Mark Wedel wrote: > > While one can certainly make the case that elevation data, > and what it is used for, is not great, I think we have to > acknowledge that elevation data is there. And if we ignore > the weather effects, and say do use it for line of sight, or > something else interesting, it would be nice for the editor > to support it. I don't like the argument "it exists", because it supports those who put code on CVS without asking. If we want to get somewhere, it shoud be as easy to fix something broken, as it is adding a broken feature. Let's talk about the LOS code with elevations then. Our maps are flat, players don't see elevations and they are not going to understand them. Imagine a player standing on a large field of grass. Do you think he will understand why he can see to the left but can't see to the right? - No he won't. Instead of thinking "wow I'm on top of a mountain", he will much more likely think: "wow the LOS code is broken". Apart from the fact that elevations don't make sense on a flat map, let's face it: They are nothing better than a bunch of random values. And the maintenance problem will make it even worse. What good can you do with such values? Take the example of growing random plants based on weather, which boils down on elevation and water. This may sound tremendously exciting, but chances are high that the most rare plants grow right next to scorn. - Because you have no control over the system. There's no "greater meaning" behind it. IMO it is not fair when mapakers have to set thousands of values, just because someone thought it is cool, or "there may be plans for it". AndreasV -- +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ Jetzt ein- oder umsteigen und USB-Speicheruhr als Prämie sichern! _______________________________________________ crossfire-devel mailing list crossfire-devel at lists.real-time.com https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/crossfire-devel