• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

2300AD "Subway" Star Map

I think that I, like many people, really enjoy the fact that the 2300AD setting utilizes a 3-dimensional star map that's based on real data - we all know there are some inaccuracies, but it's easy enough to stick to the existing maps if one doesn't want or need to correct for them.

However, one difficulty can be charting a course using the spaghetti-like connections depicted for the American, Chinese, or French Arms (at least, I have trouble with it). So, taking inspiration from subway maps where a 3-dimension map is projected in 2-dimensions for clarity while ignoring accuracy of position, I've made an effort to do the same for 2300AD.

You can check out my first efforts here:

American Arm

Chinese Arm


Please let me know what you think, if you find it useful, and if you have any suggestions for improvements. Also, if anyone has already done similar work can you point me to it? I've seen John McClure's map here but unfortunately it's quite difficult to read and looks like it does not include many systems.

Thanks and enjoy.
 
I see for most nexus systems there are usually only four connectors, but some have more... would a hexmap help untie those few knots?
 
Great work, Vorlanth.
Just one suggestion, can you put the distances between the stars on your map?
Thanks for posting them, they make a handy reference.
 
robject - Unfortunately, some systems have as many as 7 connections in the Chinese Arm (i.e. Xiuning) so I'm not sure a hexmap would help that issue (if you can provide a drawing that clarifies your point, it might help me better understand).

Additionally, the requirements of projecting the connections in 2D means that at some point, you have to start crossing lines or drawing longer connections between seperated systems (i.e. Hunjiang to Tau Ceti). I struggled to avoid this and attempted to minimize it as much as possible. If anyone can identify a place where I can simplify a nexus, I'd welcome the suggestion.
 
Sigg Oddra -

I'm working on adding the distance between systems to the maps. It's a little more time consuming and hard to figure out how to squeeze the numbers in without expanding the map (especially where connections are depicted as crossing). As soon as I figure out the best means to do this, I'll upload the updated maps.

Also, I'm thinking about putting a color overlay or underlay to indicate special groups (i.e. Latin Finger, Canadian Finger, American Sub-Arm, etc). Finally, I tested one earlier version by color coding systems based on the number of connections they had (Black=1, Blue=2, Green=3, Yellow=4, Orange=5, Red=6+) to try to clarify systems that would most likely see a lot of cross-traffic & trade. It's interesting, but I'm not sure how useful it would be. Anyone have other ideas about the best way to use colors to add information density to the maps?

After I work these details out, I'll try to tackle the French Arm (it's giving me a headache just thinking about it ;) ). Thanks for the feedback.
 
Originally posted by Vorlanth:
Sigg Oddra -

I'm working on adding the distance between systems to the maps. It's a little more time consuming and hard to figure out how to squeeze the numbers in without expanding the map (especially where connections are depicted as crossing). As soon as I figure out the best means to do this, I'll upload the updated maps.

Also, I'm thinking about putting a color overlay or underlay to indicate special groups (i.e. Latin Finger, Canadian Finger, American Sub-Arm, etc). Finally, I tested one earlier version by color coding systems based on the number of connections they had (Black=1, Blue=2, Green=3, Yellow=4, Orange=5, Red=6+) to try to clarify systems that would most likely see a lot of cross-traffic & trade. It's interesting, but I'm not sure how useful it would be. Anyone have other ideas about the best way to use colors to add information density to the maps?

After I work these details out, I'll try to tackle the French Arm (it's giving me a headache just thinking about it ;) ). Thanks for the feedback.
I'm looking forward to seeing it all. Keep up the good work
 
color the route markers....

certain of the clusters have crossing lines.

But yeah, that's pretty cool, and yes, i feel it needs the distances...
 
Hey Malenfant --

Looks like good material. What 'we' 'need' out there is something like ChView that can give us a rotatable, zoomable 3D projection. Actually, we probably need something *very* like ChView... in fact, we should be using ChView...

Well, I should probably pester the ChView architect about possibly retrofitting it into something non-Swing, for speed purposes...
 
Another suggestion would be colour coding based on colonization. Colonies could be red, outposts could be blue and alien homeworlds green.

I also second the colour overlay for the sub-strata.

Peter
 
The Near Star map was a good thing for a 'hard' RPG like 2300 but these 2D maps are more useful. Outstanding work. I agree that distances should be added though as they have an effect on gameplay given the 7.7 Ly limit of stutterwarp tech.
 
You might want to include external links where the arm contacts Kafer or Pentapod colonies, or comes closest to another arm (it's really hard to appreciate the 3D distribution of the arms).
 
The subway maps are great. And while the 3D maps are fine, I am beginning to see that the subway maps are actually more useful for plotting the destination of the ship.
 
Interesting point, Drakon.

You've got me wondering if Vorlanth has hit upon a 'silver bullet'...
 
Sorry for my delay in updating these maps. I've appreciated the suggestions as well as the encouragement. However, I'm having some difficulty.

Specifically, I'm trying to stick to canon sources for distances and connections. However, absolute distance is difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain from the maps in the 2300 Adventurer's Guide.

Therefore, I tried relying on the data in Warp 98 (a little free program on the web that does star maps and routes and such). It supposedly uses 2300 AD canon data, but I've found discrepancies.

For instance, the American Arm Map shows no connection between AC +32 54804 and Ross 165, but Warp 98 says a route exists. Who do I believe?

And as for using real star data, it's been amply demonstrated that the 2300 AD maps are inaccurate. So using real star data would potentially force us to redraw routes - adding some in some places and removing some in others. This would change the stellar landscape as it were and definitely render the maps non-canon.

So, does anyone have any ideas? Anyone know of a list of canon star-to-star distances that I could use to base the map on? If not, I may have to fall back on just using real data when I can't find canon data, and fudging the result.

Your comments are welcomed.
 
Use Astrosynth, from Nbos. Its a 3D star mapper and you can plug routes as well as whole star charts in yourself. In the Samples folder, there is an Excel spreadsheet for inputting stars and their position. I am sure with a bit of work you can come up with what you are looking for.

Once you input the stars into the spreadsheet, convert it to a .csv file (data file separated by commas) then you can upload that into Astrosynth, and set your routes to 7.7 light years. You can look and see which stars connect to which other stars. (Note: set max routes to some high number. I usually set this to 99 but anything above say 5 should do.)

There is always going to be a problem of accuracy, as new data comes in to better estimate the range to nearby stars. Hipparcos mission did a good job at this, and pushed many of our nearby neighbors out by about 10% We may have to live with a bit of inaccuracy
 
Hehe - Thanks for the recommendation. I just was working on this last night.

I took the 2300 data from Warp 98 and hammered it into the csv format of AstroSynthesis. Still came up with issues of missing routes or additional routes (although it is slightly improved if you adjust route length to 7.8 - 8.0 light years instead of 7.7).

I guess I'll just keep hammering away at this, getting my distances where I can from real data, and conscientiously stick to the map in the Adventurer's Guide to determine whether a route exists or not.

But if anyone wants to start on the route distances in the French Arm, while I work on the American and the Chinese Arms, it would help things along much faster.

Thanks.
 
Briefly off-topic -

By the by, has anyone noticed that navigation in Astrosynthesis is kind of wonky. I'm running a 2 Ghz machine with a 1 gig of Ram, so it's not speed issues I'm running into. It's the fact that the ability to rotate in 3 dimensions is frequently not sensitive enough. Obviously this is a small development studio, but the 3D cameras that many computer games on the market use are much better (i.e. Black & White pure mouse camera control was very intuitive). I think they should add the ability to "slide" rather than just always pivoting or zooming around a fixed star.

I have some ideas for other features - maybe I should post it on their forums. In it's current form, it's not developed enough to make it worth buying for me (close, but needs a little more polishing).

But I'm glad that someone is working on a commerical program like this.
 
Yeah, I noticed that Astrosynthesis was a little wonky, at least in the demo version. I started to play with the NSL data, but then I realized "I don't have time for this" I want to get that data in there, though. Ahh, maybe when the book is finished.

Colin
2320AD writer
I hate un-writing...
 
I think subways are great ways to travel to the stars. All you need are wormholes. Now you place these wormholes under Manhattan and build tracks that go through them leading to subway stations on other planets in distant star systems. That way all you need to do is buy a Metrocard and take a subway to Sirius.
 
Back
Top