The Rebel Faction

Seth, I just compared the two maps, and there doesn't seem to be any conflict between the two regarding Commonwealth planets. I haven't looked at the BDE, yet, Heir, but if there's something that needs to be moved, let me know.

Is there a specific reason why it was changed?

Because this is an improvement. Because Wes did the work and this was the format he used. Because. Because no one told him otherwise. Because 'we' didn't do it. Because this map is canonically approved and is more modern then the old template we used. Because of all the things Wes said.

Wes is obviously continuing to update the map and this implies that if one has problems with the position of planets there-in, one should make public that issue so that, when Wes comes to doing a new update, he can include and accommodate any changes needing done much as he has been doing.

So, it's a change. It's a change that was employed because of all of the above because(s).

I, for one, thank you for your hard work. That said, all the planetary bodies that concern me seem to be properly placed though, based on intepretation of the medium, I have in my writing described the Colonies being further from the Outer Rim border, that the junction of the Corellian Trade Spine and the Hydian Way were deeper in to the preceeding territory.

After how many years of taking worlds, declaring borders and otherwise moving with a plan based on one map we all used, which do you think BDE prefers?

Instead of asking rethorical questions, I suggest you take a moment to describe the changes you would like to see implemented (on the map) so as to better ease your unrest with the change. That, or I suggest you take the old map, yourself, and begin updating it accordingly.

What is this, Fifteenth Century Spain? Someone changes the map and everyone is out crying for blood? Come on!

It's just goddamn, motherfucking reference material.

And when someone starts to cry about the six point oh one seven milimeter difference because, somehow that graphical representation is not down to the fine line accurate, I will feed him or her last weeks socks.

EDIT


I too would like to see our classic map be updated, but that is not the point. The point is that someone was willing to do it. This community depends on volunteered effort.

It appears that Wes is attempting to make this map amenable to everyone as best as he can. This implies it is a work in process and I feel we should reserve judgment until such time as its completion. Having said that, I too have issues with this map...

1. It is not our classic map.

2. It is a new perspective, that is to say Top Down and not from a skewed angle.

3. It is somewhat harder to read then our old map.

4. It has some inaccuracies.

BUT!

1. Times change. We change with them or die.

2. A new perspective does not imply fault or failure or lack of adaptation to changing paradigms.

3. With revisions, clarity will doubtless be found.

4. Wes continues to update and edit the map which implies that in time, it will have no errors.

Wes, I'll go through it in more depth and let you know of the changes I'd like.

I apologise if I came across as unappreciative, because that is really not the case, on the contrary I'm impressed someone other than a staffer has taken it upon themselves to do something like this for everyone at TRF.

I have been away for a while , and was wondering if I had missed something.

Beff: It's a more recent map that includes a large number of unclaimed canon planets. As we were running out of those, it seemed to be a good switch. Secondly, I personally like the top-down version better. Third, Park was going to update it using that map anyway; I just beat him to it. Fourth, like LOS said, it is a better map.

Seth: Thanks. I never thought you were unappreciative. I had some of the same problems when I first looked at the map, but IMO the benefits outweighed the negatives. Anyway, just let me know what you need changed, and I'll fix it for the next version.

LOS: Thanks!