The Map.... Again

[Sir Shiva]

I wish you could delete posts from a topic.. Those underground level posts by me are pretty stupid... Maybe I wasn't totally awake when I posted them .

Anyway, another idea :-

Missiles shouldn't be moved around like units. They should be given a target and launched, and then they should attempt to hit it on their own... Accuracy would depend on guidance systems tech, distance etc.

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

[Adm.Naismith]

DarkCloud, are you mixing simulated reality with game interface?

What's the point to enhance the world reproduction from "buggy" to "patch 5.0 full tested"?

In the past the know shape of the world has been debated and changed until the (more or less spherical) globe was empirically then scientifically demonstrated.

Still I would go crazy if Firaxis will change the map midgame: don't try to pre-sale bugs for hidden feature

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

[Sir Shiva]

As for going over the poles, I agree, only flying objects should be able to.. Or icebreakers.. So instead of trying to fit poles on the map, there could be some way of getting flying objects across.. perhaps some sort of calculations as to where they would emerge and how many moves it would take...

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

[Sir Shiva]

Definitely no changing the map in mid-game.

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

[Sir Shiva]

Check out Andz83's thread.. Alot of good ideas there too...

Basically a bump post, I wanna get to 100 replies...

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

[airdrik]

At first, I didn't like the idea of pixilized maps, but now seeing some of the ideas presented here, I've changed my mind.

New ideas of discussion: It takes longer to climb a mountain, because gravity is against you, than it does to run down it, because gravity is with you. They should implement this with the new pixilized map, have it take more movement points to move to higher elivations than to lower ones.
Also, they could have mountains be made of more 'pixils' per area because a pixil would be an area perpendicular to the surface it represents, and mountains have more surface area than do plains.
Comments, suggestions?

[airdrik]

I hate it when I post a new related idea on a post, and no one replies to it. It makes my feel like no one likes my ideas, so to get them out of the way they just don't reply to them. I would like it if, before not replying to such a post you come on and say 'your idea is stupid.' Then I'll just agree with you and go on thinking of new stupid ideas.

[Ribannah]

quote: Originally posted by airdrik on 11-09-2000 09:54 PM I hate it when I post a new related idea on a post, and no one replies to it. It makes my feel like no one likes my ideas, so to get them out of the way they just don't reply to them. I would like it if, before not replying to such a post you come on and say 'your idea is stupid.' Then I'll just agree with you and go on thinking of new stupid ideas.

Airdrik, give it time! Sometimes even an entire thread gets plowed under, and then somebody will pick it up again and lots of people will reread the ideas and respond.

------------------
If you have no feet, don't walk on fire

[Sir Shiva]

MOVEMENT POINTS..

Sums up the entire thread.

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

[Odin]

I think The world should be a spher a sphere of Hexegons instead of the mercator Projection in the other civ games

[airdrik]

Hexagons have the same problems as squares do because they tile into a flat surface, unless you are thinking about having them be stretched to fit the terrain/map, in which it would still have the same problems as squares, you still couldn't tile them into a sphere. triangles are another story because they actually tile into 3D figures and can be stretched to fit the terrain/map.
But we are no longer talking about tiles, we are talking about having the map be made of points, if you had read the last 5-10 or so posts on this thread. It would make things much more realistic and, if programed right, might not take up as much memory as would have been anticipated. As for HOW to program it right, that's for Firaxis .

[airdrik]

Hey, look, Sir Shiva, 101 replies and 3 pages too .

[Sir Shiva]

100!!!!!



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

[Sir Shiva]

Ralf, do you have Chris Pine's email address?

Or better still, is anyone out there from Firaxis. I don't like 100-post topics just disappearing like this, u know ..

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

[Sir Shiva]

Those unit pics show that we really do need a larger map... For those new to this thread, a larger map would mean a much more zoomed in view, and correspondingly increased movement points... These units would look really cool on a large map.

And another thing. How about incorporating city view onto the map itself. It would be really cool to be able to see city improvements, roads, cars, smokestacks and smoke etc. on the map. Not too big, just big enough to make out. For example, if you build a nuclear plant, you should be able to see its characteristic smokestack.

And, if tiles are done away with and the pixel/co-ordinate idea is used instead, it would make for good city expansion. The only problem I foresee is, at which point on the maps would cities be attacked. Three solutions - Any movement onto a city-containing region; The 'city centre' only; or, you could garrison forces all over the city and each would have to be picked off one by one... Which would make for partially captured cities and urban warfare and stuff.. Not Civ-ish, but cool anyway...

I wish I could make a screenshot to illustrate my point. RT2 screenshots could give a rough idea.

And another thing. Unit sprites should be easily editable. Also, the thing I don't like about the sprites in CTP2 is that they stop on each square. In civ3 they should move continuously and at uniform speed to their destination or till they run out of movement points. Not in a series of one-square movements.

Just imagine - A lush, detailed landscape, large smoothly moving phalanxes and panzers and riflemen moving between proportionately large, bustling, distinct cities. It makes me feel warm all over...


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