I think this map is really cool but why did the creator make it 3Dish? also is this something from Star Trek? I'm not a star trek fan I'm just wondering.....

|> why did the creator make it 3Dish?

Probably because they thought it'd look good. :p Or maybe because they didn't feel like drawing it themselves and this image was readily available.

|> also is this something from Star Trek?

[Have you tried asking Google](http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Vor%27Cha)? And have you read [the map description](http://warlight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=11274) (use the "Preview Map" button on the map selection screen)?

I foresee it being more difficult to make it non-3d'ish..

if this game allowed multiple page maps, I could foresee there being blueprint maps... multiple story buildings, possibly huge buildings.. but it would likely be very difficult to implement, as well as to play.

Multiple story buildings has been done already, for instance [GDS Upper School](http://warlight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=518) and [Kroma's Castle](http://warlight.net/SinglePlayer.aspx?PreviewMap=9700).

If with "blueprint maps" you mean a map with a front, side and top view, I think it could be done; multi-part territories are supported, so you could make one territory consisting of three parts (one in each view). Connections would be a hell though, both to make and to play...
While it would be cool to have 3D objects as maps (which you could rotate and move around), those would be incredibly difficult to make and for "mere mortals" pretty much unplayable (except in the simplest of cases, such as globes or cubes, but those can be easily represented in 2D as well).

ps. [These images](http://www.strekschematics.utvinternet.com/fanbprints/jackills/vorcha/vorcha.html) don't look 3D-ish at all, so it could certainly be done. How well-suited they are, in the case of this ship class, to base a map on is another story. (For other ship classes, this kind of "flat" images might very well produce playable maps though.)

Sorry to bump this thread, but we are playing a game on it and the map has a lot of issues. I sent feedback, not sure if the maker is still active or if it is possible for someone else to fix it.

I think it looks cool, but many of the connections are messed up. IMO, countries that only share a corner (one vertex), but not an actual line segment should not connect. This map has some that do and some that do not. It makes it very tedious to play because you have to keep clicking more info (or check in attack phase) to see where connections are.

|> not sure if the maker is still active or if it is possible for someone else to fix it.

[The maker](http://warlight.net/Profile.aspx?p=866669992) has no "this player has been inactive for x days" message on his profile, so he's still active on WL. (And no, generally it's not possible for someone else to fix a map. There have been a few instances of maps getting adopted though.)

|> IMO, countries that only share a corner (one vertex), but not an actual line segment should not connect. This map has some that do and some that do not.

That is your opinion, which you are perfectly entitled to. And even though most people seem to agree with you, it's still just an opinion.
However, it can indeed be argued that each map should at least be consistent, which is also not the case here. I've sent the maker the same feedback when the map was just published; if it hasn't been fixed yet, you might not want to hold your breath... :(

Yeah, I'd like to see a general rule followed with those connections. I would be fine if it was consistent throughout the map and maybe not standard for all map makers, but it is different all over on the map. Oh well, I just won't play it after this game.