Topic: New Immovables
chuckw
Topic Opener
Joined: 2010-03-15, 16:23
Posts: 945  One Elder of Players Location: New York - USA |
Posted at: 2015-02-08, 18:06
@kaputtnik - That is a valiant attempt at rivers! It points out the challenges we face whether we make rivers immovables or terrain. It would seem they can be neither, so perhaps a unique class of graphic is needed that could be placed on a map like an immovable but could dynamically adapt to terrain elevation. This is sort of like "where a miracle happens". I'm not knowledgeable enough with what may be required from the game's rendering engine to achieve this or even if it can be achieved. That is where the Bug report #1418305 comes in. This will likely require some major coding changes, but we need someone familiar enough with the mechanics of the rendering engine to make the assessment. Edited for links Edited: 2015-02-08, 18:09
I see little people. 
Top
Quote
|
kaputtnik
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 2552 OS: Archlinux Version: current master One Elder of Players Location: Germany |
Posted at: 2015-02-08, 22:02
Yes, i think we need a additional cathegorie of "terrains". Maybe "advanced terrains" or similar which consist of different renderrules. I tried out a coast :
Currently i implement this as terrain, just as an appetizer I think we should create such things and define renderrules out of them?
Top
Quote
|
DragonAtma
Joined: 2014-09-14, 01:54
Posts: 351  Tribe Member |
Posted at: 2015-02-09, 08:47
If we're adding rivers, are we adding bridges? Obviously some rivers are small enough to be a non-issue (the arkadiko bridge dates back over thirty-three hundred years), but some are huge (the Yangtze's main area used ferries and didn't get a bridge -- the Wuhan Yangtze River Bridge -- until 1957!). But adding bridges may be a pain, seeing as the current framework wouldn't work.
Top
Quote
|
GunChleoc
Joined: 2013-10-07, 15:56
Posts: 3317 One Elder of Players Location: RenderedRect |
Posted at: 2015-02-09, 11:03
Gameplay-wise, narrow water is already automatically bridged by roads, but wide water isn't. I assume we could use the same mechanics for rivers. What we don't have support for is using special graphics for bridges - that might be fixed by a terrain type query in the engine though. Edited: 2015-02-09, 11:04
Busy indexing nil values
Top
Quote
|
|
kaputtnik
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 2552 OS: Archlinux Version: current master One Elder of Players Location: Germany |
Posted at: 2015-02-09, 11:30
Bridges over small rivers has to be terraindepended IMHO -> if a road crosses water, a roadtype "bridge" should be displayed:
Surely we need then two kind of bridges: One for normal roads and one for busy roads... Maybe defining a ford (a riversection with small depth) where wide rivers could be crossed will bring the same possibility as a bridge? The crossing road could then be displayed with a bridge roadtype.
Top
Quote
|
|
chuckw
Topic Opener
Joined: 2010-03-15, 16:23
Posts: 945 One Elder of Players Location: New York - USA |
Posted at: 2015-02-09, 14:26
Please direct further discussion of rivers and bridges to the Rivers and Bridges thread I see little people.
Top
Quote
|
|
kaputtnik
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 2552 OS: Archlinux Version: current master One Elder of Players Location: Germany |
Posted at: 2015-03-09, 21:58
I tried me in making summits a bit.
The right dark summit have an animation for the waterfall:
What do you think about that?
Top
Quote
|
|
GunChleoc
Joined: 2013-10-07, 15:56
Posts: 3317 One Elder of Players Location: RenderedRect |
Posted at: 2015-03-11, 09:58
The lower slopes of the summit could be gentler, to make it fit in better with the other terrain. Maybe they don't need to be this high? Busy indexing nil values
Top
Quote
|
|
DragonAtma
Joined: 2014-09-14, 01:54
Posts: 351 Tribe Member |
Posted at: 2015-03-12, 07:23
You'd also need snowy versions, as having the peak be snow-free just looks weird. As for the waterfall, in concept it's great, but it doesn't match up well with a river ten times as wide -- and currently that's the thinnest river possible.
Top
Quote
|
|
kaputtnik
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 2552 OS: Archlinux Version: current master One Elder of Players Location: Germany |
Posted at: 2015-03-12, 09:42
Thanks for your comments. About the height and slighter slopes: I'll try that. Compared with the tress they look not high. About snow i thought allready. And the width of the waterfall? If i make it wider to fit it with the currently possible width of a "river", most of the hill is coverd... With snow terrain you could limit the width of a "river" a bit.
Top
Quote
|
(the above terrain works only as horizontal coast)
