line around the outskirts, but it would be nice if I could have them be elevated lines later on when they solely carry electrified passenger trainsCosta Fierro wrote:
I don't see the southern and northern freight lines being connected, unless you're doing what we (or I at least) suggested vis a vis the rail corridors.
You're right, they're not
Would it be sufficient to connect them off the southern edge of the map, and adjust their courses to suggest this? It's still tacking an extra 100 kms or so onto the journey, but if the Gyŏngnam line is electrified and elevated it may struggle with tall and heavy well cars passing through all the time.Costa Fierro wrote:
That's how it works IRL, with even high speed trains sharing the same track to get into major stations. I used the TGV in France about eight years ago and they ran TGV sets on regular rails and the trains often routed into major stations in places like Paris on normal rails also. It's cheaper and better to have one major station catering to all commuter and intercity passenger trains (providing traffic management is good to reduce delays) rather than building two separate stations for normal and high speed trains (as is the case in Avignon).
Maybe it's hard to see here, but the high-speed line does merge alongside regular passenger trains while moving through the city, and stops at Donggyŏng Main Station. The high-speed trains use standard gauge and are electrified, so they could move onto regular rails during this stage. Though I'd imagined having two sets of track running in either direction down that trunk so that traffic from commuter trains wouldn't interfere as much with the high-speed and express intercity lines.Costa Fierro wrote:
Commuter stations would concentrate principally on where the population is most dense, so suburban areas where there might be a stop every couple of kilometres. The wider metropolitan area is less dense but still a source of significant commuter traffic so it could be a case of having one station in every major population center outside of the capital's main urban area.
Right now I have one station in each population center large enough to be marked red on the map, sometimes two, and occasionally stations in between where the rail line passes a highway or something. But that's still about 5-10 kms between stations on average, compared to 2-3 kms between stations on New York's Harlem Line for example. And I'm not sure if it's worth adding more stops in between given that much of the empty space is smallholder agriculture rather than middle-class suburbs.
I'm also divided over whether to add more commuter stops within the city center, which would increase delays but serve commuters better, or use express service to larger and more widely spaced stations, with the understanding that passengers will use the subway lines spreading out from those hubs.The Akasha Colony wrote:But to say that it's cheaper and better to have a single station as a general statement is, IMO, hard to defend. It varies too much from city to city to be true.
Literal path dependency
Prosorusiya wrote:Would it still make sense if it were more of a single plant built as a propaganda piece\in a setting where nuke power if becoming more common? This would be used for a near future\ cyber punk setting in the 2020s...
I not, I'll just scrap it. If I have some time, I'll post rough maps for the RP I'm running in meatspace of a cyberpunk version of Grozny that is under going a redesign...
NeuPolska wrote:Shoot for something orchestral
The Greater Aryan Race wrote:Welskerland wrote:
That's what I'm thinking. I want orchestral/symphonic but I don't know any good pieces to use. I don't want to use music of well known composers just because it would be too obvious and I want it to sound grandiose.
The Ukrainian and Croatian national anthems are fairly decent. And the Polish anthem. Majestic albeit melancholic pieces these.
Purpelia wrote:Actually I find that both libertarianism and base Marxism have the absolute same problem. They rely on people being good by nature. And that is absolutely positively 1000% undeniably wrong. People are monsters, plain and simple. Being good is no more natural to us than presenting a paw to shake is to a dog. It's trained behavior.
And I find that all freedom loving ideologies, be they relent on good through individual expression or good through cooperation fail because people just won't do good until you force feed it to them during their formative years. And that's hardly free now is it?
Actually I find that both libertarianism and base Marxism have the absolute same problem. They rely on people being good by nature. And that is absolutely positively 1000% undeniably wrong. People are monsters, plain and simple. Being good is no more natural to us than presenting a paw to shake is to a dog. It's trained behavior.
Allanea wrote:Actually I find that both libertarianism and base Marxism have the absolute same problem. They rely on people being good by nature. And that is absolutely positively 1000% undeniably wrong. People are monsters, plain and simple. Being good is no more natural to us than presenting a paw to shake is to a dog. It's trained behavior.
Only if you have some highly unreasonable definition of 'goodness'.
DnalweN acilbupeR wrote:The Investigations Bureau of the Intelligence Branch of RN police agencies (whether local, county, state or federal) may include the following: