I think we can pretty much say that an individual will have immense leeway regarding all the landforms involved with their map. They want a mountain that their narrative justifies where none would be on our map they can throw that in, they need to change a coastline to suit their needs, or as islands or whatever I say go for it. The elevation map, and indeed the landmasses are suggestions merely to give people a foundation to work on and not actually reflective or determinative of what is there.
Originally Posted by Azelor
Yea I know we have to let some leeway but it's was a joke
And the climates are coming. I still need to check if I haven't mixed the info on January and July again.
I've got to say I surprised at how closely the world aligns with Earth. I was expecting some similarity as we have two halves and a big continent like Asia, but there is far more than what I thought.
It took a while to do it but I like it. Need some revision here and there probably but it's not so bad. I was going to do the poles separately, so don't bother with them.
January wind and pressure: similar as before but I combined the two maps. It took me 3 times to get the winds right. I think they are for the most part.
Arrows at the poles might not be right but they are ok for now.
July wind and pressure
no color= dry
dark blue= low
mid blue= moderate
the rest is either wet
or very wet (Pixie is not too clear about that) and everything above fall into the very wet.
Precipitation maps might need some corrections is some places. It look messy but you can see where the continents are.
July temperature map (I still have the January map to do, but I need at least a full hour to do it with that level of precision if I don't mix the layers like last time)
So tell me if you find something wrong with these maps. If it's alright I will do the January temp map. Make the corrections to the temperature and precipitation maps to make them more ''consistent'' (patching holes, things like that). Then it's on with the climates. I will try my method to determine climates based on a CMYK classification. I just need to take the rain and temperature layers in a new CMYK file. Change the 10 temperature colors in Cyan/Magenta. Change the 5 precipitation categories into yellow and black. Put the layers in multiply and look at the results. This is an experiment so I have no idea what I will get but it could save us some time. If it doesn't make sense, we will do it another way.
There is something wrong with the mountains. They are too hot to my taste. Very high mountains should stay at least cold (under 0 Celsius) even during the summer. The Himalaya is almost at the 30th latitude and some of our mountains are also at these latitudes.
Based on our elevation map :
no changes in temperature
1000-2000m : -1 temperature category (like in the tutorial)
2000-4000: -1 (a full category)
4000+ :-2 ( 2 full categories)
6000+ for very high summits, lower the temperature by another 2 categories
If the altitude is Severely hot at 0m
it become Very hot at 1000m
hot at 2000m
mild at 4000m
cold at 6000m...
but when the temperature is at cold or very cold at the base of the mountain, there are no differences because the summit is already at the coldest temperature possible.
I just wonder how cold is our mountains range in the north east. Considering that the temperature is -25 at the base and that the temperature lower by almost 5.5 Celsius for each 1000m. At 6000m = -58 (on average)
These are the areas that receive less than 240mm off precipitation a year. Poles excluded. The reason why I ignore the poles is because they are going to be classified as Ice caps, both of them. It's just easier that way unless someone disapprove.
Most of these areas seems logic places for desert and arid climates but the north east continent.. you really need to look at the rain and precipitation map to understand.
In January, the mountains forces the Polar front to go south. This creates offshore winds from the mountains.
In July, the Polar front goes north again blocked by mountains and the ITCZ is too far south so it kinda fall into the Horses latitudes with almost no winds.
Does it make sense ?
I understand that the center of the largest continent is dry. It does seems to make sense. And some of the northern parts are probably not desert. It's possible to have a humid climate if the temperature is low enough.
But that is not taking in account the surrounding areas that only have slightly more rain. They could also turn into deserts or steppes.
Does the size of the continents come into play at all? Also I'm assuming that the areas of 240mm precipitation will all be deserts or tundra or the like, does this preclude other areas from being similarly arid in practice? As it seems that there is relatively little "desert" areas if that is the case. Which is fine obviously, it can be a wetter world than Earth and likely is. Also I remember you said the second star didn't have much effect on temperature but was there some? A stabilising effect maybe leading to milder winters warmer summers or none at all?
Incidently I think that laying in major rivers, or perhaps just indicating major watersheds is the last step before opening up the map for public claims. I'll start work on that tonight. Or perhaps we should wait till after the climates and biomes are done? Although with all the ground work laid I'd also expect people to be able to figure that out on their own as needed...
08-18-2014, 12:06 PM
The second star increases the temperature by 9 Kelvins according to BlackChakram.
I'm not sure if the number is right but I that 's what the formula said and he know more than me on that topic. This could be mitigated by several things including that our planet contain more water, reflect more energy into space (larger ice sheets), the main star is smaller than the Sun...
The second star is so far compared to the main star that the influence is always 9 Kelvins unless it is aligned behind the main star. Then, we might have a solar eclipse but it does not last for very long.
Yes the size on the continent in the south west explain why it is the driest. But some of the regions there are also some of the wettest on the planet. It's a land of contrast. And having low precipitations does not always mean it's a desert... And desert can also span elsewhere. Close to the equator, the annual rain requirement is much higher. The hottest spots could need around 1000mm of rain to stay at least humid. A good thing that we don't have much of these.
If you are talking about the other continents, particularly the one in the North east , then the answer is no; the size is not the major factor. Mountains and the differences in pressure are the most important factors.
Tags for this Thread