Celestial Reorganization Project

That is true, pirates are more prevalent when there are undefended or lightly defended frontiers.

Alright. It's taken about a day, but we can now safely conclude that all mapmaking has been officially finished. I'll move to wiki'ing the articles for individual sectors tomorrow, and distribute a ZIP folder containing the .psd and .png versions of the map to FMs and Administrators of interest.

Thanks for supporting this, and I really hope this works out.

http://img693.imageshack.us/i/starmap.png/

50 LY Maps
Samurai Sector
Lor Cluster
Frontier Cluster
Hukka Cluster
Yuukan Cluster

100 LY Maps
Core Cluster
Nepleslia Sector

200 LY Maps
Haven Cluster
Saiki Cluster
Elysia Cluster
Bard Cluster
Freehold Frontier
Kapital Cluster
Yugumo Cluster

300 LY Maps
New Nepleslia Sector
Ketsurui Military Sector
Astral Cluster

in the KMS, Make sure to have all the proper starbases ETC. in place.

Also, where are the UX- systems?

Other than that, it looks pretty nice. This will be very useful to me as a GM.

kai said:

Also, where are the UX- systems?

Click to expand...

I spent about 3 hours waffling between giving the UX systems names and trying to find any evidence of naming them. Needless so say, I didn't try again.

Thank you for adding the grids. I've found them very helpful on the maps they've been put on. Somehow, my eyes seem to be able to take it all in and make sense of it much more easily.

I am curious: What did you use to make the new map, Exhack?

illustrator or photoshop, I would assume, since it's a psd file.

But that would defeat the concept that brought this about. Several of the other factions want to spread things out so that their factions have room to grow instead of all being lumped together.

Click to expand...

This is the wrong opinion to have when talking about the map retcon.

I'm in full support of the map retcon if only for the fact that it makes SHAMELESS LAND GRABS harder.

Some people on this site STILL haven't moved on from the 'our territory has to be BIGGER than theirs,' belief, which I feel is the most active detriment to the unity of the site and is an elephant in the room that needs to be addressed.

If it were up to me, I'd have the entire star map obliterated, but this is happy medium I can accept.

Maps don't affect the "Land Grabs." No matter what the layout is (or even if there was just systems lists and no map), there will be expansion...so I don't agree with your post Tom.

If you wanted to slow land grabs, you'd have to do something like require a certain amount of RP per added system, require a player per system (like our guidelines are now), or require that each new system come with some sort of issue (like maybe it has native life you have to figure out how to get along with, or maybe the NMX are also trying to take it and you do a plot mission to drive them off).

Tom,
For the record I have no problem with this new map. I have already been giving thought regarding having to rethink dynamics and logistics. For example an SSS Tansaku traveling from Yamatai to Daichi is going to take 23+ days using CDD. 800 LY / 1.43 LY/H = 599.4 hours or 23.31 days.

I have no problem with this, but it does affect how I will post things, if I write a post about a ship traveling to Yamatai I have to remember that its about 10 times longer than I originally had. And if that same ship were to use Fold which they don't for long distances because of the risk, its 17.77 hours.

My post that you quoted was in response to Uso's comment of

Uso said:

Using a separate overall cluster map with the current map as the 'core cluster' would mean no retconing and wouldn't affect what is already established in RP.

Click to expand...

Overall I have no problems with this concept. It does help give a sense of how big space is and and that help is not going to be coming in a few minutes..

Maps don't affect the "Land Grabs."

Click to expand...

I beg to differ. They most definitely do.

Back with the old map, we had people counting planets, making sure they were on equal footing with everybody else. When the little dots of one faction got threatened, or some faction we didn't think deserved dots decided to try to claim said dots, we took sides over it. Called it overexpanding, or protecting the nation/race/culture/whatever you named it.

Fact is, there was loads of drama over it, and the fact that the star map kept expanding and those dots kept adding up proves there was some notion of greed, of oneupsmanship involved in the whole process.

At least with the new map, we have rather vague borders AND we make it a lot harder to expand because in order to make your circle bigger, you have to add loads of planets to fill it out. Also, with the bigger maps, there isn't so much of an emphasis on the number of planets one faction owns. It's just a vague concept of 'controlled space' which really has no bearing on what's in that space to begin with.

In my opinion, this forces people to do a lot more work into the process of expansion, which is a wonderful thing.

No matter what the layout is (or even if there was just systems lists and no map), there will be expansion...so I don't agree with your post Tom.

Click to expand...

I partially disagree. Expansion will exist, yes, but without the 'visual candy' of a map, the idea of territory becomes a lot more abstract, which I think it should be.

Will territorial expansion happen? Of course.

Is territorial expansion a good thing? In most cases, no. Maybe for plotship-based expansion, I can support it, but not others.

In fact, I challenge people to prove me wrong when, in a majority of the cases, territorial expansion of one nation or another didn't lead to some OOC bickering or drama. Mainly because someone just decided to plant some flags somewhere.

We gotta take everything into perspective and try to utilize a new approach. I hope this map is a step in the right direction.

To Nashoba: no worries.

If anything, the new map system would increase "land grabbing."


- Sectors eliminate being crowded by neighboring factions (eg Yamatai beign all around the Seelie and Abwheran factions) so there is room too expand more.
- Sectors make factions more defensible in their bubble and so there's less reason not to expand
- The map is much larger in LY so there is more to claim
- Factions will naturally want to expand to "fill" their sector so no other factions can move in on them so they will grab more systems
- FMs will likely update their sectors to have more star systems at their convenience, which they likely will do to increase their industry levels (affecting ship counts, etc)
- Because the maps are split up, sector changes won't be visible to people who aren't watching for them so there may be "low key/stealth expansion."

We should probably have more stringent rules for expansion to keep this fair, then. Restrictions based on RP and playerbase size, and try to instill a 'less is more' attitude among FMs.

I can't believe what I'm reading here and some of the attitudes that some of you have considering how amazing Exhack's work has been. Oh no! Players = Planets = Production doesn't work anymore because planets are more nebulously defined? Then get rid of the middle part of the equation and Players can still equal Production. And amazingly this fixes the problem where a Faction would have to lose planets because they are at a low point in players. Now, they have a potential story hook to explain why production is low. Perhaps the war with the Mishhu is going bad? Perhaps there is some political or economic upheval? But please, keep whinging that Exhack's awesome update now screws everything up.

But oh no! Distances are now further and strategically bluh bluh bluh. The map can already be leapt in an inconsiquential time. Adding some distance isn't going to change that by a significant factor. Especially given the fact, that there is no tactical advantage to location in SARP space where you can just leap to any point on the map in a matter of minutes or seconds. If some of you guys spent half the energy you spend complaining about things instead constuctively adding to the site, this site wouldn't have the problems it does at the higher levels.

So, not only do I applaud Exhack for taking the intiative on this new art, but I additionally applaud him on sticking around and continually improving the site, its roleplay, and its lore by his work, his presence and the effect it all has on others.

Wes and I just disagree on the impact of the map update, not that the map update is a bad thing at all. In fact, I think we both love it. Uso raises relevant points himself, but I think they've been addressed for the most part.

I think you missed that, Revolver.

I was thinking we could approve the big map and then work out the details on the sector maps individually. I know I want to change the KMS one to more closely match the original, for instance.

With the dead FTL zones?

Please no! T_T

The Dead FTL zones as the occasional space phenomenon is fine and all, but when you start spamming them around... it just gets ridiculous. I don't want them back.

I beg! Pretty please with strawberry on top!

I just want my systems in the same positions.

I'm also thinking of making cute little icons for each major space station since we're getting a lot of them now.

I agree that Icons for stations would be p. cash.

Especially since I run several stations.

Wes said:

I just want my systems in the same positions.

I'm also thinking of making cute little icons for each major space station since we're getting a lot of them now.

Click to expand...

I went to the trouble of giving the UX systems names and changed the positions around mostly as a suggestion. If FMs would prefer their systems to be arranged differently, I'm open to requests via an MS paint example of the new arrangement, and wouldn't offended if they used the .psd and reworked it themselves.

There is only one things I'm not going to compromise on in this case.

Microsoft Bold Extended ATT is the standard font I used for everything. It should probably remain that way unless a more appropriate and more sci-fi font is chosen, to keep the articles looking fairly professional.

Size 12 for worlds and objects. Size 18 for major landmarks and the LY counter on 50-100 LY maps, minor ones on 200+. Size 24 is standard for major landmarks on 200 LY+ maps and the size marker for those. 36 is generally only used for the title of a map.

I marked off all worlds with a size nine hard brush, in white. Stations were done with a size 4. It's optional, and was only carried over if it was on the original map.

Oh. And even though I marked off stars on the maps, those listings are not permanent or absolute. Inside of a cluster there could be many more systems than those which are initially charted, and some stars might be stricken from the map when they prove to be empty or are destroyed.

PS: Beacon's Perch is supposed to be the Freespacer Preserve (that I remember you dismantled ICly a while ago...)