OBT Forum
General BattleTech => Cartography Central => Topic started by: Blacknova on November 19, 2012, 08:52:23 PM
-
Hey Voltampere, ISP3 is out, with huge maps of the deep dark beyond. I look forward to your new coordinates........
-
Hey Voltampere, ISP3 is out, with huge maps of the deep dark beyond. I look forward to your new coordinates........
Hehe...
-
Volt, if you want to be able to map the stellar nebula seen in IE, I have a way of doing that. Just map as poinst the vertices (places where the direction of the edge changes) of each shape.
From there, I can take the points and create a polygon from them and smooth it. It won't be 100% accurate, but will be close enough to it not to matter much.
With all of that, I can generate a complete map of the DP.
-
I already merged all 4 of those maps into 1 huge one (link on my blog).
I didn't try to get them lined up perfect, was just lazy, but I figured once HBHK came out I'd update them so volt can finish up the coordinates I've long since given up on keeping maintained. After entering in 30K of them, parsing them all, and spending months with Volt finding errors, then combined with all the various issues that kept popping up and my frustration with BT in general, I just *really* don't want to enter in the coordinates for 6 more maps.
But I will load them up in illustrator and give Volt good copies once that book comes out, which will hopefully be soon. At that point we can *FINALLY* have complete maps of the inner sphere for all those succession wars.
The only other maps I'd like to see are 5 (or 1 with just border lines) for each of the grand survey's, so we can see when systems were discovered. Age of war stuff may not be too bad either, but with HBHK we are at least pretty current up until 3095 (current timeline).
I also told Volt once HBHK comes out I'll update my cartographer application again, and I gotta stick to that :)
-
Good news and bad news:
GOOD:
All new systems/clusters on from the four ISP3 maps have been etracted and merged with the other coordinates using the maps' 300LY scale
BAD:
The scales suck. Comparing the new coordinates with those previously taken (ie Skyfog and the Clan way stations between the IS and Pentagon) the new coordinates are off by 0.5 to 100LY (crazy). The computed distances also do not match the estimated distances written within the book (A is approximately XXXLY from B)
GOOD:
The four maps are nearly identical in scale, so merging them gives a negligible error in the coordinates. This is also the first time we have a "Y-axis" scale, thanks to the 300LY scale on the spin/anti-spinward maps, which happen to be identical in size (the coreward 300LY scale is actually 5LY (0.02px) wider than the rimward one)
BAD:
Migrated the coordinates of the waystations, Jarnfolk, HL, imperio and Clan systems from the WOR map to the ISP3 map, and i get a significant shift in x and y coordinates for all those systems.
I've decided to go with the coordinates I got because they're still the best shot we have now at drawing a full Battletech map, short of getting accurate scales or exact coordinates (which is virtually impossible). I can't upload the new spreadsheet yet because i'm still missing 820 coordinates from 2764 and 3063 after i migrated from using the erroneous 3130 map to the more consistent-with-other-maps-though-still-questionable 2764 map. I hope to finish the 820 before the end of the year. We now have a total of 3139 systems/clusters.
I have not recorded the coordinates of nebulae as the shapes are very erratic. I could probably get the coordinates of the center of the polygon but am unsure on how that data would be of any use.
When i get some free time I'll try to alter the scale of the four maps and see if i can line up the new coordinates with the old ones and with what the texts say. Should be pretty quick once i have the formulas set up.
EDIT:
Forgot to mention, the scales suck! The Axumite Providence systems shown at 100LY scale is not 1/3 the size of the outline in the 300LY scale map. The scale should be around 120LY give or take. I didn't check if the same is true for the New Delphi Compact, i'll go look into it in the morning.
-
ugh forget what I just said about rescaling the four maps... it's impossible to get the coordinates line up with the approximate distance given by the text. I'm definitely going with the coordinates extracted using Syntax's procedure, they're scientifically more accurate than relying on a writer's approximate.
-
Can you add points on the map to a few edge points of the nebula. Give me those points and I can create a polygon.
-
hey BN, sure, but how about we do it this way, mark on the PDF map that Syntax made what points you want an I'll give you those numbers, that way we have the exact number and coordinates of the vertices you need to make the polygon. I have the maps open on illustrator now so I can give you the coordinates within minutes if you need them.
another !@#$%^&*, according to text, Beehive Cluster is 300LY from Midden. Using two different methods (1) a ruler (yup) on my screen, comparing to the scale legend and (2) trigonometry (coordinates) there is NO way the distance is 300LY, it's more like 160-170LY.
-
I don't envy your task Volt. Fanmap 1 for Shattered Dawn wasn't easy to come up with and included a lot of guess work. Its too bad you can't get a second confirming source for some plots. Have you asked TPTB? Can't wait to see what you come up with.
-
Hey Takiro, I've asked TPTB regarding the maps and basically this is what I got:
1) the maps are political maps and not jump maps, so
(a) just because the system does not appear does not mean it's undiscovered or abandoned at that particular time (and there are no official rulings on what systems exist when except for a few that have been posted on "ask the writers", but they don't consistently answer all questions). The best bet here is if there are any in-text doc that says when a system was discovered/colonized/abandoned/destroyed/etc
(b) there are some systems (Mica, Niops, etc) that show more than one planet on maps but are actually just one system. What I did here was get the average X and Y coordinates and the result is what I used for the system coordinate (crude but it's the only process we have in the absence of official coordinates)
2) allegedly there are official coordinates but it would appear they would never see the light of day, so there might as well not be any. Since the declaration that the housebook coordinates are no longer canon, the coordinates released by Syntax and myself are to date the only "complete" attempt to map each system's position. I say "complete" because for every new map released that contains more comprehensive information it's possible that older released coordinates be rendered obsolete. This is because of:
(a) the inaccuracy in the 12-LY ruler as X-scale
(b) the absence of a true Y-scale reference
(c) limited number of reference points when plotting far systems (JarnFolk, Pentagon, etc) against the inner sphere. ISP3 is the first map that I have that allowed me to position these systems using Terra as my anchor point. If we take the Y-scale of the ISP3 maps as correct, then it turns out that the KCluster should be 16.5LY farther, the Pentagon 1LY to the Left and 14-15LY higher up, Imperio worlds 6LY to the Left and 10LY higher, Hanseatic League systems 7LY more to the left and 7.5LY higher, JarnFolk 5.3LY to the right and 5.2LY higher, etc...
3) even then, we cannot fully rely on the coordinates and scales because according to Oystein the maps are warped (non-uniformly scaled) when they try to fit them on the page during layout. I don't know how true this is but since we have no access to the raw maps/coordinates, we have to accept them at face value.
It's actually like working on quantum mechanics. The coordinates are accurate up to a certain value within the limits of the TPTB Uncertainty Principle. But that's not stopping me from making coordinates for those who wanna use em. If TPTB want me to stop then they'd better come up with a more accurate one than what Syntax and I made.
-
Ack, do *NOT*, i repeat do NOT use the map I made for anything other than casual glancing.
I didn't spend the energy to actually try to line them up, and just deleted the circles that were off, so many are going to be off by up to maybe half a circle in distance.
Please tell me you didn't use the one I made for this, and I'm worried for no reason.
If you did, I can go make a new one and actually attempt to line things up better, if not, well, I presume you spent the effort to make sure they lined up better :)
And the map scales should also never be used, they are off all the time. Instead, use the rings for 250 and 500 LY out from Terra as the scale, it is more accurate.
-
haha don't worry, I have a copy of ISP3 and used the maps there, not your frankenmap. good point, I'll use the circles instead, hopefully get a better scale off it. I tried using that on the 3130 map but it was a complete bust because the LY circles weren't even circles to begin with (hooray).
EDIT: You mean 500LY and 1000LY right? :o
-
Once you have your scale worked out, send me your map, I'll mark the points and send it back.
-
3) even then, we cannot fully rely on the coordinates and scales because according to Oystein the maps are warped (non-uniformly scaled) when they try to fit them on the page during layout. I don't know how true this is but since we have no access to the raw maps/coordinates, we have to accept them at face value.
It's actually like working on quantum mechanics. The coordinates are accurate up to a certain value within the limits of the TPTB Uncertainty Principle. But that's not stopping me from making coordinates for those who wanna use em. If TPTB want me to stop then they'd better come up with a more accurate one than what Syntax and I made.
Ah, that makes a lot of sense. Fit to Page formatting will skew the original significantly. Is it possible to reverse the format? Can't we guess at the original size based on the space shown. You could take your map as an anchor Fit to Page Format it and see if it matches up. Then overlay the two if they match. Might not give you the exact spots but pretty damn close.
-
Don't think that would help much because the coordinates I got are from the skewed maps. So whatever output I have will more or less look like those. Garbage In = Garbage Out
-
Something interesting... I overlapped the 3085, 3130 and the ISP3 maps and I found the following about 3095:
Lothian League is independent of Marian Hegemony (as seen in 3130 map)
All inner borders are those of 3085, so no border swaps during that 10-year period
Althea's Choice is now independent of FS/TC
and when I aligned 3085, 2764 and the ISP3 maps, I found that the ISP3 locations of Skyfog Kleinwelt were wrong (not surprised at all)
-
Delurking and necro-posting, but has anyone tried overlaying the ISP3 maps with the 2750 map to get some idea of what worlds are in the Outland Wastes?
-
And when are we going to see these maps? ;D
MA
-
Not sure, but this link http://galaxymap.org/detail_maps/gould.html (http://galaxymap.org/detail_maps/gould.html) that Oystein provided, where they got most of thier data from, would likely help it determining actual distances for many of the clusters etc. allowing for a more accurate read of the ISP 3 maps.
-
Delurking and necro-posting, but has anyone tried overlaying the ISP3 maps with the 2750 map to get some idea of what worlds are in the Outland Wastes?
I think that would be all of the systems that are no longer in the 3025 map. But for those just inside the borders it looks like:
all of Bloomstein Province
all of Overnwatch Province
from Baliggora Province:
Raldamax
Baliggora
Joshua
Halgrim
Kaldu
Eigerland of Alpheratz Province may or may not be included
Mindrel and Ulubis of Cerberus Province may or may not be included
From Trader's Domain, draw a line from between Ourem and Taumaturgo all the way to between Raetia and Crichton. Everything below that line is included, those immediately above that line may or may not be included, but it looks like they're not included.
And when are we going to see these maps? ;D
MA
Good question, I'm not done with the new coordinates yet. Been busy with work [still], and it looks like I won't hit my end December deadline for myself.
Not sure, but this link http://galaxymap.org/detail_maps/gould.html (http://galaxymap.org/detail_maps/gould.html) that Oystein provided, where they got most of thier data from, would likely help it determining actual distances for many of the clusters etc. allowing for a more accurate read of the ISP 3 maps.
ugh, what a messy map. is that 500 parsecs? I don't recognize any of those stars (except maybe for Sol) Can anyone give me reference points?
-
Use the star clusters as your reference points.
-
they all look the same to me... I can't match them with the existing Clusters in the BattleTech maps
-
Orion A and B clouds are there, with center point coordinates. Gum 12 and 16 are the Gum and Vela nebulae and S276 is Barnard's Loop. It takes time, but you can pin some down as reference points.
-
here we go:
Perseus-Cepherus[sic] Cloud Complex = Cephus, Per OB2 and [GLA89]
Acquila Rift = Acquila Rift 1 & 2 [29pc/93.386LY]
Aldrin Nebula = S308 [13pc/42.945LY]
Armstrong Nebula = Alessi 44 Star Cluster [10pc/32.244LY]
Barnard's Loop = S276 [20pc/66.514LY]
California Nebula = S220 [5pc/17.459LY]
Chameleon Nebula = Chameleon [8pc/25.242LY]
Coalsack Nebula = Coalsack [17pc/55.925LY]
Cygnus Loop = S103 [4pc/11.839LY]
Eagle Cloud Complex = [DT85] Cloud A & C [6pc/20.899LY]
Flying Bat Nebula = S129 [3pc/10.246LY]
Helix Nebula = Alessi 19 Star Cluster [14pc/46.250LY]
Lambda Orionis = S264 [2pc/8.108LY]
Lupus Cloud = Lupus [16pc/51.754LY]
Orion A Cloud = Orion A [0pc/0.888LY]
Orion B Cloud = Orion B [20pc/66.295LY]
Gum Nebula = Gum 12 [0pc/0.556LY]
Vela Nebula = Gum 16 [1pc/3.155LY]
Vela Sheet = Vela Sheet [24pc/79.611LY]
Vul Rift = Vul Rift [15pc/49.649LY]
Beehive Cluster = ASCC 123 [0pc/0.815LY]
Star Cluster 65 = Collinder 65 [4pc/13.209LY]
Star Cluster 752 = NGC 752 [35pc/115.759LY]
Star Cluster A51 = ASCC 51 [16pc/51.925LY]
Star Cluster Briceno 1 = Briceno 1 [22pc/71.147LY]
Star Cluster P12 = Platais 12 [1pc/2.498LY]
Star Cluster P24 = Alessi 24 [18pc/60.011LY]
Swan's Eye = Platais 4 [3pc/11.242LY]
Theta Carinae Cluster = IC 2602 [1pc/3.244LY]
as you can see, some of my coordinates are off while some are really close [astronomically speaking]. Some factors that contribute:
1) possible errors in the PDF map [whether drawing position or ruler scale] resulting in inaccuracies in the derived coordinates in LY relative to Terra
2) rounding off errors [had to convert my coordinates from LY to Parsec and then compare with (inaccurate?) distance in parsec from the website and then converting the difference back to LY]
3) I could be looking at the wrong celestial body
I don't have all the clusters and nebulae here yet, hoping I could get some people to point them out to me.
As for what I am going to do with these distances, well I guess nothing, since they are too inconsistent and to rounded off for me to use them as scale references. Average difference is around 4pc/13.281LY, that's too big for my liking. Looks like we're sticking to the scales from the PDF maps.
-
Looks good. If you can give me central points from each, I can then assign 2 fields, type and diameter. From there it is faitly easy and I can mod the resultant polygons to match thier shapes in the books.
-
I can only give you coordinates based on the PDF maps since the website's map gives distance from center. I can't get coordinates without a reference angle. The problem with the coordinates from the PDF is that you would have to make rectangles instead of circles since the coordinates are based on the center of the shape.
I think I would be able to give you the total height and total width in LY in addition to the rectangular center.
-
Wow, can't wait to see this!
-
I can only give you coordinates based on the PDF maps since the website's map gives distance from center. I can't get coordinates without a reference angle. The problem with the coordinates from the PDF is that you would have to make rectangles instead of circles since the coordinates are based on the center of the shape.
I think I would be able to give you the total height and total width in LY in addition to the rectangular center.
Center and dimensions is perfect, as I can take the centre, buffer it to create a base shape based on the dimensions and then edit for final shape.
-
here we go! all dimensions (Height/Width) are all oriented coreward-up
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?f2ee4faoxa2ercs (http://www.mediafire.com/view/?f2ee4faoxa2ercs)