Okay, so I un-fussied the tectonics map and made it a little more infomation friendly.
So:
Red = convergent
Yellow = transform
Blue = divergent
Aerlaan Tectonics 2.jpg
Greyed out the map so it's easier to focus and simplified the representation of the tectonics. Also probably more accurately represented the spread/shear zones of the divergent boundaries.
To my untrained eye I can't see a problem with what is happening. i have projected the map onto a sphere mesh in PS and it fits (that's actually why the south pole divergent boundary looks weird, that's kinda how it fits down south).
I got rid of the small plate west of the northwestern landmass. I couldn't really figure out what it was doing there. also actually added plate movement speeds in cm/yr and got rid of the fused plate boundaries (I only included these to justify some ancient eroded ranges like the Tianzi Mountains in China which i guess i can really include anyway )
I'm wondering if it's worth naming the plates? What do you guys think? It would kind of pin me down to the end result naming in some regard. I guess i'm okay wiht that.
So, I guess unless anyone chimes in with some words of wisdom I guess I will proceed (Gods help me).
PaGaN