FrankenCiv: a hypothetical

[onodera]

Is this something you'd want to see integrated into FrankenCiv, or just an idea you had?

Finished codecademy's HTML/CSS tutorial, though I still need practice getting all the pieces together. I think they have widgets for practice with that sort of thing. Started with Java anyway; I think the library has books I can borrow too, since I know there's more to learn about HTML, at least.

Java or Javascript? If you plan to use MelonJS, learn JS.

I also propose we keep FC simple and stick to squares or hexagons.

[Lorizael]

Yeah, JavaScript and Java are not the same thing.

[Elok]

Yes, I meant JavaScript. Codecademy doesn't teach Java AFAIK.

[N35t0r]

yes, but breaking the hexagons and pentagons down to their constituent triangles. Units would move along edges and come to rest at vertices, surrounded by 5-6 triangular tiles that would form a larger tile of that unit's zone of control.

I remember a lot of rambling on the subject when discussion started on the list for civ3 (IIRC).

[Lorizael]

Yes, I meant JavaScript. Codecademy doesn't teach Java AFAIK.

I'm apparently 80% of the way through the JS tutorial right now. It approaches objects from a very strange direction that might have you scratching your head or might be just right for people relatively unfamiliar with the concept.

[self biased]

I remember a lot of rambling on the subject when discussion started on the list for civ3 (IIRC).

I don't doubt it. Perhaps modern pcs have the horsepower to manage such a thing

[Lorizael]

I'm apparently 80% of the way through the JS tutorial right now. It approaches objects from a very strange direction that might have you scratching your head or might be just right for people relatively unfamiliar with the concept.

Man, this sounds really arrogant, doesn't it? So not the intention. I just mean that the way the tutorial introduces objects is just plain weird. It had me scratching my head, because it's not the way I was taught at all. Maybe it's a better way to teach it, though, and I'm just used to what my high school teachers did.

[Elok]

It actually didn't sound arrogant. Also, you're right, its instruction methods are somewhat idiosyncratic. I'm at 10%, and I've already had to sort of guess what it meant a couple of times.

Re: SB's edge-and-vertex map, what would be the advantages of such a scheme? It sounds like it would be functionally almost identical to a hex grid, except for the occasional pentagonal tiles and ZOC (which could be implemented on a hex grid as well).

[Lorizael]

Done with the JS tutorial. On to HTML. One thing the tutorial doesn't teach you (among many things) is how to actually implement JS code in a webpage. That seems like a significant omission. /me shrugs. I suppose that's what this hefty book I got out from the library is for.

[self biased]

Re: SB's edge-and-vertex map, what would be the advantages of such a scheme? It sounds like it would be functionally almost identical to a hex grid, except for the occasional pentagonal tiles and ZOC (which could be implemented on a hex grid as well).

it would allow for a finer gradation of terrain: hills, forests, &c, and make for greater variety visually.

[C0ckney]

if you're looking for inspiration, you could do a lot worse than caveman 2 cosmos, a mod for civ 4 which expands the game enormously. the programming is pretty advanced and the concepts are very interesting.

this is its forum and all the information is there.

[N35t0r]

if you're looking for inspiration, you could do a lot worse than caveman 2 cosmos, a mod for civ 4 which expands the game enormously. the programming is pretty advanced and the concepts are very interesting.

this is its forum and all the information is there.

That mod is amazing. And slow as molasses.

[Elok]

Okay, I checked two books out of the library. The HTML/CSS one is from 2011, which I assume is reasonably current, but the guide to JavaScript is from 1999. Is that one even worth reading, or has the language upgraded so much since then that it's worthless? Among the references to Netscape Navigator and suchlike, it said to use == for a Boolean operator, not === as codecademy's tutorial says. Is either form valid?

[Lorizael]

I can't speak to how out of date it's going to be, but I caught the JS codecademy tutorial using == at one point, and I duplicated it later on, and it worked. I don't know what that === stuff is all about, really.

[Lorizael]

Oh.

The === operator
The languages JavaScript and PHP extend this syntax, with the "==" operator able to return true if two values are equal, even if they have different types (for example, "4 == "4"" is true), and the "===" operator returning true only if two values are equal and have equivalent types as well (such that "4 === "4"" is false but "4 === 4" is true). This comes in handy when checking if a value is assigned the value of 0, since "x == 0" is true for x being 0, but also for x being "0" (i.e. a string containing the character 0) and false (as PHP, like other languages, equates 0 to false), and that is not always what one wants, but "x === 0" is only true when x is 0. When comparing objects in PHP 5, the "==" operator tests for structural equality, while the "===" operator tests for physical equality.