[crossfire] multipart images

[Mitch Obrian]

I was agreeing with Mwedel. However if it makes
cfarches easier to play with via scripts etc I suppose
it is good. As I said, I will make all new multipart
images start with x.

>
     
      (making yet another colour of marble flooring
     
     >
     
      however seems a bit
     
     >
     
      superfluous to me).
     
     
The jab was unnecessary. I processed the extra colors
of marble because I did need them for my maps (baroque
style, they splatterd all diffrent types of inlayed
marble everywhere). I am sure all of my archtypes are
superfluous... for we really do not need eastern
buildings, mid-eastern buildings, violins, grand
pianos, chandeliers, and such. In fact, the whole idea
of having yet-another-rpg can be said to be
superfluous.

Yes diffrent marble colors are just a color change and
easy to do... but I have great use for them in my
levels so I make them. Drawing a violin or a grand
piano from scratch is not.

Death To women's Rights

--- Todd Mitchell <
     
     temitchell at sympatico.ca
     
     > wrote:
>
     
      On Fri, 2005-27-05 at 23:01 -0700, Mitch Obrian
     
     >
     
      wrote:
     
     >
     
      > I think this should be a non issue. Nothing is
     
     >
     
      > broken... changing the image names and the arches
     
     >
     
      is
     
     >
     
      > usless busy work.... just a waste.
     
     >
     
      > 
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      I don't consider it 'busy work'.
     
     >
     
      This is a new case and not a historical conversion
     
     >
     
      of the crossfire
     
     >
     
      images. Aside from the few images just committed all
     
     >
     
      the arches do
     
     >
     
      follow this standard since I have been slowly
     
     >
     
      merging the multipart
     
     >
     
      images.  The reason I am merging the images is to
     
     >
     
      make them easier to
     
     >
     
      edit and improve - not just to bounce my name across
     
     >
     
      the internet.  
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      The image naming convention is there for a reason -
     
     >
     
      to make managing and
     
     >
     
      updating the arches easier.  The name convention is
     
     >
     
      "name.xyz.type.png"
     
     >
     
      where x is the tile offset for a multipart image, y
     
     >
     
      is the facing
     
     >
     
      (clockwise) and z is the animation frame.  Images
     
     >
     
      larger than 1 tile are
     
     >
     
      new and aside from the recent buildings added all
     
     >
     
      have x as the first
     
     >
     
      digit because this indicates a large image.  Since I
     
     >
     
      have been merging
     
     >
     
      all the images they all were getting an x - It made
     
     >
     
      it easy to fix the
     
     >
     
      arch for the new image and as a bonus - to find a
     
     >
     
      large image
     
     >
     
      programatically.  I thought I should try to
     
     >
     
      formalize this.  It may be
     
     >
     
      useful to know which images are multi-tile at some
     
     >
     
      point and it does
     
     >
     
      make it easier to explain how to make an arch if
     
     >
     
      this is always the
     
     >
     
      case.  
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Without a naming convention it becomes very hard to
     
     >
     
      learn how to make
     
     >
     
      arches and very hard to debug arches so I don't
     
     >
     
      consider it busy work
     
     >
     
      (making yet another colour of marble flooring
     
     >
     
      however seems a bit
     
     >
     
      superfluous to me).
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      It took me a while to learn the ropes and I believe
     
     >
     
      others had the same
     
     >
     
      problem since I have also been doing a lot of fixes
     
     >
     
      and clean up of the
     
     >
     
      arches over the last few years because the name
     
     >
     
      convention wasn't
     
     >
     
      followed.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Along the same vein - if crossfire ever had the
     
     >
     
      ability to store
     
     >
     
      animations as binary objects instead of a series of
     
     >
     
      png (hypothetical -
     
     >
     
      not a request) I would expect these images to use a
     
     >
     
      'z' as the third
     
     >
     
      digit in the name convention to denote this.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Contriwise - images with a single facing would have
     
     >
     
      a y as the second
     
     >
     
      position - I think this may take it too far however.
     
     >
     
       Perhaps if
     
     >
     
      crossfire ever used 3d models this would be the
     
     >
     
      case.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      _______________________________________________
     
     >
     
      crossfire mailing list
     
     >
     
     
      crossfire at metalforge.org
      
      
     >
     
     
     
     http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire
     
     
>
     
     
     

		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site
     
     http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/