This is scaled to 1/8 the size of the map. Base map consists of 20 deg X 10 deg squares, therefore this sample is 10 base squares by 5 base squares (50 total squares). The map is based on the lakes, rivers, geology and topography provided by Cornell @ http://atlas.geo.cornell.edu/webmap/

Full World Map size is 10800x6120@100pix/inch (64Meg bmp).

The greenery also seems a bit off. Like looking at England, you've got a huge forest right in the industrial heartland of England, so the map can't be based on current data, and most of Ireland looks like Kansas- flat plains, so it can't be based on older data when Ireland was very green.

I followed the link you're using for the raw data, and it seems there doesn't seem to be really good vegetation data there. I've got some maps you might find useful, that apear to be in the same projection, great relief maps. What era do you want to vegetation to be based on- modern day, with all the massive deforestation? Or how things look naturally, before we f**ked things up so much? Or some combo in between? For instance, I've got a great data set that covers all the world in CTP2 type categories and its based on about 1960 data, before the deforestation really got out of control. But the map projection isn't the same, so you'd have to do a lot of eyeballing to get it on your map.

Please also note that the England picture was based on pre colour coding and the image represents nothing done by me, only what was provided by the site. I agree there should be some hills in Ireland but none appeared on the elevation maps I had. If you have a site with beter data sets I sure would love to have it.

This is going great now. Thanks Harlan for pointing me to some other mapping sites.
http://viz.globe.gov/viz-bin/map.cgi?l=en&b=g&rg=n&enc=0&DS=G1&e=topo
http://edcdaac.usgs.gov/glcc/na_int.html
http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/uncgi/Earth
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/seg/topo/globegal.shtml

What I've done, when using topographical data as part of the basis for a map, is base the hills & mountains on the slope -- that is, the change in elevation.

Also, as long as you're making a map, you might want to make two versions: one, a "terrain rich" version, and the second, using the regular terrain. By terrain rich, what I mean is using extra terrain types on top of just the ones the regular game uses. I wrote a post about this a while back... One can't add new terrain types with new graphics, but one can add new terrain types using the same data sets.

In the latest Alex scenario, I took advantage of this in several ways. One, I created two types of desert: a regular desert and a "Sand Dune" desert (the current "sand dune" type being renamed to what they really are: "desert hills"). The Sand Dune is completely desolate, lacking all trade goods or production value of any kind, hard to pass through, and only units with the "mountain" flag can even try. There's a slightly different terrain graphic set to use here, that is the same as regular except without the cactus, skulls and so forth.

As I posted in some other long-lost thread, one can do this with other terrain types. For instance, have taiga/boreal forests look like regular forest, but when you transform them you get plains instead of grassland. Or have two types of deep ocean, differing only by movement speed. A faster type would represent the Gulf Stream and other currents. Give them a much higher trade good movement value, and trade routes will tend to go along these currents, greatly increasing naval strategy. There are other potentials as well in using the same terrain graphics for more than one type, though if we went too gozongas with that, it could become very confusing.

Another thing I did in Alex is use Polar Mountain to represent any mountain area over about 20,000 feet. This makes this terrain type more useful, since otherwise the only place to use this would be Greenland and Antarctica.

Topographical Map 86400x21600 http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/seg/topo/gltiles.shtml
Satelitte Image 12288x6144 http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/uncgi/Earth
Global Ground Cover (too small and would like larger)

Anyone have any good sites to large databases for ground cover, please don't worry about the size of the downloads. I've tried
http://edcdaac.usgs.gov/glcc/glcc_version1.html#Global http://edcdaac.usgs.gov/1KM/comp10d.html http://www.geog.umd.edu/landcover/1km-map.html

The Maryland site has great potential (Plate Carree projection), but when I download the files there and import to photoshop there is only a black image. I know it has to do with converting the file from .raw to another type. If anyone has any idea or can help me convert this it would be greatly accepted. The file itself is 889Megs big thus I don't suggest downloading it and converting it yourself. There is the following data included:

Platte Carre File Dimensions and Projection Information:

Image Size : 43200 pixels by 21600 lines
Projection : Geographic (lat/lon)
Earth Ellipsoid : Sphere, radius 6370997 m
Upper Left Corner : 180d00'00.00" W Lon 90d00'00.00" N Lat
Lower Right Corner : 180d00'00.00" E Lon 90d00'00.00" S Lat
Pixel Size (in Degrees) : 0.00833 Lon 0.00833 Lat
(Equivalent Deg,Min,Sec) : 0d00'30.00" Lon 0d00'30.00" Lat

8-bit unsigned integer

I downloaded and converted all 16 Globe 1km maps since I was using these maps as another input source in the map conversion pgm. I also joined all 16 together and made one big-a map. Unfortunately, a few days ago, I lost the 40g network drive all the data was on so it is now history. If you have any interest in thse maps let me know since I have the raw data specifications needed for the conversion.

For conversion you mean the source data, size and colour conversion info. If that's what you mean I downloaded those and I have decompressed the files and just have to put the image together. If you mean you isolated out the mountains/hills/slope calculations then I'm definately interested since I can't seem to get Wilbur to work properly yet. I get some data but it's not what I want. The change in elevation from ocean to continental shelf to hills to mountains seems to blur together and I get what I believe to be a useless map. If I can't figure this out soon I'll can the idea of slope calculations and just map it as is. I know that's not the ideal way to do it but if it's not going to happen for me with the small amount of time that I have left before finals, 1.5 weeks, then I'll just have to make due with what I have.

Are you speaking about the GLOBAL 1km map or the Plate Carree 1km map?

I have been using the GLOBAL 1km map and color indexing for conversion so I have not 'isolated the mountains/hills/slopes' per say.

One problem you might run into is size and memory. The Global 1km and Plate Carree 1km maps are both 43200x21600. Photoshop max is 30000x? and PSP max is 32767x? so you can't produce a 43200x21600 map. I ended up settling for 10800x5400 becuase that is all my memory would allow for and stay proportional. (43200x21600 --> 21600x10800 --> 10800x5400)

It appears we are attacking this thing from 2 totally different directions so I probably can't be of any help to you. However, if there is something I can do or check on for you, just let me know. In the mean time, I am trying to decide whether I want to try to re-create data (and source code) that I have been gathering since 1991 or just blow the whole thing off and forget about it.

Back to the Land cover data (Plate Carree 1km map). I know it's larger than the memory and size allowed for photoshop. Is there anyway to break it into pieces and proceed? I openned it as 10800x5400 and recoloured it getting a nice view I think of 90N to about 60N and 180W to 90W. This is good but I need the rest. Any ideas?

One final note to Salvius, I tried to open the GLOBAL set piece by piece into Wilbur and ran the slope function getting a slope map. BUT there were too many lines to be of any real use. How do you limit the number of slope lines created and how can you determine what the minimum elevation change will result in a slope line, since I think that I only want changes when it changes more than say 250, 2500, 5000 meters. If you can help a poor guy out with this it would be appreciated.

I have other programs to read the file but they keep saying the file is invalid. I have D/L'd it a few times and it is always the same. So... I am getting files which are in different formats now. (I am D/L'ing a 933M .bzq ground cover file now.) The following 2 pages are helpful and I am sure a way around this can be achieved. That is, once I understand everything better.

Okay back to the original question. Harlan is there anyway to add different terrain data (ie add a colour to the bmp2ctp2 program to code for another terrain type?) This would be huge since you were talking about a rich map and not so rich map. I've got the data now. The question is can I use the data to my benefit or do I just make the not so rich map and leave it at that. The data is split into 13 terrain types + any ocean types that I can find in the next round of searches. Hopefully the answer is yes?

Rich - the exhausted.

EDIT: This is the landcover set that went with the map I ended up getting.

0 WATER (and Goode's interrupted space)
1 EVERGREEN NEEDLELEAF FOREST
2 EVERGREEN BROADLEAF FOREST
3 DECIDUOUS NEEDLELEAF FOREST
4 DECIDUOUS BROADLEAF FOREST
5 MIXED FOREST
6 WOODLAND
7 WOODED GRASSLAND
8 CLOSED SHRUBLAND
9 OPEN SHRUBLAND
10 GRASSLAND
11 CROPLAND
12 BARE GROUND
13 URBAN AND BUILT-UP

Then I open this topic up and see..I am by no means CLOSE to what you guys are doing!

BTW...I congratulate you and am just in awe of your talents!

Keep up the great work fellas!
I really like the Map that was posted by Salvius.

Keep up the great work and as allways..I am no threat in yet another area of Modification!..MAP GENERATION!!!

LOL

Thanks for all the Hard work Folks!

We in the community really appreciate it!

Troll

PS: Mark i've mailed you about 10 times about this, I think you should get another ModEditor who knows something about slic.I dont have time with exams coming up.