Author Topic: Unmapped, lost or misnamed systems and planets (last updated 10 November 2016) (Read 56924 times)

Frabby · « **Reply #30 on:** 20 November 2011, 11:22:59 »

Øystein comments on missing/unmapped worlds past 3020 here:

Quote

as a general rule, any "missing" Great House world mentioned post-3020s is deemed to be a secondary system some place, or an alternative name to a world, since the 3025 maps from FASA are deemed to be 'complete'. We don't have inhabited Great House (or major periphery) systems that are not shown on the maps.

Also, Harry found some interesting (although technically apocryphal) information where missing systems were translated as known systems in the German edition of the book that mentions them (Decision at Thunder Rift):
- Drune II --> Beta VII
- Chekkar --> Kaesong

Redfaction · « **Reply #31 on:** 16 March 2012, 10:16:32 »

I have been searching for a map of the Chainelane Isles for ever, and I feel like I found it in one of the sourcebooks once, can anyone tell me which it is? I have been getting a massive headache trying to find it.

I am also curious if worlds that were part of the TC and OA that are no longer on maps considered lost?

Øystein · « **Reply #32 on:** 16 March 2012, 10:57:05 »

Quote from: Redfaction on 16 March 2012, 10:16:32

I have been searching for a map of the Chainelane Isles for ever, and I feel like I found it in one of the sourcebooks once, can anyone tell me which it is? I have been getting a massive headache trying to find it.

I am also curious if worlds that were part of the TC and OA that are no longer on maps considered lost?

Field Manual: 3085 has the only detailed map of the Chainelane Worlds. An outline map of it has appeared in some sourcebooks, like Explorer Corps, and Warriors of Kerensky, IIRC.

With regards,
Øystein

Redfaction · « **Reply #33 on:** 16 March 2012, 11:01:19 »

Thanks! I knew I had seen it somewhere!

BrokenMnemonic · « **Reply #34 on:** 01 July 2012, 06:04:38 »

129A-14H - site of an abandoned colony somewhere on the border of the Circinus Federation. Used as a bolthole for elements of the 49th Shadow Division prior to the death of the Master, and nuked extensively from orbit by the Regulans before their task force hit Circinus in April 3081, according to the Wild Weasel chaos campaign track in Jihad: Final Reckoning.

Frabby · « **Reply #35 on:** 05 July 2012, 16:14:21 »

Updated. Also found a reference to the "Sylven" system on p. 6 of the old GDL scenario book, where it says that "Trellwan would become a dagger in the Commonwealth's back, a staging area for launching attacks toward Drune II, Sylven, and, ultimately, toward the Steiner capital, Tharkad itself."

Drune II and Sylven are both marked as unmapped worlds.
In the German translation of the scenario books, they are translated as "Reiche Ernte" (=Bountiful Harvest) and "Wroclaw", respectively.
In the fashion of what was done to Chekaar, this may apocryphically establish the systems in question.

Kit deSummersville · « **Reply #36 on:** 06 July 2012, 14:52:14 »

Barahona is on the map in HB: MPS p. 147. You might just try a CTRL+F search on maps for some of these worlds.

Frabby · « **Reply #37 on:** 06 July 2012, 16:45:52 »

Quote from: Kit deSummersville on 06 July 2012, 14:52:14

Barahona is on the map in HB: MPS p. 147. You might just try a CTRL+F search on maps for some of these worlds.

I normally do a CTRL-F search on several publications including HB:MPS... not sure how I missed this. Thanks for pointing this out.
Since HB:MPS is older than the BC scenario in question, it was never an unmapped world to begin with. I have removed Barahona from the list.

Frabby · « **Reply #38 on:** 15 August 2012, 08:24:29 »

New find: Niue, as described in the BattleCorps story "Commerce is all". Seems to be in the periphery somewhere in the Circinus Federation/Illyrian Palatinate/Magistracy of Canopus region though no conclusive info is given.

The Hawk · « **Reply #39 on:** 12 October 2012, 09:18:28 »

So, in a recent Ask the Writers post, the following statement was made by Øystein:

Quote from: Øystein

100% of all settled systems within the Great Houses and Near Periphery nations are shown on the maps. 100%.
There is no "too small to be shown" if it is within a Great House. HPGs has also nothing to do with any systems ever appearing on any maps. If it is not on the map, it is deader than a norwegian blue.

I raise it here because this seems to have consequences for the effort toward which this thread is directed. Let us assume that all planets listed above that could be secondary or tertiary planets in a mapped system are. Let us further disregard Periphery planets (as Øystein went on to state that only important Periphery worlds appear on the maps.) What consequences does the above statement leave us with?

The Five spring to mind immediately as a problem. Jardine, for instance, must have been "settled" to some extent before its destruction, yet it dropped off the maps. Presumably the same is true of at least two of the other three Hidden unless they're all Gabriels, i.e. secondary planets in an otherwise inhabited (and mapped) system. The ComStar base systems, Ross and Luyten, must also have had some type of population over the centuries, minimal though it must be, though they've never been mapped.

Are there any other known systems that 1) are in the Inner Sphere; 2) from their description must be in their own system (rather than a secondary world in a system); and 3) don't appear on a map corresponding with the period of their habitation, and thus would violate the absolute rule reflected in the above quote?

Frabby · « **Reply #40 on:** 12 October 2012, 12:36:11 »

Much as I respect Oystein and his work, I don't think this quote of his will hold up against Herb if some "new" (forgotten and previously unmapped) system springs up in some canonical book from the old days. One day I may check the map on the BattleTech 2nd Ed. box cover (with the battling Warhammer and infantry superimposed on it) versus existing star maps just for fun, because I don't think anybody did that yet. And there's always the possibility that a new world gets retconned in through new fiction, even if just because the factcheckers don't realize it is a new one.

As for the Hidden Five, this thread was never aimed at them specifically. But while we're at it, Herb has explicitly confirmed that the three as-yet unidentified ones show up on old maps already, though under different names of course.

Kit deSummersville · « **Reply #41 on:** 12 October 2012, 12:45:38 »

Øystein's comment was regarding known inhabitation. Hidden worlds or some bandits setting up camp in a formerly inhabitated system wouldn't get put on the maps.

BrokenMnemonic · « **Reply #42 on:** 12 October 2012, 13:05:24 »

There's also a tendency for worlds to have dropped off the map during the Age of War, only to reappear later. We don't have a map of the entire Inner Sphere dated earlier than 2571, only partial maps based around the founding of the various Great Houses (less the Camerons). I've come across several planets like Cebalrai recently, where the text history doesn't match the maps; the answers given in the Ask The Writers forum have generally been that the world was settled before the Reunification War, depopulated, and then later repopulated. It would be easy to add a planet to a later map and simply state that the population was eradicated between maps - settled in the Age of War, depopulated by 2571; settled during the First Succession War, depopulated before 2822, and so on.

Øystein · « **Reply #43 on:** 12 October 2012, 13:40:30 »

Quote from: Frabby on 12 October 2012, 12:36:11

Much as I respect Oystein and his work, I don't think this quote of his will hold up against Herb if some "new" (forgotten and previously unmapped) system springs up in some canonical book from the old days.

Actually, it does. Any "missing" post-3025 worlds mentioned in various old scenario books are generally considered secondary and tertiary worlds in already existing systems. We have gone with the basis that the 3025 maps are complete regarding the Great Houses. This has been the policy ever since I've been doing maps, and approved by the line developers.

With regards,
Øystein

reppa · « **Reply #44 on:** 09 January 2013, 16:35:50 »

Frabby --

another possible addition to the missing -- Valin.

I was looking through my FASA 3060 TRO, and I found this in the UrbanMech IIC entry:

"Clan Burrock attempted to acquire Coyote genetic material by raiding the Coyote repository on Valin."

I don't know if this was corrected in later versions of this TRO, and I don't recall anything about any Clan space dead worlds before the Wars of Reaving. Maybe it's the name of one of the continents on one of the Coyote worlds, but I'm not sure....

or I just missed something elsewhere....

Moonsword · « **Reply #45 on:** 09 January 2013, 16:45:31 »

That was corrected to Tamaron in the CGL version.

Frabby · « **Reply #46 on:** 09 January 2013, 17:01:15 »

Also, note that the wording is somewhat ambigous. "Valin" could denote a continent or an elevated terrain feature as easily as a planet or moon in this context.
But it is a good find nevertheless - don't be discouraged reppa! O0

reppa · « **Reply #47 on:** 09 January 2013, 17:11:28 »

Quote from: Moonsword on 09 January 2013, 16:45:31

That was corrected to Tamaron in the CGL version.

ah, and kind of what I expected...

and thanks, Frabby....

BrokenMnemonic · « **Reply #48 on:** 10 January 2013, 14:43:59 »

Quote from: Frabby on 26 January 2011, 06:33:38

- Knutstad (ISP p47)

This planet is on maps in Historical: Liberation of Terra Vol 1 and Era Report: 2750

Tai Dai Cultist · « **Reply #49 on:** 18 January 2013, 02:31:54 »

I think this might be a bit of a tangent as it's a purely real world/OOC typo issue.

What was the story on Kaznejov being retconned to Kaznejoy? I mean, yes I know it's Official. And I heard it had to do with what appeared to be a typo on a fold-out IS map due to the interaction of a circle printed directly over the 'v' in the system's name.

Since the original House Kurita Atlas clearly named it Kaznejov I'm curious what was the reason for the 'clarification'? I'm not trying to beat a dead horse.. I honestly don't know the full story.

Øystein · « **Reply #50 on:** 18 January 2013, 03:55:31 »

It's a typo that has been stuck and just instead of going back and correcting a decades worth of maps and sourcebooks, we've decided that Kaznejoy is the correct spelling. It happens now and then. There are about a dozen troublesome worlds that keeps having multiple spellings in sourcebooks (like Itabaiana and New Vandenburg for instance) over the years and we had to pick one to be the correct one.

Frabby · « **Reply #51 on:** 11 February 2013, 15:34:31 »

Two more from the BC story "A Distant Thunder": Altruis, essentially an uninhabited system with a blue giant star used as a waypoint for quick recharging, and Rumor V which may or may not be the (otherwise unnamed) colony world near Valencia that was destroyed by what circumstances suggest was the WoB Erinyes.

Redfaction · « **Reply #52 on:** 12 February 2013, 01:36:57 »

Quote from: The Hawk on 12 October 2012, 09:18:28

So, in a recent Ask the Writers post, the following statement was made by Øystein:

I raise it here because this seems to have consequences for the effort toward which this thread is directed. Let us assume that all planets listed above that could be secondary or tertiary planets in a mapped system are. Let us further disregard Periphery planets (as Øystein went on to state that only important Periphery worlds appear on the maps.) What consequences does the above statement leave us with?

The Five spring to mind immediately as a problem. Jardine, for instance, must have been "settled" to some extent before its destruction, yet it dropped off the maps. Presumably the same is true of at least two of the other three Hidden unless they're all Gabriels, i.e. secondary planets in an otherwise inhabited (and mapped) system. The ComStar base systems, Ross and Luyten, must also have had some type of population over the centuries, minimal though it must be, though they've never been mapped.

Are there any other known systems that 1) are in the Inner Sphere; 2) from their description must be in their own system (rather than a secondary world in a system); and 3) don't appear on a map corresponding with the period of their habitation, and thus would violate the absolute rule reflected in the above quote?

This pricked a point of memory in my mind, in Handbook: House Steiner it explicitly states that there are some worlds that are not mapped because they are "too small, private, etc" and in other publications it has stated that many realms have "periphery holdings" like mining concerns and other such possessions. So what does official canon say about such systems? Are they "too small to be mapped"? If so, does that explain some of the more random names we see? And does that leave room for systems with a population (I would assume absolutely minuscule) to exist within/without of the Great Houses and Periphery realms?

The Hawk · « **Reply #53 on:** 12 February 2013, 09:49:04 »

Quote from: Redfaction on 12 February 2013, 01:36:57

This pricked a point of memory in my mind, in Handbook: House Steiner it explicitly states that there are some worlds that are not mapped because they are "too small, private, etc" and in other publications it has stated that many realms have "periphery holdings" like mining concerns and other such possessions. So what does official canon say about such systems? Are they "too small to be mapped"? If so, does that explain some of the more random names we see? And does that leave room for systems with a population (I would assume absolutely minuscule) to exist within/without of the Great Houses and Periphery realms?

Coincidentally, I also read in ISP3 the other day the following in-universe quote:

"...while invaluable, official maps produced by ComStar and its Explorer Corps as well as other published sources cover only worlds with high population densities, major industries, and HPG coverage."

(Pg. 16.) I wasn't going to mention it, but I do note that many, possibly even all, maps are fluffed as being in-universe ComStar documents (the ones from the Handbook series are all tagged as (c) 3067 ComStar Cartographic Corps), so we have an in-universe source telling us that other in-universe sources are incomplete based, presumably, on in-universe experience...

Øystein · « **Reply #54 on:** 12 February 2013, 10:00:12 »

Quote from: The Hawk on 12 February 2013, 09:49:04

Coincidentally, I also read in ISP3 the other day the following in-universe quote:

"...while invaluable, official maps produced by ComStar and its Explorer Corps as well as other published sources cover only worlds with high population densities, major industries, and HPG coverage."

That refers to Periphery maps and outside the established periphery powers.

All inhabited systems are displayed on the Great House maps.

With regards,
Øystein

Kit deSummersville · « **Reply #55 on:** 12 February 2013, 12:09:35 »

Quote from: Øystein on 12 February 2013, 10:00:12

That refers to Periphery maps and outside the established periphery powers.

All inhabited systems are displayed on the Great House maps.

With regards,
Øystein

Well, the known ones. ;)

Frabby · « **Reply #56 on:** 17 February 2013, 14:38:22 »

Two more, from Blitzkrieg: Operation Ice Storm:

- Falcon's Beacon, a deep periphery Jade Falcon "Watch outpost" that the Ice Hellions seized in 3071 to move a massive supply convoy through, only to have a Whirlwind appear unexpectedly in the middle of the helpless convoy. One of the events that spelled doom for Clan Ice Hellion. The location is unclear and said not to be on most maps even by the Jade Falcons, but it will obviously lie between the Clan homeworlds and the Jade Falcon occupation zone.

- NGC-99382, an uninhabited system from which, after withdrawing from Camelot Command in the Dark Nebula, the Ice Hellions make the "first jump of many that would start the Ice Hellions along the Exodus Road back to home". So apparently, it's somewhere in the CJF OZ the IS or in the near periphery, presumably one jump coreward of the Dark Nebula.

Rant time:
- "NGC" doesn't denote a system. It's an abbrevation for a catalogue number in the New General Catalogue of Nebulae and Clusters of Stars (abbreviated as NGC). As such, objects in the NGC catalogue are, well, clusters or nebulae or entire galaxies. That's an order of magnitude beyond a single system. The name of this star system is the equivalent of naming some back alley in a backwater town after a whole continent.
- Also, the Dark Nebula. It's pretty much treated like a single system in the story, but it isn't. It is a nebula, i.e. an area of space. In this particular case, according to canonical information, we're looking at a "vast cloud of ionized gas" with "several" white and red dwarf stars and at least 17 pulsars in it, a couple of lightyears across. Intense radiation is mentioned. Camelot Command is a planetoid orbiting one of the red dwarfs, which so far however has no name.
Other clusters in BattleTech have similar problems, lumping separate star systems together into a "cluster" for no good reason at all.

foxbat · « **Reply #57 on:** 17 February 2013, 14:50:13 »

This is technically correct, certainly - I'll admit my astromy knowledge is fairly light -, but a lot of systems in the BT Universe are not mapped because they are not inhabited. So, I've always considered that having a single system mapped in the Dark Nebula meant there was but a single inhabited one, the remainder being inhospitable to Terran life.

Kit deSummersville · « **Reply #58 on:** 17 February 2013, 15:01:32 »

Quote from: Frabby on 17 February 2013, 14:38:22

Rant time:
- "NGC" doesn't denote a system. It's an abbrevation for a catalogue number in the New General Catalogue of Nebulae and Clusters of Stars (abbreviated as NGC). As such, objects in the NGC catalogue are, well, clusters or nebulae or entire galaxies. That's an order of magnitude beyond a single system. The name of this star system is the equivalent of naming some back alley in a backwater town after a whole continent.

Apparently it was expanded sometime in the millennia between now and then.

Jerome · « **Reply #59 on:** 29 March 2013, 03:53:04 »

Quote from: Frabby on 26 January 2011, 06:33:38

- Dragon's Field (The Sword and the Dagger p46), FS world

In the German version of The Sword and the Dagger the name was changed to Novaya Zemlya, probably because Dragon's Field could not be located on any map. So possibly Dragon's Field is just another (inofficial/local) name for Novaya Zemlya. Sarna.net seems to assume so, since in the description of the novel only Novaya Zemlya is mentioned, and in the description of the planet it says:

Quote from: sarna.net

In 3025, the planet was chosen by House Davion as a concentration area for troops bent on recapturing Stein's Folly because of its thick cloud layer, which renders enemy reconnaissance through spy ships or drones ineffective.