The Map.... Again - Page 2

The Brain · July 8, 2000, 16:48

SOLUTION FOR TRAVELLING OVER THE POLES:

*The poles would NOT be on the map, you never see them, but they are there.
*When you move a unit towards the poles you'll be asked whether you want to or not, you choose.
*Let it be known that travelling over the poles is somewhat dangerous and could risk having your unit destroyed. It would be safer for Air and Sea units, but more dangerous for Land units.

How the computer would determine where you would end up after you cross of one of the poles:

Let's say you're on a LARGE map (75x120) and you cross of the North Pole at co-ordinates 0,0 (which on earth would be the Line of Greenwich) you would travel half of the way across the globe. Since the world is 75 squares across you would travel half that way over the map which is 37,0 (rounded down, and that would be earth's Int. Date Line). This would let the map stay the same with the new feature.

I hope that makes sense to everyone.

------------------
The Brain: Weirdo who takes modern culture and stabs it in the eye
-Founder of DoH!
-Please pull up to the second window
-I see dead people...give me my medication!
-What's your favorite scary mov--Please deposit 25 cents for the next 5 minutes.
-Visit DoH, or else!
-How much longer is my sig gonna get?
-This much.

phunny pharmer · July 8, 2000, 23:15

The Brain: However, if you travel over the poles, you can conceivably end up anywhere. Literally, anywhere. It is much simpler to go at an arc around the pole than to cross right over it. Thus, it is faster to cross to a point two squares to your right (by travelling 'off the map' to that square. You probably aren't following what I am saying, but that's OK. I'm thinking in 3-D.

I must say, Civ 3 needs to have a 3-D world. This world must rotate, so that you won't always be looking ***down*** on the map from the same angle. You should be able to look ***down*** on the north pole, on the equator, and on the south pole.

The only conceivable way to do this (that I can think of) would be to create a world where you set the latitude and longitude of the point that you want directly under you. By moving the mouse left, right, up, or down, you will make the world rotate in that direction.

This brings up a tough logistical point. All the civ-genre games so far have been fought on a cylindrical world. Thus, there are an equal number of horizontal rows at the ***equator*** as at the ***pole***. I expect that this must be the easiest way to program. However, to really cross the pole, The Brain, you would need to have a different, exponentially decreasing number of squares in a row as you approach the pole. In short, you need a 3-D world.

An interesting historical side note. Both poles were only crossed at the beginning of this century. And although these missions were of scientific and nationalistic value, they are not exactly of military importance to ground troops. It is also of rather minimal usage to sea and air troops during the ***winter*** months. Perhaps the entire subject of the pole is superfluous.

Par4 · July 9, 2000, 00:44

OMG the brain posting a sensible post????

I will return, when I become a king, by tomorrow I will be back tomorrow just 100 more

------------------
fldmarshallpar4@icqmail.com

There is no spoon
-The Matrix
Let's kick it up a notch!!
-Emeril Lagasse
Fresh Soy makes Tofu so silky
-Ming Tsai

July 9, 2000, 13:59

I agree with Limey. There's just no way to make a spherical map accurate. You're going to have distortion and it will only make the game harder to play. It would be nice, but lets stick with the map we all know and love, just make it bigger!

Brain - Oh my, a serious well thought out post from the Brain.

Par - yah, but how much of your post count is SPAM?

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"
- Dealer of the POBS Poker Club - The next game starts at 12:00 AM (EST)
- Webmaster of Apolyton Picture Contest IV

The Brain · July 9, 2000, 21:05

quote:

Originally posted by OrangeSfwr on 07-09-2000 01:59 PM
Brain - Oh my, a serious well thought out post from the Brain.

Well thought out? No, it took about 5 minutes!

------------------
The Brain: Weirdo who takes modern culture and stabs it in the eye
-Founder of DoH!
-Please pull up to the second window
-I see dead people...give me my medication!
-What's your favorite scary mov--Please deposit 25 cents for the next 5 minutes.
-Visit DoH, or else!
-How much longer is my sig gonna get?
-This much.

Par4 · July 10, 2000, 00:00

quote:

Originally posted by OrangeSfwr on 07-09-2000 01:59 PM
Par - yah, but how much of your post count is SPAM?

Most of it

My only sensible posts come from some military stuff. Don't worry it'll return to sensibility once school starts again right now I have too much time on my hands to think.

------------------
fldmarshallpar4@icqmail.com

There is no spoon
-The Matrix
Let's kick it up a notch!!
-Emeril Lagasse
Fresh Soy makes Tofu so silky
-Ming Tsai

TheLimey · July 10, 2000, 00:09

Accurate mapping while a facinating concept, is UTTERLY unfeasible. Having a truly spherical world would add to realism yes, but take over the project in terms of complexity, and would be extremely likely to introduce many situational bugs forced through lack of foresight.

No other idea has the possiblity of ruining Civ3 as much as this one.

July 18, 2000, 00:00

Another application of this 'elevation' model..

You gain alot of movement points or 'speed' when charging down the slopes of a mountain into an attack..

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

ElmoTheElk · July 18, 2000, 00:33

Well, after reading all this, I definitly DON'T think it's a good thing for the map to be 3D or spherical at all. Because:
- How do you you render this on screen (escpacially differt hights).
- All the rendering of polygons or even sprites would slow down the game dramaticly.
- Most important: It will be too complicated to play. The gameplay would be killed! I mean: It is not fun any more if every single area of 1 km2 has to be ruled.

As I would prefer:
- Stay in 2D or a 'flat 3D' (isometric) and just make large worlds.
- Don't miniturize too much. It will be too complicated.

I know that my post is not as clear as it has to be, but it's not an easy topic at all, don't you think?

July 22, 2000, 22:18

3D isn't required - My original theme was to reproduce more realistic elevation and stuff, instead of the one-tile mountains of civ 1 and 2. It would still be 3-D isometric. And creating these tiles shouldn't be too tough for the computers of 2001 (civ3 release date). We should actually be making use of this power.

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

Spider · July 22, 2000, 23:35

The idea of a 3-D world represented in 2-D form.

What's so hard about making it top to bottom scrolling? All's you need to do is think of the world as a cubic monopole. The pole would be the eight corners of the cube, with each face of the cube representing the entire earth.

Hope that's as confusing as it sounds.

Father Beast · July 22, 2000, 23:37

urrr... Elmo, elevation is easy without a 3D engine. just look at AC. the demo is easy enough to get ahold of and it has elevation. I'm not sure if it affects combat, though. maybe it should.
I think a spherical world is doable using the tile system, although some distortion is neccessary. most of the distortion is near the poles themselves, though, and that land can be made undesirable.

UltraSonix · July 23, 2000, 01:20

It is probably easy to do elevation with a 2d engine.

But I just wanted to pick on some details:
Civ3 could come out in 2002, I saw here.

And also, don't assume that just 'case it'll be 2001/2002, all the computers willl be good. I mean, my primary computer's four years old - it's a Pentium 166.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...
[This message has been edited by UltraSonix (edited July 23, 2000).]

Evil Capitalist · July 23, 2000, 03:18

I just want to point this out. The game needs overlapping resources. Several areas ecomony relied on the presense of two resource, notably iron and coal. South Wales and Silesia are 2 areas that come to mind, and I'm sure there are more.

Shadowstrike · July 23, 2000, 10:45

quote:

Originally posted by MidKnight Lament on 06-26-2000 09:53 AM
EC3 is over. It was sent to Firaxis long ago.

- MKL

WHAT! So every idea we post here is pointless?!!! Why are we making so many good ideas here then?

UltraSonix · July 24, 2000, 01:23

If it's a good idea, then Firaxis will read it - they're here, watching us, you know...

Eg of good idea --> Overlapping resources.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

ElmoTheElk · July 24, 2000, 20:12

3D isn't bad, I propably have an P4-2Ghz when Civ3 releases, but it's more the way it infects the gameplay. If you just keep on miniturizing on and on the game get's too conplex.

So 3D looks interesting too me, as well as overlapping recourses which are not very discussible I think, they just should be there. But I hope that the 3 D graphics are used correct.

The way I was thinking is a 3D-tiled map. So you can 'look around anywhere', but the movement stay a little basic. I think turn based games are not very open too free terain movement, don't you think?

What current game engines looks interesting too you all now? Overdeveloped civ2? Railroad Tycoon 2? Earth 2150?

July 26, 2000, 00:43

Hmm.. I hope Firaxis IS listening..

The Railroad Tycoon II is exactly what I was thinking about.. At least the elevation /tunnels part.. The resource model of rr2 appeals to me too, as some of you'll might know

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

July 28, 2000, 10:18

I also think the Populous 3 interface is quite interesting.. As is Earth 2150.. But RR2 represents elevation and scale really well..

And resources.. And industry..

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

Seeker · July 28, 2000, 20:22

Why this obession for accuracy in polar crossings?

When a unit crosses the 'edge' of the map it should appear at a point half-way from where it entered. Not accurate, but simple.

About the strategic value of the poles: during the 80s the north pole was the scene of a mini arms race as US and USSR made subs capable of traveling undetectably under the ice. Tracking stations and bases like Alert were built, and both sides had many Sub-Zero arctic units, with some mechanized snowmobile units (Canadian).

More importantly, Civ 2 is a game of 'might've beens'. I mean, if the Aztecs can conquer Europe, why not have the USSR invade north america via the north pole??

DarkCloud · July 28, 2000, 21:39

I believe that the map levels should be transposed over one another such as you can build a city on land and have a unit over it in the sky, however, to see the sky unit you have to 'tilt' the map using a button and from that 'tilt' you can see the land units obscured and the sky units bigger and more vibrantly colored such as the land units are gray and the sky units are colored.

Just a thought

-DarkCloud

July 29, 2000, 05:46

And a good thought too... It should extend to submarines, ships etc. Planes should be able to fly over ground units, too.

Say 1 ground level, 2 above and 2 below (underwater/tunnel/underground bases??/nuke silos)

------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

DarkCloud · July 29, 2000, 16:44

How about in the below level the land is shown like in Rollercoaster Tycoon for tunnels, in RCT you had an option to see underground because the land could be raised. How about that?

August 1, 2000, 08:14

Good idea..

I like these Tycoon games..

------------------
Get paid for every second you spend online at
http://referral.jotter.com/join/bulk
Refer people (like what I'm doing) to earn even more. $50 a month is not uncommon.

-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980

August 6, 2000, 06:41

Just a few more 'underground' thoughts..

Underground rail? Missile silos?

Expanded bunkers?

------------------
Get paid for every second you spend online at http://referral.jotter.com/join/bulk
Refer people (like what I'm doing) to earn even more. $50 a month is not uncommon.

-Shiva
Email: shiva@shivamail.com
Web: http://www.shivamail.com
ICQ: 17719980

August 20, 2000, 10:36

Coming back to the map issue, have any of you'll played Shogun: Total War?
It's a new game, and the battle map is fantastic. We could use something similar in civ.. A LARGE map but with more movement 'points' will let you use attributes like charging down a hill for better attacks, vanguards, rearguards and stuff..

In turn-based play of course..

Just a thought..

------------------
Get paid for every second you spend online at http://referral.jotter.com/join/bulk
Refer people (like what I'm doing) to earn even more. $50 a month is not uncommon.

-Shiva
Email: shiva@shivamail.com
Web: http://www.shivamail.com
ICQ: 17719980

DarkCloud · August 20, 2000, 13:21

Underground roads and rails are good ideas.
How about, Underground Habitat (A city) which has specific improvements to allow it to grow, I.E. Sundome, Nutrient Soil.

You should also be able to build irrigation underground with 'artificial heat lamps' they would be called artificial irrigation.

Some underground resources
Diamonds (Shields)
Fossils (Research)
Gems (Shields)
Worms (Food)
Grubs (Food)

Any other ideas?

August 20, 2000, 17:42

Grubs and Worms as food supply?
Doesn't that go a little bit too far?
I would even prefer moles then (IF we need underground food-resources)

------------------
GAK-Sturm Graz 2:0 (0:0)
just the result of the recent football-derby in Graz.
We are the GAK, Grazer Athletik Klub, Austria's football club No.1

DarkCloud · August 20, 2000, 19:58

Not really, people do eat them and we do need food supplies.

I believe more people eat grubs and ants than moles however. (At least in France)

August 23, 2000, 07:55

Wow... I certainly didn't have grubs and worms in mind when I posted the first message of this thread...

I don't think these improvements need underground layers though.. Underground is where tunnels and underground bases/bunkers etc. come in..

------------------
Get paid for every second you spend online at http://referral.jotter.com/join/bulk
Refer people (like what I'm doing) to earn even more. $50 a month is not uncommon.

-Shiva
Email: shiva@shivamail.com
Web: http://www.shivamail.com
ICQ: 17719980