Map Stacking Limitations Question

So what I am thinking of doing for an aerial combat sequence where the characters will be passing over quite a bit of terrain is to stack multiple (about 10) maps in the map layer then use the Front to Back tool to cycle through those maps instead of putting each map in a separate tab and dragging the combat from scene to scene. My question is has anyone had any experience with pulling this sort of trick? Are there technical limitations on the number of maps that can be stacked, load time issues (some of us are on poor connections), that sort of thing? The combat will be somewhat on rails, so I should be able to get the static order set up okay, but am I missing any deal breakers here?

Out of curiosity, why not make one really big map? I believe Roll20 breaks large maps into smaller chunks for loading purposes and will also load everything currently on the visible map (including stuff hidden behind other stuff) so you should get better performance from a larger scrolling map than multiple maps in the same space. Is there a reason you can't do this? Otherwise I think multiple pages are going to be the best bet from a performance perspective (also, you can go to any of the terrain, a front-to-back solution means if you accidentally move to the wrong place you'll kind of be stuck). One of the devs will be able to give you a better idea of how the back end handles multiple images over each other but I suspect you're going to suffer a performance hit.

I was considering a long scrolling map, but for surprise value decided to break it up. Course I could use Fog of War... Hmm. Tempting, but I'd also have to join all the maps together, and I'm not thinking they are going to fit together seamlessly without a lot of work. Thanks for the suggestion though -- that is exactly the sort of input I was looking for, even if it doesn't turn out to be what I end up going with.

Jacquesne is correct, it would be better for performance to have maps 'offscreen' on the same page rather than stacked. Images that are not visible are not being actively processed. However, there is no limitation to what you are trying to do so you could try it and then switch to a different method if there is a performance problem.

How about creating a rollable table with all your maps, then use the token button to make an instance of it on the map layer. You can then just right click it and Choose Side to get the one you want. No worry about needing to front/back until you find the right one. :) I can't remember who told me about that trick (William? Kevin?), but it seems tailor made for your situation.

Aaron said: How about creating a rollable table with all your maps, then use the token button to make an instance of it on the map layer. You can then just right click it and Choose Side to get the one you want. No worry about needing to front/back until you find the right one. :) I can't remember who told me about that trick (William? Kevin?), but it seems tailor made for your situation. Now that is an interesting idea! Thanks. I'm going to go experiment with that right now. EDIT: That seemed to work great, although I could only test it by myself as Player and GM. As far as I could tell switching maps on the Rollable Token was reasonably prompt, and I didn't notice any undue lag with moving other figures over the map layer. Thanks again!

:) Glad that worked out the you! The person who originally posted the idea used it for encounter maps. He had a bunch of generic maps setup in it for forests, roads, towns, caves, etc. then just switched to the terrain that made sense at the time.

Just a followup, but even with ten large maps combined in one rollable table all went well. There was even one unexpected but welcome added benefit: A rollable table token, expanded to fit the entire page as a map, locks in place so it is nearly impossible to accidentally select and drag it -- even when you have carelessly left yourself on the map layer...

:). Sounds awesome!