This is the mail archive of the xconq7@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Xconq project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Coatings


Lincoln Peters wrote:

Interesting.  However, I wanted to be able to track vegetation
separately from physical topography, since I suspect that the data from
the GIS would contain so many different combinations of those two
properties (as well as others) that implementing each combination as a
separate cell terrain type would be even more work.

The whole point of binning the same cell into multiple categories is so that various aspects of that cell can be tracked separately. Assuming that the topographical data and the vegetation data can be aligned and scaled the same, then each cell cut out with a "hex cookie cutter" would have both of those layers, each of which could be used to bin the separately in the relevant category.


A problem is that liquid terrain is special to Xconq in several ways. One of these is that the AI relies on a land-sea regions layer to determine whether a body of water is large enough to consider building naval units. If everything is a bare cell underneath, then the ability to make [designer-guided] intelligent naval construction decisions is impaired.

Maybe it would instead be possible to make the cell terrain types land and water, and the physical properties (sand, silt, clay) as Coating Level 0. Or it may turn out that the physical properties I mentioned are meaningless for 99% of all situations and so could be omitted from the planned terrain module entirely.

This could be a reasonable modification to address the liquid terrain concern.


For a fantasy game, someone might wish to assume a world that truly is flat, and has spirits with chubby faces blowing across the face of the world, __you know, Boreus, Zephyrus, and that bunch....

In most cases, such fantasy is also based on a assumption that the Earth is flat and the suns revolves around the Earth. This means that the Earth would most likely *not* be rotating, in which case Coriolis force is zero.

That was my point.


Eric


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]