Quote Originally Posted by Pixie View Post
Hi Asfalt, awesome first step in my opinion. Clearly, you've lurked and "worked in secret" for a long time before posting your product here at the guild. Thanks for the compliment to my never-ending-job.

Your topographical map looks alright, but way "too elevated". The very high areas (brown) are too "fat" and there is far less lowlands (green) than one would expect from a North America sized continent. AlexSchacher made a very cool colored topographical map of Earth which you can use to compare.
And by the way, how are you doing your map? Best method is to have each altitude/color in a different layer - is this the technique you are using?

As for your biomes map, how did you work those out?
Hi Pixie and thanks for answering (...and the inspiration)!

I've looked at AlexSchacher's maps and while I like them alot, I think that they are maybe too detailed for what I am trying to achieve. If I would go for a Tolkiensque approach of my map, the only areas which would be shown as triangular mountains are the ones in the brown scale and upwards. The yellow/light green areas are more uplands regions that are rolling hills of desert and arable lands, meaning they would be shown as sort of fields on that map.

Another explanation as to why the continent is so mountainous is because when I started out doing the map, it was supposed to be a smaller, Icelandic in size. Then ideas started flowing in, growing the world. Thsi might explain the erronous scale, but I'm quite liking it anyways.

As for the biomes I am mostly basing them on a realistic approach, where the continent receives rainfall and wind from the northeast/east. The central mountains acts as a barrier and thus gives a rain shadow to the lands directly west of them, creating a very dry environment. The arable lands in the southwest is due channel-digging and such. However, I have changed my biomes slightly to make the world more dynamic and I will upload an image later on showing them.

Thanks for answering