[taken]The Destroyed Lands map

[Greason Wolfe]

So let's suppose this becomes the next challenge, or a challenge in the near future. That brings into question what we generally define as a region. Is it defined by the amount of area represented? Is it defined by borders (i.e. political or geographical)?

If, for instance, we had a small coastal valley that was generally comprised of one significant town and a few smaller towns but was bordered by mountains, would that be considered regional or would it be more along the lines of local? What about an area defined as a "National Forest" or "National Recreation Area?"

I ask more because I'm curious rather than looking for a clear-cut definition as I suspect this definition differs from one person to the next. Because the potential challenge is defined as a "regional" map, it seems to me that this would be a somewhat important definition to be clear on in regards to the challenge.

Maybe a better way to ask would be this;

If one were to depict the destruction in the Mt. St. Helens area after it blew its top, would that be considered a regional map or a local map?

GW

[Gamerprinter]

So let's suppose this becomes the next challenge, or a challenge in the near future. That brings into question what we generally define as a region. Is it defined by the amount of area represented? Is it defined by borders (i.e. political or geographical)?

If, for instance, we had a small coastal valley that was generally comprised of one significant town and a few smaller towns but was bordered by mountains, would that be considered regional or would it be more along the lines of local? What about an area defined as a "National Forest" or "National Recreation Area?"

I ask more because I'm curious rather than looking for a clear-cut definition as I suspect this definition differs from one person to the next. Because the potential challenge is defined as a "regional" map, it seems to me that this would be a somewhat important definition to be clear on in regards to the challenge.

Maybe a better way to ask would be this;

If one were to depict the destruction in the Mt. St. Helens area after it blew its top, would that be considered a regional map or a local map?

GW

Good question, I hadn't read this before. I think the range of what is regional is exactly as you describe. To me, a regional map could not effectively show much details in a city or town map, more than at this location is the city of "so and so", a regional map would probably show more than one city/town/village depicted on it, and it would include some larger geographic features such as part of a mountain range or forest.

Thus looking at the US for example, a regional map could be the "Midwest", or the State of Illinois, or the County of LaSalle, or even the Illinois Valley - which is part of LaSalle County.

So a regional map is smaller than a world map, yet larger than a city map. There is a wide range of possibilities in describing a regional map. In the example of a regional map for this challenge, I think going towards the more localized is better since such a map could more easily show how the catastrophe has affected the local population. Something like a 10 mile by 10 mile square region, rather than a 100 mile by 100 mile region - though both fall under the category of regional map.

Thus the region affected by Mount St. Helens, which might be a 50 x 50 mile or even a 100 x 100 mile region would certainly apply to a region. If the map only featured the volcano and the immediate communities surrounding it, thus a 10 x 10 mile area, it would still be regional.

I don't see an additional category of local map as existing at all, other than describing a smaller region.

GP

[Greason Wolfe]

Good question, I hadn't read this before. I think the range of what is regional is exactly as you describe. To me, a regional map could not effectively show much details in a city or town map, more than at this location is the city of "so and so", a regional map would probably show more than one city/town/village depicted on it, and it would include some larger geographic features such as part of a mountain range or forest.

Thus looking at the US for example, a regional map could be the "Midwest", or the State of Illinois, or the County of LaSalle, or even the Illinois Valley - which is part of LaSalle County.

So a regional map is smaller than a world map, yet larger than a city map. There is a wide range of possibilities in describing a regional map. In the example of a regional map for this challenge, I think going towards the more localized is better since such a map could more easily show how the catastrophe has affected the local population. Something like a 10 mile by 10 mile square region, rather than a 100 mile by 100 mile region - though both fall under the category of regional map.

Thus the region affected by Mount St. Helens, which might be a 50 x 50 mile or even a 100 x 100 mile region would certainly apply to a region. If the map only featured the volcano and the immediate communities surrounding it, thus a 10 x 10 mile area, it would still be regional.

I don't see an additional category of local map as existing at all, other than describing a smaller region.

GP

No worries there, sometimes it's hard to keep up with all the posts even in a single thread. Well, at least for me it is.

I am hoping this becomes a challenge, though, as I have an idea for this sitting on a back burner, so to speak. Haven't started any mapping, but I do have about 3/4ths of a short story done based on this same sort of situation and this would give me a good excuse to make a map for the story.

GW