• 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.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Travellermap.com a bit slow

Yes, the K'kree boundary roughly follows that path, but the rifts drawing (I don't remember exactly where that came from - a magazine article, I think?) shows that the boundary of the rift isn't the same from the "corner" of the Two Thousand Worlds onward - it goes up to the coretrailward corner of the sector and then roughly follows the boundary between Kring Noor Sector and Xaagr Sector. Looking at your data for Un'k!!k'ng Sector, the boundary of the rift would more follow a path along the line 2109 - 2206 - 2602, rather than following the Two Thousand Worlds border into the H subsector.

I am using the CT K'kree map for the rift as well. There is a bump at the trailing edge of Un'k!!k'ng. The edge of the rift in Xaagr is around hex row 14, then proceeds drunkard's walk style to near the core-trailing corner (there may be a star or two in that corner of Kring Noor). My border ended up perhaps a little lower than the CT K'kree map, which looks closer to row 12 at the spinward edge of Xaagr. Such is the price for random star placement when compared to low resolution guidance maps.
 
Last edited:
The original is at:

http://www.securityleak.com/slm/issue_05/onward_coreward_preface.html

The resolution of the map is far too crude to nitpick here, IMHO.

Okay, that actually is really low resolution (not to mention that it doesn't seem to match up with the data from the Core Expedition or the Rim Expedition).

I am using the CT K'kree map for the rift as well. There is a bump at the trailing edge of Un'k!!k'ng. The edge of the rift in Xaagr is around hex row 14, then proceeds drunkard's walk style to near the core-trailing corner (there may be a star or two in that corner of Kring Noor). My border ended up perhaps a little lower than the CT K'kree map, which looks closer to row 12 at the spinward edge of Xaagr. Such is the price for random star placement when compared to low resolution guidance maps.

I guess the CT K'kree map is somewhat different than the Security Leak one, then.

From that post, I take it Kring Noor isn't one of the sectors you're covering? Are you covering just the ones with the Two Thousand Worlds in them, or other ones as well?
 
Okay, that actually is really low resolution (not to mention that it doesn't seem to match up with the data from the Core Expedition or the Rim Expedition).

The two most informative maps of that region are in the CT K'kree book and in the GT Aliens 2 book, which has the GURPS treatment of the K'kree. Those two maps are in general agreement. It is possible I'm forgetting another good map of the region, but none of the obvious sources have one.
 
I would like to do a sector. Anyone have objections about me doing Treece Sector? It is sort of out on the edge of space away from the main action. Can't screw it up too much...:coffeesip:
I was thinking of doing it full T5.09 with Terrans (not "Solomani"), some sprinking of Hiver "observation posts" near its coreward edge and a few minor races for good measure
 
I would like to do a sector. Anyone have objections about me doing Treece Sector? It is sort of out on the edge of space away from the main action. Can't screw it up too much...:coffeesip:
I was thinking of doing it full T5.09 with Terrans (not "Solomani"), some sprinking of Hiver "observation posts" near its coreward edge and a few minor races for good measure

That sounds fine with me - a bit like BeRKA's "Free Worlds", too. ;)

As a general note, I myself am currently working on (in order of amount of time spent on each/"priority") A. Driasera Sector, B. Rim Reach Sector and C. the Orion OB1 Association.
 
My personal preference (and that's all it is) would be (these are not in any specific order):

->Modify sectors that were designed for eras different than the T5SS data (e.g. Yiklerzdanzh). Keep the existing data and tag it with the "era" tag.

->Previously undetailed sectors where the borders of interstellar states straddle the sector border (e.g. Eiaplial)

->Sectors where we have only dot maps (e.g. Etakhasoa)

->Rim Reach (only because I want to see Zzorkenstein on the map :) )

->Your pet projects - because ultimately, we all do our best work when we work on the projects we are most passionate about :coffeesip:

Cheers,

Baron Ovka
 
My personal preference (and that's all it is) would be (these are not in any specific order):

->Modify sectors that were designed for eras different than the T5SS data (e.g. Yiklerzdanzh). Keep the existing data and tag it with the "era" tag.

->Previously undetailed sectors where the borders of interstellar states straddle the sector border (e.g. Eiaplial)

->Sectors where we have only dot maps (e.g. Etakhasoa)

->Rim Reach (only because I want to see Zzorkenstein on the map :) )

Some specific thoughts related to the examples:

-Zhodani Consulate space developers need to know both the CT rules for Consulate worlds (AM4) and the additional rules and regional modifiers found in the Mongoose Zhodani book.

-Yiklerzdanzh is comprised of strong stable states, IIRC, that are unlikely to change much. It was also developed by a team of people, at least some of whom may still be active. Bringing Zho worlds into new rules compliance is one thing, but I would defer to the team for time shifts of idiosyncratic alien races.

-Some fringe sectors are simply not all that exciting. That doesn't prevent them from being *interesting*.
 
I notice that I get full functionality on Chrome, but no longer get it on Firefox. I can download, etc in Chrome, in Firefox I just get the map but none of the downloads, easter eggs, etc.
 
I notice that I get full functionality on Chrome, but no longer get it on Firefox. I can download, etc in Chrome, in Firefox I just get the map but none of the downloads, easter eggs, etc.

I'm not seeing any problem in Firefox (version 44.0.2, OSX)

Can you verify your version, and also open Menu > Developer > Web Console and report any errors?
 
On the matter of slowness of TravellerMap, I've noticed the site loads a lot more slowly in Safari (version number given as "5.1.7 (7534.57.2)") than in Internet Explorer or Google Chrome.
 
44.0.2 running no script with 100% access on Traveller map, error show is: SecurityError: The operation is insecure. Thanks.

I'm not seeing any problem in Firefox (version 44.0.2, OSX)

Can you verify your version, and also open Menu > Developer > Web Console and report any errors?
 
44.0.2 running no script with 100% access on Traveller map, error show is: SecurityError: The operation is insecure. Thanks.

Well, you're using an extension that deliberately modifies what a page is allowed to do. Perhaps you should try adjusting the extension's settings?
 
Traveller Map isn't working for me this evening.

EDIT: Back up, but still a bit sluggish.

Everleap (hosting provider) had issues with a upgrade yesterday. They sent out a post-mortem, but the TL;DR is everything should be okay now. Let me know if you see further problems.
 
Back
Top