[ɐʞᴉuoW ʇsnſ]

I haven't.
At least not completely.

Mapping every single tile may be taxing on many fronts, but it also may not be necessary. It's sufficient to map significant areas separated into sub-maps where appropriate, including but not necessarily limited to:
♦ The roads/paths that connect towns and other locations of interest
♦ Areas that may serve as points of interest within forests or other natural settings, such as animal dens.
♦ Bridges, be they across roads or rivers
♦ Town outskirts
♦ Coastline (mapping the entire coastline is honestly unnecessary, but everyone likes to have a beach)

This can keep the world compact enough for a small playerbase while expanding it artificially through obstacles and, potentially, winding routes that can slow progress. The important thing is that the maps are connected in a way that feels geologically correct, has room for wildlife and encounters, and is interesting enough for people to feel immersed just by walking through it (i.e. not a lot of empty space). This means some areas that look incredibly plain on the world map would need a touch of flavor when mapped.

I understand not wanting the map to be too massive to RP in, but it would be a shame to see the idea scrapped altogether. I also understand that we would be losing access to much of the world map as it's presented, but quality over quantity is probably best here.