63 replies to this topic

[Syrkres]

2D for multiple reasons, some of which already mentioned above (Lore placing the planets, usability - would people even use 3D?).

But also even using the 3D interface, since we do not even worry about travel times and such between battles non of that really matters? The fact a planet is higher or lower in the "universe" plane doesn't really matter? We don't use travel times to/from planets, or battles.

So other than aesthetics there is absolutely no reason to use 3D. And since it would be "harder" to code up a 3D map/UI, I suggest they use a 2D map/UI.

[DI3T3R]

All known distances, travel-times and coordinates were created for a 2D-map. How would you even come up with the z-coordinates so all distances still hold?

[CDLord HHGD]

The map MWO has for the Inner Sphere is inaccurate. The Lyran Commonwealth and Federated Suns are not considered officially joined until Victor Ian Steiner Davion takes the throne. Here is the map as it should be (I have hi-res maps for many time periods in PDF format. Got them from somewhere, be glad to send if desired).

[CDLord HHGD]

Taemien, on 26 April 2013 - 03:11 AM, said:

I think a STO-esq map would be great! So what if there's no z-axis. Since it's never been specified, then that gives creative license. Just vary it along a plain high or low by 20 degrees. The galaxy is a relatively flat disk anyways so when its said to map in 3d, that doesn't mean a big sphere.

[Johnny Z]

Went with both. Potentially 3000 planets will likely need both views.

Using the 2 best sci-fi games out today as inspiration.

Walk into Dropship Tac-Ops, then continue to walk up to Tac-Ops computer, left wall is a 2d map of inner sphere with front visual markers etc. Use tac ops computer to manuever around the 2d map displaying a 3d multi focused and dynamic viewer to the right.

For actual planet details the view would switch to directly in front of player to a cool monitor with 2d rotating planet and details.

Controls: W=left map, D=right map, S=front screen, W=zoom

If needed to begin jump leave to head to bridge, shows the ship going to jump speed? Not sure how it works in MW only that jump ships are needed for transport and they use jump points.

Btw if Mechwarrior Online was going to add to the universe some totally new content, the dropship department would be an excellent place maybe.

Edited by Johnny Z, 02 October 2013 - 05:18 AM.

[culverin]

From a BattleTech nerd.

There are no canon 3D maps. Us BattleTech nerds have never really asked or needed one in the decades this game has been around.

The ISCS (inner sphere cartography society) has the best maps and will be in 2D.

Measuring jump distances in a 3D universe is not realistic on a 2D map.
Why?
If the map legend is accurate (Lightyears and Parsecs), then the distances between Planet A, Planet B, Planet C and Planet D must also therefore be accurate.

In order for Planet A, Planet B, Planet C and Planet D to be accurate, that means they must all lie perfectly flat in the same Core-Upward (z-axis).
This is pretty ridiculous.


So why break both physics and canon just to have a 3D map?



You're welcome

[Stardancer01]

2D in implantation but 3D in rotatable display. Camera 45% plan front.

Edited by Stardancer01, 02 October 2013 - 11:52 AM.

[LordSkippy]

Although the galaxy is three dimensional, on the large scale it is relatively flat. Because of the way gases condense in the formation of a spiral galaxy, there really aren't any solar systems that would overlap when represented in a 2D map. A 2D map is perfectly acceptable, but a 3D map would look nice.

[wanderer]

Should just use this as a model:

http://openbattletech.com/

[Coralld]

Johnny Z, on 02 October 2013 - 04:49 AM, said:

If needed to begin jump leave to head to bridge, shows the ship going to jump speed? Not sure how it works in MW only that jump ships are needed for transport and they use jump points.

If I remember correctly the Jump Ships don't need to physically move/accelerate when Jumping, kind of like how Carriers, Dreadnaughts, Super Carriers, and Titans Jump in EVE.

Edited by Coralld, 11 February 2014 - 07:36 AM.

[wanderer]

In fact, you don't want to be moving much if at all when jumping- Kearny-Fuchida drives rely on being at a preplotted, stable point to jump, and pretty much blink out at their start point to blink in at the destination. Unless you screwed up or there was a drive malfunction or something occupied your endpoint that was too big for the K-F field to shunt aside.

One of the most gruesome things in Battletech is when one ship jumps into another's space or multiple K-F fields interact catastrophically. The results are nearly always fatal and usually involve mixing the two ships and crew in ways physics should not be able to describe and biologically impossible.

Edited by wanderer, 11 February 2014 - 08:55 AM.

[9erRed]

Greetings all,

With Community Warfare, Front Warfare, as well as Planetary Warfare, showing the actual map front line would normally be easer to represent with a 2D map. Also much easer to program and allow players to move around the IS system map.

And as has been stated the movement of Jumpships happens nearly instantly, the travel time we see in the novels as well as the Tech books is related to the much slower Dropships and warships. These ships should normally not exceed 1G of acceleration for the inhabitants, this slower movement (relatively) is where the hours/days are required to reach outer system planets. This initial arrival location is due to the location of the systems jump points, normally located at the upper/lower suns LaGrange points (balanced gravity points), but there are also the "Pirate Points" that exist within each system. These are much closer/within the planetary bodies, constantly changing, difficult/dangerous to map, but allow nearly orbital arrival locations. And much less warning for the planet being assaulted.

So back on topic, 2D would be the easer map to support, but having a 3D map just for eye candy might be nice. Selecting the 3D option might only allow for identifying the systems and coloured to show who currently owns it. It you require access to individual planets with these systems then the map shifts to the 2D view.

- Keep in mind that there are set locations/directions that Jumpships can jump to, 30 light-years at a time.
- These are pre-plotted, and require a recharge to jump again.
- Some ships carry batteries to allow for an instant second jump.

And the programming for the orbiting planets, orbiting systems, moving galaxy, is another beast in itself. We are talking about 100's of systems, with 1000's of planets, not sure PGI should spend the time and manpower to do that. But there might just be "off the shelf" programs that can be adopted to this universe and brought into the game world.

- Keep in mind that each Faction would only need a smaller slice of the entire galaxy.
- Activities only need 30 light years jump distance for game play.
- Additional batteries may be available for longer jumps.
- So showing the entire IS may only be required for overall views and planning.

Restrict the "Overview" to just "State of the Inner Sphere", and not have it for Faction tactical planning or jump plotting. The Merc's contract system may require them to cross different Factions areas, but this might not require a visual presentation. Merc's except the contract, gather there forces, deploy onto Dropships, system arrival. Keep it simple. Just some idea's.

I will submit another games version of the 2 systems that can work together, 3D as well as 2D. Just to show that both could work. And this within the CryEngine.
Although this video is of a much smaller system it does show both 2D and 3D elements being used together.

https://www.youtube....e&v=9cLeXj4p03k


Just some thoughts,
9erRed

Edited by 9erRed, 11 February 2014 - 09:41 AM.

[Coralld]

wanderer, on 11 February 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

In fact, you don't want to be moving much if at all when jumping- Kearny-Fuchida drives rely on being at a preplotted, stable point to jump, and pretty much blink out at their start point to blink in at the destination. Unless you screwed up or there was a drive malfunction or something occupied your endpoint that was too big for the K-F field to shunt aside.

One of the most gruesome things in Battletech is when one ship jumps into another's space or multiple K-F fields interact catastrophically. The results are nearly always fatal and usually involve mixing the two ships and crew in ways physics should not be able to describe and biologically impossible.

Yeah, finding out what happens when 2 objects share the same space through spacial distortion equipment is never good.

And while we are on the stopic of Space assets, I wonder if any one would update the art work for some of the Space ships. I mean the TRO Monolith looks cool but a lot of the others look like hell.

[Gaan Cathal]

Wilhelm Krauss, on 09 January 2012 - 03:16 PM, said:

The only number for the thickness I can find is somewhere on the order of 1000 LY, but I'm not sure where that is. By the map I'm using, that's about comparable to the diameter of the traditional 2D Inner Sphere, giving us a nice sphere to work with. Most likely, it is more narrow than 1000 LY at Earth, but still the z direction is not negligible. That being said, I think it's more trouble than it's worth.

More as a point of interest than serious advocacy for a 3D ingame map (we don't even have a 2D one, afterall)...

Not only is the 1k LY 'thickness' of the milky way not applicable in the earth-region, but there's a distinct decrease in density of stellar matter as you go up or down from the galactic plane, meaning that any meaningful coordinates (planets orbiting sunlike stars) are likely to be within a 5-7.5k LY band relative to galactic plane. Still not negligible, but you're probably looking at something more like a 2:2:1 x:y:z ratio ovoid than an actual sphere.

[Geeks On Hugs]

I love the 3d map in EVE, it's really cool. However I voted 2D. It's simpler and effective. While obviously true the galaxy is in 3+ dimensions there is a "galactic plane" that makes a 2D conception of navigation somewhat helpful and then makes available four cardinal directions (Spinward, Coreward, Rimward, Anti-Spinward as used in the lore).

(Edit: I changed my vote to the third option. I would love a 3D map for aesthetic purposes. As mentioned with EVE it was the singular most memorable item from the trailer that got me to try that game out.)

Edited by Geeks On Hugs, 16 May 2014 - 07:19 PM.

[Geeks On Hugs]

Raeven, on 08 January 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

Also, the 3rd dimension of the starmap wouldn't be significant enough compared to the 2nd dimensional numbers to be worth implementing.

The Milky Way is a relatively flat disc when you get away from the Galactic Center and Earth is located further towards the fringe of the galaxy than the center.

If the Milky Way were the Star Wars galaxy we would be a backwater in the Outer Rim territories.

Stahlseele, on 08 January 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

you mean, like the hanseatic league?
http://www.sarna.net...anseatic_League

Voted both.
Because i think there were some maps that showed a top down version and a side version of the sphere years back . .

So what is the "diameter" of the Inner Sphere? If the galactic plane is 1000 LY how many LY is the diameter of the Inner Sphere for comparison? I think it might be just about 1000 LY itself? If so then that would make that point less relevant although I thinks someone mentioned average density is going to be reduced above or below the plane.

Edited by Geeks On Hugs, 16 May 2014 - 07:26 PM.

[Geeks On Hugs]

wanderer, on 28 January 2014 - 05:42 AM, said:

Should just use this as a model:

http://openbattletech.com/

Thank you. Did you guys thank him? Nice map.-

[Grimmrog]

Zerberus, on 09 June 2013 - 01:44 AM, said:

2d for 2 reasons. One Lore and one reality.

Lore: the maps we`ve been using for amost 30 years alre all 2d.

we used horses as main transportation for centuries, and then we used trains, and maybe its time to get down from your horse and finally step into a car.

[Exilyth]

Well, for sources on star/system coordinates...
http://iscs.teamspam.net/
... has files for all eras (both maps and raw data w/2d coordinates).

This thread has some explanations and math about how far off the map of the inner sphere is from reality:
http://bg.battletech...58.0/nowap.html

Edited by Exilyth, 13 June 2014 - 10:53 AM.

[Tordin]

I voted both. If you could swich between the two or they have different uses.