[CF-Devel] Large forest. Was: more proposals

Sat Jun 21 11:38:13 CDT 2003

A couple points - I'l drop a seperate note about the python and the bank 
code.

David Seikel wrote:

>

     All my work has been on the release version, orignally 1.4 and the small

     >

     world, but I've been using 1.5 since the day it was released.

     >

You might want to update your copy of the maps - there were some large 
scale changes in the areas near and around this change - specifically 
changes surrounding Brest and substantial foresting of the areas 
already.  Because of this I would suggest the forest be shrunk a bit or 
if you have a script to run it with the newer maps in mind.  It looked 
like some of the areas you changed might overlap the mountains around 
Brest...that would be bad.

>>

     starting to get cozy with the idea of having a single elevation value 

     >>

     per map (determined by finding the current average?) and then generating The elevation 

     >>

     the elevation of each tile on that map based on the arch and that map 

     >>

     elevation value, to generate the weather maps - I think this would be 

     >>

     better way to handle it than actually having the elevation values in the 

     >>

     arches. It would allow for a deep lake in a high mountain area or high 

     >>

     forests or deserts which is not the case currently.  It wouldn't be hard 

     >>

     to do (he said expecting to be corrected...) I think, just changes to 

     >>

     the weather map genertation routine and the map headers,  and it would 

     >>

     free up the map maker form having to change the elevation to make the 

     >>

     weather do the right thing...  You worked with the weather code a bit, 

     >>

     what do you think of that?

     >>

     >>

     >

     >

     Elevation is used in more than the weather calculations if I'm not

     >

     mistaken.  LOS is oftem blocked by higher ground.  Movement rates should

     >

     also be modified slightly when going up or down hill (I do a lot of bush

     >

     walking), dunno if they actually are though.

     >

     As far as I know elevation isn't used at all after the weather maps are 
generated.

>

     Map makers changing the elevation is a problem, just look at the elevation

     >

     around the road between Scorn and and Santo Dominion.  Looks like when the

     >

     orignal big world was generated and the first towns and roads where grafted

     >

     onto it, who ever did that road lost all the elevation info.

     >

     I expanded the roads, but at that time there was no attempt (by anyone) 
to maintain the elevation information at all - it was not used for 
anything.  I have since spend a bit of effort backfilling or otherwise 
adding in or maintaining in elevation for the sake of the weather code - 
this is one reason I think that removing the elevation values from the 
individual arches should be done.  I don;t think it is worth fixing the 
elevation on the roads, but I am fighting an inevitably loosing battle 
to try to maintain the elevation for larger chunks of the maps to 
minimize the impact on the weather - the roads should just be a blip 
anyway, the cities are a bigger issue.

>

     On the other hand, this could be seen as a general problem.  Sometime in

     >

     the future some other information could be attached to the squares on maps

     >

     and the editors will have to be updated to not drop this information. I

     >

     would rather solve the general problem, but thats just the way I am B-).

     >

     This happens constantly yes,  but only if there isn't better way as I 
think there is in this case.  I think that changing the weather code 
would solve the general problem correctly.  If the elevations are 
retained as is then the elevation value looses its meaning when changes 
are made to the maps (say a mountain is replaced by a lake - the lake 
would be lower then the surrounding ground...).  If you want the 
elevation to reflect your map changes in a meaningful way, you have to 
hand edit or run a script - both ways will make the landscape either too 
choppy (random elevation assignment) or too flat (copying the same value 
to all the changed arches) or not reflecting of the objects on the map, 
or most likely case since it isnt' used by anything except intitial 
weather map generation it just won't get done and you will have bug 
holes in the map when people choose to ignore doing it.  I don't think 
there is a reasonable way to script *meaningful* elevation values on a 
per tile or even a per map basis in the editor.

>

     >

     Local mana level / god influence are the sorts of things that would have

     >

     the same problem.  A good example would be my elven forest, Lythander would

     >

     have a greater influence in the forest, his altars would work quicker /

     >

     better, his worshippers would have a little bit more luck, orcs and goblins

     >

     would be scared to enter, etc.  However the Dark Forest is inside of my

     >

     large forest, with the Dragon City just on the edge, so a per map figure

     >

     would not work.

     >

     I don't suggest just a per map figure, I suggested storing the map 
average in the map header then determining the elevation of each tile by 
the arch when creating the elevation/humidity map.  You would still end 
up with a value for each tile. but you would not have to maintain the 
elevations (no matter how careful you are, if you have the elevation 
value in the tiles the values will will become randomized and distorted 
over time instead of maintaining a sloped land type shape.)  I think of 
it like a wire frame of the world map with a point plotted for each 
individual map - then you can fill in based on the arches.  Mountains 
are locally higher than the map average based on the type of  mountain 
(high, very high...), lakes relativly lower based on the type (shallow, 
deep...)  - stuff like swamps and hills fall in between...
I think this would be more natural anyway (you can get a forest or a 
lake at 15000 ft this way...).  It would also work for any world map you 
throw at it (not bigworld but if someone did a unique continent) even if 
it was not generated by a fratcal type generation (handbuilt maps).  All 
you need do is put in the average map elevation values you want on each map.

These are my thoughts anyway...

_______________________________________________
crossfire-devel mailing list

     crossfire-devel at lists.real-time.com

     https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/crossfire-devel