There will be anomolies
Personally, I'm not too too concerned with scale problems and anomolies. This is our first project and everyone is having fun. Thats more important.

squares are square
I hear what you're saying about the curvature of the world map Neonknight but rightly or wrongly, my section is a square. If the flat maps get finished people will spend far more time on the flat maps than the globe map.

I dont think we can affectively map thinking that every pixel is a third shorter than it is wide. Its just too hard for 12+ map makers to have different scales north-south than east-west. The global plotting in FT is a thing of beauty. The globes are cool and useful as regional maps. I think we have to accept that the squares are square because thats what we have to work with.

I also dont think we should change the scale.
Shrinking the world would change all the information generated in the various maps and make future measurements on something like google earth impossible.
Besides, there's a lot to learn in adapting to various land masses. I think its better to develop regions in a square than shrink the squares.

Adapt Region Names & Rethink
If each square is half again the size of Germany, we should probably develop our regional names a little bit. Unless this world has cars, european distances make much more sense to me. Cities and villages 12 miles apart etc...
Most people have coastline, I think we should look at settlement patterns springing from the coastline and rivers.

Perhaps we should trade regions after they're 'done' ?
One way to adapt to the size of the regions might be to have more people create into them. That would give genuine variety and maybe reflect the size better. How many different stories are between London and Berlin?


Sigurd