Impassable Terrain Question

The place to post your WML questions and answers.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Forum rules
  • Please use [code] BBCode tags in your posts for embedding WML snippets.
  • To keep your code readable so that others can easily help you, make sure to indent it following our conventions.
Post Reply
quartex
Inactive Developer
Posts: 2258
Joined: December 22nd, 2003, 4:17 am
Location: Boston, MA

Impassable Terrain Question

Post by quartex »

We were discussing this in the arts and music topic, under canyons.

Having a 99 move requirement works, but's an ugly way to make sure a unit can't enter a hex. Could we have a new movement amount, "-1" which means can't move into this type of hex? I assume no hexes will every make you gain movement points. It would be a nice way to have a number value for impassable. Or you could assign a boolean value to each hex for if it is impassable terrain or not.
Dave
Founding Developer
Posts: 7071
Joined: August 17th, 2003, 5:07 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Dave »

Assigning a flag to a hex to make it impassable doesn't really work, because it might be impassable for some movement types and not for others.

But with the current code base, instead of

Code: Select all

deep water=100
you can simply put,

Code: Select all

deep water=impassable
and that'll work too :)
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
Christophe33
Posts: 826
Joined: January 21st, 2004, 1:10 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by Christophe33 »

Yes, writting "impassable" would do the job nicely even though I doubt many players will notice the difference.
About the canyon and specially cliff, the question is how to display them.
The canyon is 1 hex wide and I was thinking to make two diagonal versions (a bit like bridges) plus some transitions. I'm afraid I will face the same transition problems than with the abyss (i.e: the transition are not used properly with some other terrains).
A cliff would be great too but should it be displayed as a special kind of transition (so less than an hex wide)?
It will probably make the graphic easier but would certainly require some coding to have it setting up an impassable area (for non flying units in that case).
The simple alternative is to make it as a terrain but it might be difficult to get the computer to place the right cliff at the right place.We might have to wait for the multi-hex tiling system to be implemented.
Cliff would be nice and usefull along some shore, covering some castle flanks, between hills/mountains and plains...
Never tell a dwarf that he shortchanged you!
Sangel
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 2232
Joined: March 26th, 2004, 10:58 pm
Location: New York, New York

Post by Sangel »

I have no problem with a cliff which is a full hex wide. It's a hell of a lot easier on the code than an impassible transition would be, and still just as useful to scenario designers.
"Pure logic is the ruin of the spirit." - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User avatar
turin
Lord of the East
Posts: 11662
Joined: January 11th, 2004, 7:17 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by turin »

Sangel wrote:I have no problem with a cliff which is a full hex wide. It's a hell of a lot easier on the code than an impassible transition would be, and still just as useful to scenario designers.
well, not quite. it might be fun to have somewhere where ranged units could shoot down off of but melee units couldn't attack, and couldn't move up to attack. ;)
For I am Turin Turambar - Master of Doom, by doom mastered. On permanent Wesbreak. Will not respond to private messages. Sorry!
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
Sangel
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 2232
Joined: March 26th, 2004, 10:58 pm
Location: New York, New York

Post by Sangel »

Now you're just being evil. :P
"Pure logic is the ruin of the spirit." - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Post Reply