ufostalker.com No paid content found

A battle map is a scaled, top-down map used during tabletop RPG encounters to show where characters, monsters, and terrain sit relative to each other. You use one when positioning matters — combat, chases, traps, room-by-room exploration — and skip it for purely narrative scenes. You can make one by drawing terrain in a vector editor, placing assets, then exporting for screen, print, or a virtual tabletop. DungeonFog is one tool built for exactly this workflow.

Battle map vs. world map: what's the difference

These two map types answer different questions, and mixing them up is the most common early mistake.

A battle map zooms in far enough that a single chair or pillar changes your tactics. A world map zooms out far enough that a single chair is invisible. You generally need both over a campaign, but they serve different moments at the table.

When to actually put a battle map down

Reach for a battle map when the answer to "where exactly is everyone?" changes the outcome:

• Combat — line of sight, flanking, area-of-effect spells, and movement speed all depend on position.
• Dungeon crawling — doors, corridors, and room shapes matter for exploration and ambushes.
• Chases and escapes — distance and obstacles drive the tension.
• Stealth and traps — who is standing where determines what gets triggered.

Skip the map for shopping, negotiation, travel montages, and any scene where nobody cares about exact distance. Forcing a grid onto a conversation slows the game down.

How to make a custom battle map

DungeonFog describes a three-step process: create a map, place assets, then export and play. Here's what each step involves and what to expect.

1. Draw the terrain

Start with the layout — dungeon walls, building floor plans, or overland terrain. DungeonFog uses a vector-based editor, which means shapes stay sharp when you scale or print them, rather than turning blurry like a stretched bitmap. Draw the rooms and corridors first; decoration comes later.

2. Place assets

Populate the map with props, furniture, and terrain features. DungeonFog's library lists over 3,000 assets spanning different time periods and settings, and new asset packs are released monthly as part of its premium content subscription. Search the library for the pieces that match your story rather than settling for whatever's closest.

3. Export and play

You can play with others inside DungeonFog itself, or export and print the map. Exporting is where your earlier choices pay off — a vector map holds up at print resolution, and a well-scaled grid keeps tokens aligned.

Key considerations before you commit

• Grid scale. Decide your squares-per-inch (or per-5-feet) before you draw, not after. Changing it later means redoing the layout.
• Resolution. If you plan to print, you need higher resolution than for on-screen play. Vector output helps here.
• Asset library size. A bigger library means less time hunting for the right prop — but also more browsing. Check whether the library covers your campaign's setting (fantasy, modern, horror, etc.).
• Where you'll play. On screen, printed, or inside a virtual tabletop each has different export needs.

Ways to play with your map

• On screen — display the map on a TV or monitor laid flat or mounted, and move physical minis on top.
• Printed — export at print resolution and tile the pages for a physical battle mat.
• In a virtual tabletop — play with others inside DungeonFog, or export the file for use in your VTT of choice.

The practical takeaway

If you only need a quick sketch, paper and a marker still work. If you want reusable, high-detail maps that survive printing and scaling, a vector editor with a large asset library saves real time across a campaign. DungeonFog fits that second case — free to sign up, with premium memberships and a marketplace for additional content. Check the pricing page for current tiers before committing, since asset packs and premium features sit behind that subscription.

Electrogravitational field theory is a family of speculative proposals suggesting that a sufficiently strong or specially configured electromagnetic field could interact with gravity itself—effectively letting a craft generate thrust or cancel its own weight without propellant. Applied to UFOs, the idea is that the reported behaviors (silent hovering, sudden acceleration, no visible exhaust) might be explained by manipulating a gravitational or electrogravitational field rather than by rockets or jets. The critical caveat: this remains outside mainstream physics, with no confirmed experimental demonstration of propellantless gravitational control. What follows is an explanation of the proposal, not an endorsement of it.

What "Electrogravitational Field Theory" Means in Plain Terms

In conventional physics, gravity and electromagnetism are two separate fundamental interactions. Gravity is described by general relativity as the curvature of spacetime produced by mass and energy; electromagnetism is described by quantum electrodynamics and governs charges, currents, and fields. There is no accepted mechanism by which an electric or magnetic field directly generates or cancels a gravitational field at useful strength.

Electrogravitational proposals insert a coupling between the two. The general claim is that under certain conditions—high voltage, asymmetric capacitor geometry, rapidly changing fields, or charge distributions that are not perfectly balanced—an electromagnetic system could produce a gravitational side effect. Sometimes this is framed as a modification of general relativity; sometimes as a new field that couples to both charge and mass. The term "electrogravitational mechanics" in the site's own framing points to this same territory: treating gravitational field behavior as something that can be engineered electromagnetically.

Where it sits relative to mainstream physics: it is a fringe or speculative research area. Some of its historical roots (for example, work associated with Thomas Townsend Brown in the mid-20th century) are real and documented, but the claimed gravitational effects have not been reproduced as a propellantless propulsion mechanism under controlled conditions.

The UFO Behaviors the Theory Is Invoked to Address

The theory is usually brought up because conventional propulsion has trouble with a specific list of reported observations:

• Silent hovering. No roar, no jet blast, no rotor wash. A rocket or jet producing enough thrust to hold a craft aloft would normally be extremely loud and would move a lot of air.
• Sudden acceleration. Reports often describe near-instantaneous changes in velocity, sometimes to hypersonic speeds, without a visible acceleration phase.
• No visible exhaust or plume. No chemical flame, no obvious reaction mass being expelled.
• Sharp maneuvers without apparent aerodynamic control surfaces. Turns and stops that would imply enormous g-loads on any structure and crew.
• Low observable signatures in some accounts. Little or no heat signature, sometimes no radar return.

The appeal of an electrogravitational explanation is that it would address all of these at once: if a craft could modify its own gravitational interaction or generate thrust through a field effect, it would not need to throw mass backward, would not need a loud plume, and could in principle change velocity without the same structural and thermal penalties.

The Proposed Mechanism, at a Conceptual Level

Different versions exist, but the common conceptual chain looks like this:

1. Generate a strong, asymmetric electromagnetic field. Typically this means high voltage across a specially shaped electrode arrangement—often an asymmetric capacitor, where one electrode is small and pointed and the other is large and flat.
2. Create a field gradient rather than a uniform field. A uniform field is claimed to do nothing useful; the proposal depends on a gradient or asymmetry in the field configuration.
3. Couple that gradient to a gravitational or mass-related effect. The speculative step: the electromagnetic energy density or charge distribution is said to interact with the gravitational field, producing a net force or a local modification of inertia/weight.
4. Use the resulting force for propulsion or lift. If the effect is real and scalable, the craft could hover or accelerate by tuning the field, with no propellant expelled.

A simple analogy sometimes used: instead of pushing against the ground or throwing mass backward, you would be "leaning" against the gravitational field itself. The analogy is intuitive but also where the physics gets thin—mainstream theory provides no accepted coupling that would let you lean hard enough to matter.

Speculative Proposal vs. Confirmed Result

This distinction is the most important part of any honest discussion.

The pattern to notice: the small, real effects (ion wind, electrostatic forces) are often real but are not gravitational. The large, dramatic effects (weight cancellation, propellantless thrust) are the ones that remain unconfirmed.

Main Open Questions and Criticisms from Conventional Physics

• No accepted coupling mechanism. General relativity and the Standard Model do not include a term that lets laboratory electromagnetic fields produce useful gravitational forces. Any proposal has to add new physics, and that new physics has not been validated.
• Energy and momentum accounting. Propellantless thrust raises conservation-of-momentum questions. Proponents argue the field carries the momentum; critics note this has not been demonstrated in a closed, controlled experiment.
• Measurement artifacts. Small apparent weight changes are notoriously easy to produce through electrostatic attraction, ion wind, thermal effects, vibration, or electromagnetic interference with the balance itself. Careful replication attempts often reduce or eliminate the effect.
• Scaling gap. Even if a tiny effect existed, there is no demonstrated path from milligram-scale anomalies to lifting and accelerating a craft.
• Alternative explanations for UFO reports. Misidentification, atmospheric phenomena, sensor artifacts, classified conventional aircraft, and hoaxes account for many cases, and no single propulsion theory is required to explain the entire reported range.

How to Think About This Responsibly

If you are curious about electrogravitational ideas and UFO propulsion, a practical approach is:

1. Separate the three layers. (a) Established physics, (b) small anomalous lab effects that are real but contested, and (c) speculative propulsion claims. Do not let layer (c) borrow credibility from layer (a).
2. Ask what would falsify it. A useful theory makes predictions that can fail. If a proposal cannot specify a clean, replicable test, treat it as a hypothesis at best.
3. Look for independent replication. One lab's result is a lead; repeated results by unrelated groups, with artifacts ruled out, are evidence.
4. Keep the UFO question separate. Even if electrogravitational propulsion were possible, that would not by itself establish that any specific UFO report involved it. The two questions are linked only by speculation.

The short answer to the title question: electrogravitational field theory attempts to explain UFO propulsion by proposing that electromagnetic fields can be engineered to interact with gravity, providing lift and thrust without exhaust. It is an interesting conceptual framework and a long-standing fringe research topic, but it is not established physics, and no confirmed experiment has demonstrated the effect at the scale the UFO interpretation would require.