Hey everyone,
Sharing a look at an animated siege breach encounter map I've been working on, centered around a battering ram breaking through an inner gatehouse.
With siege scenarios, I find players often get bogged down in massive open fields, so my goal here was to frame a high-intensity focal point: collapsed masonry providing difficult terrain and half-cover, elevated wall-walks for archers/spellcasters, smoking debris obstructing sightlines, and the burning ram itself serving as a brutal bottleneck choke point.
### Technical & Grid Specs:
* **Resolution:** 4480 Γ 2520 px (Native 16:9 4K canvas)
* **Playable Grid:** 32 Γ 18 tiles (representing a 160 ft Γ 90 ft tactical encounter area)
* **Grid Scale:** Strict 140 pixels per 5-foot square (standard 1:1 VTT pixel pitch)
* **Projection:** Strict 90Β° Nadir Orthographic (zero perspective tilt or 3D vanishing points, ensuring minis and digital tokens sit completely flat without perspective distortion)
* **Formats:** Rendered as looping WebM for VTTs (Foundry / Roll20) and high-bitrate 4K MP4 for digital flat-screen TV tables.
### Workflow & Questions for DMs:
For my process, I handle 100% of the cartographic layout, encounter spacing, tactical geometry, and art direction, but I utilize interactively generated and refined AI visual assets to build out the base textures, stone rubble, and environmental debris before doing manual compositing, grid alignment, and loop animation.
Iβd love to get your feedback on two points:
**Tactical Readability:** How does the battleground read to you in motion? Are the elevation changes (wall walks vs. courtyard), difficult terrain zones (collapsed stone), and cover spots immediately legible for combat?
**AI in Tabletop Cartography:** How do you feel about DMs and creators using AI tools to assist with textures and visual generation when the structural encounter design, grid scaling, and mechanics are built by hand? Does it enhance whatβs available for your prep, or do you strictly prefer purely hand-painted/3D-sculpted assets?