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