# Mapmaking Discussion & Philosophy (WIP/Critique) > Sci-fi/Modern Mapping >  Some ship maps

## stargate525

Hey there, thought you guys might like these things I've been working on. Although they're finished, I'm really looking for critique; what could be done better, what should stay the same, what should be improved, that kind of thing.

http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs70/f/20...targate525.png

This one's pretty much my first attempt, and has got some huge problems in its overall design. As it stands, the thing is pretty much impossible to extrapolate into a 3-view that looks halfway decent, and the design itself could probably use some work.

http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/f/20...targate525.png
http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs71/f/20...targate525.png

This one I'm a bit more proud of; it's smaller, tighter, and I think an overall better design. It's got a 3-view, so the entire thing makes sense in an internal standpoint; everything legitimately fits in there. However, I think that the layout still needs some work.

So suggestions and critiques, like I said, sould be great. I'll enbed the images when I'm back on my home computer, sometime next week. I apologize for the need to link instead of just posting below.

----------


## Fuse

I really like the first image a lot. What program are you using to make these?
I've never been a fan of the star-trek style "wings" or whatever they are called that hang off to either side  :Crying or Very sad: 
I think in this case their shape doesn't match the main body at all.
The main body of the ship though, is quite nice. Great shape to it and overall I like the design.

I did notice that there aren't a lot of airlocks on your ship, which if the hull was breached would be an instant "OH SHI...!" moment for anyone in the main area.

The second image made me think to ask if there were only the forward facing guns equipped on the ship? If so, an enemy behind you could be an even bigger problem than it already is. You could have gunports at key spots on your ship (front, rear, sides) that could be manned from inside or from some other designated area. Overall it looks functional.

The last image I don't find all that pretty, but it gets the job done and if I were gaming and using this image I wouldn't mind a bit!

So I hope I didn't sound overly critical cause I do like the style.

Keep up the good work!!

----------


## Midgardsormr

A couple of terminology pointers: On a ship, the bathroom is the "head," and the kitchen is the "galley."

I like your balance of detail to clarity. It doesn't look so sparse as some deckplans, but the details don't clutter the plans. I can't really think of much else to say, other than to mention that a serif font is easier to read at small sizes and in large blocks such as your descriptive text. Also, left-aligned text is easier than centered, although for blocks this small, it's not really a big deal.

@Fuse: Trivia for you: The "wings" on Federation starships in the Star Trek universe are the warp nacelles. They are separated from the rest of the ship to insulate the crew from the harmful radiation and spatial distortion they produce.

----------


## stargate525

Thanks guys, both of you. I've noticed several misspellings, so those need to be fixed anyway. I'll do the terminoloy change at the same time. The sort of 'backstory' behind the wings bit is that they provide a wider base of thrust for the engines which equals a better maneuverability without as much use of lateral thrusters. On the Valerie, the engines work by taking sections of the ship and applying an acceleration only to them via a ridiculous set of technobabble. More area to grab thats farther away from the center of mass is, again, equal to better maneuverability. 

On the Omaha, the ship does have a turret-mounted gun. It's not a combat vessel, so the lack of general heavy weapons is intentional. On the second, it is better armed, but the main guns are external and... not shown on the 3-view. Damnit. I'll have to add those. 

The lack of airlocks (I'm assuming you mean between bulkheads and not external docking apparati) was not intentional. If I remember my early sketches correctly, they were in there to begin with, but the ship was much more aesthetically flowing without them in there. Maybe I should add those as well.

About the serif font, is there one that you would recommend? I'm having a hard time finding one that looks 'artificial' enough to not clash with the design of the blueprints, and maintains readability. I finally settled on this one. Is it difficult to read?

The whole thing was done in GIMP, with a lot of patience. And cursing. Quite a bit of that.

----------


## tilt

Really nice looking - good job. I like both ships but would like an external look on the first one, so we can see what it looks like. The design of the second one (exterior) I think is a bit boxy, Yachts tend to be streamlined - it helps them look cool  :Wink: 
concerning the font I don't see a problem with it, the text blocks are small and a non-serif font tend to give a more futuristic look. (then again, one could argue that when we reach that future we will have used grotesk fonts so much that serif fonts will be the font of the future *lol*) ... and midgarsormr has it right concerning the wings "Live long and prosper"   :Smile:

----------


## Midgardsormr

The type would probably be easier on my eyes in print, but on the screen I had to slow down significantly to read it. Finding a futuristic-looking serif font that is readable at small sizes is an interesting challenge...

Cambria, maybe. It has a vertical axis, not much variation in line weight, the serifs do not taper much, but it's not a slab-serif. It still looks a little classic, though, but so much as other serif fonts.

----------


## stargate525

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria_(typeface)

What say you about that one? I'm not on my home computer, so I can't test it as small font sizes, but it looks like it might fit the bill.

----------


## tilt

well, it is actually a grotesque looking serif - but my guess is it would be even harder to read... what you would be looking for is a light font (thin lines) with a big width in letters and I would still choose a grotesque font (no feet). And remember, if its supposed to be seen on print, then THAT is what you want it to work on and if it works on screen to, that would just be a bonus  :Smile: 
If you want a serif font - Liberation Serif is a nice modern one  :Smile:

----------


## alaskanflyboy

Most blueprints I've seen in the real-world often use a sans-serif font, but they're as Tilt described. Wide letters with thin lines (traditionally written by hand). This is a payware font that costs $30, but it's a good example of a blue-print type font. The similar fonts in the sidebar are some other nice examples. You should be able to find something free that's like them on DaFont.

As for the ship itself. I really like the design of the first one. As one already mentioned, it could use airlocks in the corridors. A spaceship, like a real ship  much more like a submarine, really  needs a way to seal off sections that are breached or on fire, else the entire ship is compromised. However, the monochrome and simple design looks much like a company blueprint you'd find in their pamphlets. It has me inspired.

----------


## m036462

I know I'm ages late to the discussion, but current US subs only have one or two watertight interior doors.  (not including doors to the reactor compartment which are never opened underway and rarely opened in port).  Not that many foreign subs and US subs in the past didn't have more watertight compartments.

----------


## moriturimax

Really cool, reminds me a LOT of the Zaon ship maps, which is my way of complimenting your design.

***** stars!

----------


## darcsied

Do you have more in the works?

----------


## SimonDarksideJ

Very detailed interiors, could very well be used for a traveller style game.  Great work.

----------

