Hex Mapping
- Thread starter jswa
- Start date
Generating, storing and displaying raw system data is all ver well, what would be realy useful is an application for creating a whole setting. I want to be able to click on a world to view it's details, have easy access to editable descriptive articles, customisable space and surface encounter tables as well as a fully integrated trade system.
Do any of the mapping applications offer anything like this?
Simon Hibbs
Do any of the mapping applications offer anything like this?
Simon Hibbs
GypsyComet
Emperor Mongoose
Subsectors can be whatever size you want to fit on a page, really. Traveller convention is 8x10. but if you are rolling your own, there is no need to follow the convention.
phild said:Which of course brings us neatly onto.... anyone mapped 3D subsectors? :O
I've used a 2.5D system for short running game, it's not true 3D but is a lot easier to represent on a map.
For some worlds on the map, you annotate them with a positive or negative number that indicates that world is above or below the plane of the map. The magnitude of the number is added to all travel distances to that system. Note that even if the number is negative, indicating the system is below the plane of the map, it increases travel times to that system. e.g. is a world is 2 hexes from a world on the main plane of the map and annotated with a -1 then the true distance between them is 3 hexes.
Whe plotting travel distances from one world to another where both have offsets of this kind, work out the vertical difference between them and add that to the travel distance. e.g. if two worlds are 3 hexes apart on the map, but one world has +2 and the other -1 next to it, the total distance between them is 3+2+1=6 hexes.
This system works best if it is used sparingly. At most I had 3 or 4 worlds in a subsector off the normal plane and offsets should be kept failrly low, the largest I ever used was an offset of 3. Also I never stacked more than one system in a single hex.
No attempt is made to use trigonometry to calculate true 3D distances, the offsets are simply added to travel distances with no complex maths. This makes the systema little technicaly inaccurate, but extremely easy to use. It also makes it highly scalable. You could map an area the size of the Imperium like this without any porblems, except that the map would approximate to true 2D on the medium to large scale. It only approximates 3D on the local scale.
Simon Hibbs
phild said:Which of course brings us neatly onto.... anyone mapped 3D subsectors? :O
I have gone round in circles over this issue several times in the past, and in the end came to a simple conclusion: it's just not worth it !
The point of a star map in Traveller is to allow you to plan routes, to spot profitable trading options, to see how to get to world B from world A. In any reasonably populated 3D subsector, doing that quickly becomes a nightmare. You either have all the worlds on a single map, with their z coordinate listed - which rapidly turns into a mess, or you have a separate map for each z slice of the subsector - which means you have to leaf through a stack of maps to plot even a short hop, and makes plotting more than a couple of hops hopeless unless you have the 3D spacial awareness of a dolphin.
So then you end up designing some kind of schematic view instead of a real spacial view (eg. the famous London Tube map versus is actual spacial layout). At which point you've effectively come full circle and ended up with a '2D' star map anyway !
Much as I think a 3D map adds depth and 'realism' - I honestly don't think it adds anything to the experience of playing the game, and more likely detracts from the enjoyment....
(that aside, one possible approach is to print separate vertical slices of the map on to acetate, and then at least you can stack then and see through each layer and see all the worlds at once)
Gee4orce said:phild said:Which of course brings us neatly onto.... anyone mapped 3D subsectors? :O
So then you end up designing some kind of schematic view instead of a real spacial view (eg. the famous London Tube map versus is actual spacial layout).
Actually, it's a schematic view. It bears some relationship with reality, and you can roughly navigate the streets on foot using the tube map, but it's been pulled about and prodded in for accessibility.
I suspect this is true, barring groups with access to some very natty computerised star maps. I have written an excel-based plotter that makes an isometric subsector map, with the size of the star relative to its depth and guidelines showing how the stars touched the axes of the grid. But frankly, without the ability to spin it around it was pretty bloody useless
[/quote]
(that aside, one possible approach is to print separate vertical slices of the map on to acetate, and then at least you can stack then and see through each layer and see all the worlds at once)[/quote]
Nice idea. But as you say... cost/benefit is the issue. ( thinking more about cost=effort than £$)
phild said:I suspect this is true, barring groups with access to some very natty computerised star maps. I have written an excel-based plotter that makes an isometric subsector map, with the size of the star relative to its depth and guidelines showing how the stars touched the axes of the grid. But frankly, without the ability to spin it around it was pretty bloody useless
Well, the Astrosynthesis program from NBOS can do this quite nicely, and relatively affordably, too. Still, you wind up with a stack of print outs to make things easy to reference for the PCs and GM.
As a wargamer as well as an RPGer, I've found that while 3d is cool, and far more accurate, 2d representations in games tend to be more satisfying in the terms of ease of reference and keeping the game flowing along smoothly. I'll save my 3d experiences for video games.
