Advice Thread OOC Future Tech Only

[Feazanthia]

I need to update that. People haven't been sending me stuff, but then again I haven't been looking for it. I've been lazy.

Now I feel bad. Bad mentor.

[Esternial]

After reading Feazanthia's "state of the galaxy", I realize one very important fact. I haven't killed enough Rethast. Is the pathogen a worthy enough cause to force this old war horse onto the field of honor? Only time will tell.

Well, if one pathogen isn't enough reason, a second one will!

I need to update that. People haven't been sending me stuff, but then again I haven't been looking for it. I've been lazy.

Now I feel bad. Bad mentor.

BAAADDD!

What stuff, btw?

[Feazanthia]

Stuff to put in the State of the Galaxy.

Edit: It doesn't help that my office's web security contractor seems to have closed the loophole I used to access Legion chat from my work desktop, and I haven't yet located a new workaround.

[YellowApple]

I might just have them in my culture / history but exclude them from Active RPs (war and such)

How would you do that, considering you just mentioned those 'warp pipes'?

YellowApple, Inc. could sell them some static superluminal transit nodes to make it happen.

[Auman]

Stuff to put in the State of the Galaxy.

Edit: It doesn't help that my office's web security contractor seems to have closed the loophole I used to access Legion chat from my work desktop, and I haven't yet located a new workaround.

Bro... If what you said is true today, I'm about ready to go Sam Jackson up in this bish. The best cure to Aumanii economic collapse is pounding the Rethast rear line.

Edit:

And what I mean by that is write everything you can find into the State of the Galaxy. That would be fantastic.

[Esternial]

Stuff to put in the State of the Galaxy.

Edit: It doesn't help that my office's web security contractor seems to have closed the loophole I used to access Legion chat from my work desktop, and I haven't yet located a new workaround.

Well, I can send you some stuff about my upcoming FT nation, just TG me when you need it

[Cypra Mundii]

After reading Feazanthia's "state of the galaxy", I realize one very important fact. I haven't killed enough Rethast. Is the pathogen a worthy enough cause to force this old war horse onto the field of honor? Only time will tell.

Speaking of, Rethan needs help finishing his epic story arc: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=117931&hilit=Rethan+Outbreak+2





Am I the only one who feels a Galaxy Map would be a really good thing? Or did the idea die because it wasn't needed? Because back in the day, Bryn Shander created a really goo map of the galaxy. Here's the link to bring up old memories (also, check out the names and alliances on the lists)...
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=8067&start=0

[SquareDisc City]

I need help with deciding if i am FT or not.

Due to our history, We have our nation in 2 universes
1) NSVerse, HQ of our government and offers the only point of travel between the universes.
2)Marioverse, Our nation's point of origin, Where we somehow supernaturally broke off due to malfunctioning technlogy (Fully explained in my otherwise outdated forum factbook)
We also have Warp Pipes, which are not FTL travel but most journeys only take 1-5 Minutes, unless the pipes are congested. When they are it can take anywhere from 6 minutes to an Hour.
60% of our population are Intelligent Mushrooms that are native here, and Some are Yoshis that are native to the nearby Yoshi Island, also under our control.
We also have Dimensional Reversal Devices which transport anything in the area into the Marioverse, but the current levels of technology limit us to consume 1km/h.

Am i FT or PMT?

Definitely not PMT. FanT is the most obvious fit, but there's no reason other than the possible close-mindedness of other players against anything not po-facedely serious that you can't RP in FT settings. You'll probably want some sort of spaceships for travel within the Milky Way though.

[Feazanthia]

After reading Feazanthia's "state of the galaxy", I realize one very important fact. I haven't killed enough Rethast. Is the pathogen a worthy enough cause to force this old war horse onto the field of honor? Only time will tell.

Speaking of, Rethan needs help finishing his epic story arc: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=117931&hilit=Rethan+Outbreak+2





Am I the only one who feels a Galaxy Map would be a really good thing? Or did the idea die because it wasn't needed? Because back in the day, Bryn Shander created a really goo map of the galaxy. Here's the link to bring up old memories (also, check out the names and alliances on the lists)...
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=8067&start=0

I believe (and could be mistaken) that there's at least some movement on a project to get Mindset's map operational again.

[Escalan Corps-Star Island]

Speaking of, Rethan needs help finishing his epic story arc: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=117931&hilit=Rethan+Outbreak+2





Am I the only one who feels a Galaxy Map would be a really good thing? Or did the idea die because it wasn't needed? Because back in the day, Bryn Shander created a really goo map of the galaxy. Here's the link to bring up old memories (also, check out the names and alliances on the lists)...
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=8067&start=0

I believe (and could be mistaken) that there's at least some movement on a project to get Mindset's map operational again.

That. . . would be amazing.

[Vocenae]

There has been no progress, unless it's been worked on with the intention of a surprise release.

There were plans and conversations but largely nothing came of it, so again unless there's a been development in secret, the project is in stasis, if not dead.

[Auman]

After Bryn Shander's deletion, the real trouble was in finding someone who had the patience to deal with the map process, as well as the time and skill. I mean, dealing with the map isn't that hard, it's just that things come up and maps die.

[SquareDisc City]

I think if it is picked up again it would be worth whoever handles it making their working files available, not just the final image, to allow easier handover. (It might be an image editor format with layers to allow easy removal of markers for example, or the map might be made programatically.)

[YellowApple]

I think if it is picked up again it would be worth whoever handles it making their working files available, not just the final image, to allow easier handover. (It might be an image editor format with layers to allow easy removal of markers for example, or the map might be made programatically.)

I might be able to do something with a programmatic approach. Stay tuned.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

I need help with deciding if i am FT or not.

Due to our history, We have our nation in 2 universes
1) NSVerse, HQ of our government and offers the only point of travel between the universes.
2)Marioverse, Our nation's point of origin, Where we somehow supernaturally broke off due to malfunctioning technlogy (Fully explained in my otherwise outdated forum factbook)
We also have Warp Pipes, which are not FTL travel but most journeys only take 1-5 Minutes, unless the pipes are congested. When they are it can take anywhere from 6 minutes to an Hour.
60% of our population are Intelligent Mushrooms that are native here, and Some are Yoshis that are native to the nearby Yoshi Island, also under our control.
We also have Dimensional Reversal Devices which transport anything in the area into the Marioverse, but the current levels of technology limit us to consume 1km/h.

Am i FT or PMT?

Definitely not PMT. FanT is the most obvious fit, but there's no reason other than the possible close-mindedness of other players against anything not po-facedely serious that you can't RP in FT settings. You'll probably want some sort of spaceships for travel within the Milky Way though.

Well damn, I guess I better rethink my imperial space Russians and their silly hats.

[SquareDisc City]

I think if it is picked up again it would be worth whoever handles it making their working files available, not just the final image, to allow easier handover. (It might be an image editor format with layers to allow easy removal of markers for example, or the map might be made programatically.)

I might be able to do something with a programmatic approach. Stay tuned.

My own first idea was to wrap a script round imagemagick that would read from a file of positions and possibly colours and place dots accordingly. Would need something more advanced to do labelling mind, to avoid overlaps; I know there's software that does such though no specifics.

[YellowApple]

I might be able to do something with a programmatic approach. Stay tuned.

My own first idea was to wrap a script round imagemagick that would read from a file of positions and possibly colours and place dots accordingly. Would need something more advanced to do labelling mind, to avoid overlaps; I know there's software that does such though no specifics.

I was thinking of using diagramming software and making the map more a logical map than a verbatim-coordinate map (though there should be a way to specify precise coordinates). Either way, I'm investigating software like FreeMind, which is both FOSS and supports the mm format (XML based, very clean, lots of other diagramming/mind-mapping software supports it), allowing for cool things like, say, opening up the file to public editing (so that folks can add their own entries wiki-style).

That's just my thought, though; I'm looking into the feasibility of that - and whether or not it would be something useful - as I type this.

[YellowApple]

As an addendum to my previous post, it looks like FreePlane can handle at least the logical aspects of such a map, and the format does support arbitrary positioning of individual nodes (as well as multiple connections between nodes, at least with FreePlane's extensions to the mm format), so it should be possible to do. There are a couple of questions I should ask from everyone, though, if I'm going to attempt something like this:

• Should I focus on the Milky Way exclusively, or should I allow some flexibility for other galaxies (like Andromeda)?
• Does exact positioning matter, or should the map remain abstract and only focus on logical positions? Likewise, will a precise coordinate system be required on this map? Additionally, will a grid be necessary (if so, then I'll probably need to look into a different approach).
• FreePlane supports a variety of export formats, including both Java and Flash applets (as well as, say, PNG/SVG); would a dynamic applet like that be something others would be interested in?
• How should the map be organized? I'm personally leaning toward galaxy>region>star>planet>moon>city (not all of those levels are necessary; we can stop at star) with simple color-coding for alliances and such, but I'm open to affiliation-based mapping as well, although that might make things more complicated.
• Should I aim to replicate an existing map in terms of formatting and structure? If so, which one? I know Bryn Shander's was mentioned and linked to here, but unfortunately the map link on that thread appears to be broken; if anyone has a copy of that map, that might be useful.

[SquareDisc City]

So like an interstellar tube map? That would be very applicable for people who use fixed travel routes, whether it's the technology or just common practice that fixes them. Wormholes, Stargates, safe hyperlanes, escorted trade convoys, that kind of stuff. Especially if a route across the galaxy will pass through several friendly systems. It's perhaps less useful for those who opt for "go anywhere" drives.

As for the focus of the map, the Milky Way's the priority I think. On another forum we had direction arrows pointing off towards the LMC, SMC, M31, and M33, but those galaxies weren't themselves mapped. The scale of the Milky Way offers the advantage that it's basically two-dimensional (well, the disk is, and most people are in the disk). At a larger scale, say a map width of a couple of thousand light years or less, the thickness of the disk becomes important and you need to do 3D mapping. At a smaller scale, if you want to map multiple galaxies relative to each other you again need a 3D map.

I think most people would expect geometric positioning and some sort of co-ordinate system. Whether it's necessary I can't sat, the proof of the pudding would be in the popularity and reported utility (or lack thereof) of a topological map. A grid is highly desirable for geometric maps, but unwanted for topological ones.

The most common approach I've seen has been to use a base map of the Milky Way such as this one produced by NASA (and available at a great resolution, about 50 light-years per pixel), with a grid superimposed, either NASA's or the mapmaker's own choice of system, and then location markers as requested by RPers.

"Galactic Cartographer's" map might be the last updated, it's in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=70911

[Sskiss]

YellowApple, if you're going to try to pull all this off, just do me one favour... Don't make the mistake of using large print (fonts) to indicate system names etc... such print should only show if a mouse cursor goes over it or something to that effect.

Also, people like shiny things... So make sure it looks good...

[SquareDisc City]

When labelling maps or any images for that matter I find it often helps to use black text with a white border. That way you get clear contrast whether the background is light or dark or even changes from one side of the word to the other.

[Kyrusia]

Out-of-Character:

As for the focus of the map, the Milky Way's the priority I think. On another forum we had direction arrows pointing off towards the LMC, SMC, M31, and M33, but those galaxies weren't themselves mapped. The scale of the Milky Way offers the advantage that it's basically two-dimensional (well, the disk is, and most people are in the disk). At a larger scale, say a map width of a couple of thousand light years or less, the thickness of the disk becomes important and you need to do 3D mapping. At a smaller scale, if you want to map multiple galaxies relative to each other you again need a 3D map.

Generally speaking, two-dimensional mapping is the (erroneous) standard insofar as galactic, stellar, and planetary mapping (though projection on planetary levels is of less importance in this venue). While NS Future Technology maps have, largely, consisted of two-dimensional projects, this poses a problem with scale - specifically in the case of large-scale maps (such as GC's) where, in effect, a single pixel could equal as much (if not more) as 30 parsecs (±100 light years), making precise placement of stellar and planetary systems (much less stations) as rather fallacious since, for example, if you had a three pixel diameter circle representing a system, it could actually encompass several stellar systems (assuming an average size to the diameter of the Kuiper Belt in the Solar System) inside of it, effectively negating proximity of stellar systems due to scale.

This poses obvious problems, as stellar systems can overlap when viewed three-dimensionally, though it is exceedingly difficult to properly present two-dimensionally and in a manner that is easily identifiable and understood (considering the average age of most NS'ers); after all, the Milky Way Galaxy is, in fact, not flat. The "Bulge" has, at its peak, interstellar dust and stars spanning a "height/thickness" of around 3,065 parsecs (±10,000 light years), with this "thickness" tapering off toward the rim according to differential velocity.

The more "correct" projection would be orthographic (a two-dimensional image representing a three-dimensional volume with an orthographic coordinate vector relative to the other two): in effect: a three-dimensional Cartesian space (x,y,z). The problem with this is, more or less, it requires some degree of skill in either 1) three-dimensional rendering (such as through Wings 3D, SketchUp, etc.), or 2) a very detailed, hand-designed, digital orthographic representation of the galaxy/space in question. Furthermore, it requires a container (such as Flash) to be effective, much less able to be edited by users, and a fair degree of server space to host it.

This is, largely, why two-dimensional mapping is generally used for such large-scale volumes, with individual users creating their own, smaller, orthographic projections as necessary (be it for their territory, HII regions, etc.) and why it is - for better or worse - considered the "norm". Even so, mapping the "Milky Way Galaxy" poses an even more fundamental problem which I address below.

I think most people would expect geometric positioning and some sort of co-ordinate system. Whether it's necessary I can't sat, the proof of the pudding would be in the popularity and reported utility (or lack thereof) of a topological map. A grid is highly desirable for geometric maps, but unwanted for topological ones.

Whether a Cartesian coordinate system is made into the map or not, it will exist in any map insofar as there is an assumed center; in the case of GC's map (and most galactic maps in fictitious settings I have witnessed) this was assumed to be the Galactic Center (specifically, the approximate location of Sagittarius A* as 0,0) - no doubt inspired, to a degree, by the Star Trek franchise's same methodology. In reality, scientists place the Sun ("Sol") as "0,0" due to the anthropocentric nature of any given species; this, for obvious reasons, doesn't work in NS Future Technology as there is no universally-accepted "center of focus". In truth, the nature of Fractal Sol, more or less, entirely inhibits this.

As for a topological representation (which would be a three-dimensional rendering of the volume of the Galaxy), a coordinate system would still exist, it would merely be with three axises instead of two (a Cartesian space as opposed to a Cartesian plane). In the case, for example, of an actual three-dimensional rendering of the Galaxy, a Cartesian coordinate system along three axises would exist by benefit of its actual rendering (as most three-dimensional modelling programs designate, according to variable units, the length, depths, and width of an object).

The most common approach I've seen has been to use a base map of the Milky Way such as this one produced by NASA (and available at a great resolution, about 50 light-years per pixel), with a grid superimposed, either NASA's or the mapmaker's own choice of system, and then location markers as requested by RPers.

While I don't doubt the scientific validity of NASA and their galactic mapping program (actually, it's a collection of surveys combined with mathematical physics and observation of other barred, spiral galaxies), this is the primary issue with mapping the Milky Way Galaxy - even in fiction. When we boil it down: we don't actually know what the Milky Way Galaxy looks like from outside of it (as we've never gone that far). We're basing our assumptions on its shape relative to surveys from inside the Solar System of distant stars and stellar structures according to red shift, velocity and magnitude implied by relative "landmarks" based on judgement and mathematics I couldn't accomplish if I tried, and various other data collections. In the end though: we simply don't know.

While for fiction, more or less, this can be proverbially "hand-waved" away, with the assumption of the Galaxy's shape made purely as a non sequitor, we must, in turn, realize that no map anyone makes will actually be accurate. Even if one were to create a full, three-dimensional rendering, it'd be working upon the "best guesses" we have. While this is fine, it also means, technically, we could use any approximation of the Galaxy produced by anyone, and have it be just as accurate and reliable for the purposes of such a project.

Furthermore, having to "request" being placed on the map, in such an instance as this, where a fairly-unknown user is attempting to make such a map, is a disaster waiting to happen - not to mention a time-consuming waste. Having actually created several maps in my time requiring "request" and "application", the sheer monstrosity of requests that could be lodged, more or less, would obliterate what free time most of us have, hence defeating the purpose of actually creating the map, since the creator has even less time to enjoy it.

This is why GC's was so readily accepted in the end: the player behind said account was well-known, trusted, and respected by a considerable plurality of the central NS Future Technology community at the time. Even so, not everyone used it - or even acknowledged it - within the community. Mindset's editable map also, though I personally believe to a lesser degree, was successful because it allowed users to readily edit and add to it on-the-fly.

My entire point for this being: If you want to dedicate the time and effort to a map, by all means, go for it. I will applaud your attempts, assuredly, but at the end of the day, do not expect it to be "canon". While maps are wonderful and enjoyable to utilize and look at, any map created by a user will, ultimately, be held at sway to the relative/perceived credibility of said user. There will always be a group of individuals that do not use it; another group that entirely does not acknowledge it; even more who may even go so far as to insult and deride it for merely existing.

It is my personal opinion that, due to that reason, a galactic map is simply not something required or needed for NS. Individual sub-communities and users are more likely to focus less on such large-scale parameters and more on their respective collective or individual "regions" where most of their activity takes place, and, if so inclined, may map those. Otherwise, relative means of measurement and position are the general status quo: "My civilization is in Alpha"; "My civilization is on the Delta-Beta border"; etc. As such, I view such a large, time-consuming project is, essentially, an admirable goal, but simply one that would be a waste or purely a project undertaken solely for one's personal enjoyment and use.

[SquareDisc City]

It's true that a 2D map of the Milky Way isn't going to be the most precise thing around. However it can still tell me that, for example, Bigtopia are practically my next door neighbours while if I want to get to Lilliputia I've got to go halfway across the galaxy. The markers will be larger than the territories they represent, but that's a feature of many maps and not generally a problem. If there are multiple territories close enough together that their markers would overlap, the general region can be named and given a single marker.

I think you may be misunderstanding what I mean by a "topological" map - and I in turn may have misunderstood what YellowApple has in mind. I'm referring to this sort of thing:

While such maps usually follow the geography in general, they don't rely on a geometric coordinate system, just showing the connections between points. I'm sceptical a map like this would work very well for NS, but I might be wrong, and it would certainly be a novel approach.

For more conventional maps using a base map and a co-ordinate system, then sure, use any artist's impression of the Milky Way you like. It's not like that many people claim real locations after all. But I see no good reason, other than possible artistic taste or if one is updating a previous map, to not use an up-to-date one by professional scientists.

Ultimately there's no need at all for the map to be perfect. Sure, a 2D map of the whole Milky Way has all sorts of flaws. But if we aim for everything, we'll end up with nothing.

[Kyrusia]

Out-of-Character: You seem to have, more or less, missed the point of what I said. I guess it's fine.

As for topology: You're referring to geometric topology (or, in the case of that subway map, low-dimensional topology, as a subway network maintains relevance regardless of deformation - hence "topological map"); I'm referring to point-set - or general - mathematic topology. Which, as it stands, is largely irrelevant; the topological placement of travel routes is largely relative as to the roleplay taking place, with few "dedicated" vectors of connectivity serving any vital role. A topological map, in the sense you've described, is only really relevant to a small area of space (such as Valinon's map of Alpha Centauri - a topological map of dedicated wormhole terminals); in the instance of a galaxy - where distance (and gravity) does deform travel lanes - such is largely pointless and changes too frequently to be of any real use... Spare in a relative sense, which is what I have already described is already in use without any need of point-precision cartography.

Regardless, I will make my point clear in a "TL;DR" version: Mapping the Galaxy is largely pointless, in my opinion, outside of a purely intellectual or artistic exercise. This is because of differing degrees of inter-connectivity between players and the "cliques" to which they belong. Relative differentiation of location suffices, and while I admire an attempt to artistically interpret such a volume - be it in any dimension or projection - it should not be created with the hope of becoming "canonically accepted" by the community at large.

[YellowApple]

YellowApple, if you're going to try to pull all this off, just do me one favour... Don't make the mistake of using large print (fonts) to indicate system names etc... such print should only show if a mouse cursor goes over it or something to that effect.

Also, people like shiny things... So make sure it looks good...

Duly noted on both points; I'll see what I can do. I don't know if the exportable applets support growing fonts of nodes being hovered over when sufficiently zoomed out, but at the very least zooming and panning should both be possible whether I go with a Java/Flash applet or a PNG/SVG image (or both, leaving it up to to user preference).

Regardless, I will make my point clear in a "TL;DR" version: Mapping the Galaxy is largely pointless, in my opinion, outside of a purely intellectual or artistic exercise. This is because of differing degrees of inter-connectivity between players and the "cliques" to which they belong. Relative differentiation of location suffices, and while I admire an attempt to artistically interpret such a volume - be it in any dimension or projection - it should not be created with the hope of becoming "canonically accepted" by the community at large.[/size][/blocktext]

I agree; I'm not going to aim for universal canonicity given that creating a map that encompasses every single FT player in every single NSFT multiverse/universe/community/etc. is simply not feasible.

Also, I think this whole thread is out-of-character...

So like an interstellar tube map? That would be very applicable for people who use fixed travel routes, whether it's the technology or just common practice that fixes them. Wormholes, Stargates, safe hyperlanes, escorted trade convoys, that kind of stuff. Especially if a route across the galaxy will pass through several friendly systems. It's perhaps less useful for those who opt for "go anywhere" drives.

As for the focus of the map, the Milky Way's the priority I think. On another forum we had direction arrows pointing off towards the LMC, SMC, M31, and M33, but those galaxies weren't themselves mapped. The scale of the Milky Way offers the advantage that it's basically two-dimensional (well, the disk is, and most people are in the disk). At a larger scale, say a map width of a couple of thousand light years or less, the thickness of the disk becomes important and you need to do 3D mapping. At a smaller scale, if you want to map multiple galaxies relative to each other you again need a 3D map.

I think most people would expect geometric positioning and some sort of co-ordinate system. Whether it's necessary I can't sat, the proof of the pudding would be in the popularity and reported utility (or lack thereof) of a topological map. A grid is highly desirable for geometric maps, but unwanted for topological ones.

The most common approach I've seen has been to use a base map of the Milky Way such as this one produced by NASA (and available at a great resolution, about 50 light-years per pixel), with a grid superimposed, either NASA's or the mapmaker's own choice of system, and then location markers as requested by RPers.

"Galactic Cartographer's" map might be the last updated, it's in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=70911

If I do hand-hacking of the .mm file that's generated, I can probably make it two-dimensionally accurate at a scale of x lightyears (maybe 10 for a rather large map with a decent degree of precision) per 1 unit of measurement (I'm not exactly sure how .mm files' HGAP and VSHIFT node attributes work precisely, but it appears they are some kind of unspecified logical unit of distance relative to the parent node). Either way, once I figure out the proper method of manually editing said .mm files (they're XML-based, but FreePlane is very picky about attribute values), precise positioning should be possible.

On that note, it sounds like a tube map equivalent is going to end up being the best description of what this thing will end up being.