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: GIS Update


On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 10:21, D. Cooper Stevenson wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 October 2004 05:46, Lincoln Peters wrote:
> > Do you think that this data map nicely to the terrain types in an
> > existing terrain module (plains, forest, desert, mountains, swamp,
> > shallows, sea), or does this call for a new terrain module to be of any
> > real interest?  If at this point you're just dealing with landcover, I
> > could create a simplified spin-off of my proposed omniterr.g terrain
> > module toward that end (no coatings would be needed).
> 
> Why didn't I think of that?!!?
> 
> I think you've hit the nail right on the head. It would certainly be ideal to 
> simply have a GIS terrain module that couples seemlessly with the NLCD 92 
> data. This would deprecate the need for a conversion script.

I've already modified my "omniterr.g" module so that it is entirely
based on vegetation (I kept the original, of course).  I'll see if I can
modify it to handle the different classes of land cover described in the
USGS page.

> Here is the specific landcover specification:
> 
>   http://landcover.usgs.gov/classes.asp

Looks like a total of 22 terrain types, unless I'm misunderstanding how
it's supposed to work.

> >
> > Elevation data, of course, is a fairly simple matter to import.
> > Although as far as I can tell, it only affects the isometric view code
> > and (sometimes) the fractal percentile terrain generator.
> >
> 
> I think you're right. I can see that it will be increasingly important to use 
> elevation as a determinate of such factors such as unit speed, engagement 
> advantage and "who can see whom."
> 
> This is known. The good news is that I think Xconq's engine can be extended to 
> use elevation in these ways. I may be out in left field here; Eric or others 
> may say, "Xconq already does read elevation."

Actually, there is one other thing I remember that elevation affects:
line-of-sight.  I think that it lacks the ability to affect unit speed
or engagement advantage; the best you can do is create a bunch of
additional terrain types to represent different altitudes (way too much
work, if you ask me!).

---
Lincoln Peters
<sampln@sbcglobal.net>

If your happiness depends on what somebody else does, I guess you do
have a problem.
		-- Richard Bach, "Illusions"


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