Much better, but the shadows from the furniture still seems a bit on the longish side....

If you are printing, there is a tiling option right in the print dialog, just set the desired scale (battle maps for miniatures are usually 1' = 5" (as long as your map is mapped to scale in the first place)) and set the horizontal and vertical number of tiles. Check page 47 of the user manual for details.

If you are exporting it to image files first, you can use the "Rectangular section" file type exports. This will cause CC3+ to ask you for coordinates after hitting save, and this way you can save just a piece of your map. Just use this to export your map one piece at a time.

No. The viewer product was discontinued. The problems with a viewer for CC3/CC3+ is that maps rely on artwork installed on the users computer, the .fcw files themselves doesn't have this embedded. This means a viewer would require the exact same installation of artwork as the actual product, which has rendered the concept of a viewer a bit difficult. The original viewer concept was from back in the CC2 days where all artwork were vector artwork that could be embedded into the map files themselves.

To view .fcw files you will need to have CC3+ installed, as well as the same add-ons that were used to create the maps so that you have the same art resources avilable.

If you're interested in trying out CC3+, there is a 14-day money back guarantee, but otherwise I recommend you ask the person sending you the files to export them as an image or print them to a pdf file instead.

You're not technically supposed to "choose a style" in that dialog. The style selector should be prepopulated with the correct style choice for your current map.

If you want to use drawing tools belonging to a different map type than the one you are working in, you need to import the appropriate fill styles first. More about this in this faq topic:

Mercator is honestly one of my favorites. Of course, it doesn't go with Schley at all, but since you are thinking different map levels here and not mixing them in the same map, I don't think that matters. I imagine my different maps and map levels being made by different cartographers, and don't have an issue at all with them being different styles.

But there are so many pretty styles out there, and most of them works fine as world maps, it is usually more about limiting detail level when you map rather then a specific style needed for world maps.

No. While Cosmographer allows you do draw star systems, it is a manual process. It has no concept of things like orbits and calculating positions or the effect of bodies on each other.

This is due to the particular fills you have picked. Unfortunately, most templates contain some truly ancient fill options which doesn't work very well with modern CC3+. These are the leaves, tiles, stone and woodgrain fills in the list. Avoid these. I am unsure which style your map was made in, but if you have Dungeon designer 3 (DD3) or Symbol Set 4 (SS4) I recommend starting a map in one of those styles as they contain proper bitmap fills you can use with the room and corridor commands. If not, you should also have access to the Annual John Roberts dungeon style which also have nice fills.

You'll normally also want to avoid those vector (line) based fills.

Yea, fills in CC3+ are always drawn without rotation regardless of the angle of the room. You need to use the shaded polygon command on them to rotate the fill

This is again down to your choice of fill. This command only works with bitmap filled entities. If you use one of the proper bitmap fills from the styles I mentioned above, it should work fine.

For the Dracula dossier, I am guessing those geomorph floors weren't intended to be there. Ralf repurposed an older set of symbol catalogs, as they work fine with that particular style, but I guess he forgot the geomorph catalog. The reason it doesn't work is that the fill style used for the floors in the symbols doesn't exist in the actual Dracula dossier template.

Yea, I think the first option for each product should have gotten you the right installers, but generally, what you should be looking for is if there are separate download links for the CC3 and the CC3+ version, in which case it is important you get the CC3+ one, the installers for CC3 will not install properly into CC3+.

And yea, getting the monthly content installer is good, it contains extra free stuff.

Now, make sure to install the base product, CC3+ first, all the others (except FT3) requires it.

Now, as for products installing things other than in program data, this is optional. Many of these add-ons allow people NOT owning CC3+ to install them just for the artwork, and in that case, it will install that artwork into documents. There should be a checkbox to just turn off installing that extra copy altogether during the installation. Just turn it off, and it will just install the standard copy for use with CC3+ in the ProgramData folder.

You talk about floorplans here. Did you create that using the floorplan tool from a city map? Did you perhaps pick a floorplan template for a style you don't own?

It depends what you are going for. To create a top-down overview, any city style should suffice, you'll probably be mostly using the house tool to create your own shapes rather than using finished building symbols.

If you're looking to map the interior, dungeon styles will allow you to do that. I think you're probably be best off with a regular dungeon style, the Castles add-on will probably not give you too much for a magic scool, other than perhaps some castle drawing techniques, but in general, you'll probably enjoy a modern bitmap based artwork dungeon style more.

If you are after the perspective views, then Castles may help you a bit, but it is probably better to start out with Perspectives 3 instead. But a perspective view of such a building is going to be a complex task, so not a good starting point for an inexperienced user.