![]() |
Re: New map by Jason Lutes
Quote:
|
Re: New map by Jason Lutes
Hi there,
Just doing some SP on this awesome map. I noticed that poor R'lyeh started in province#120, which is a sea province surrounded by non-sea provinces on all sites. Would it not make sense to mark province 120 as nostart? Cheers, Thomas |
Re: New map by Jason Lutes
Quote:
Love the map.. Chokepoint heaven. |
Re: New map by Jason Lutes
Is there a working download site for any of Jason's work anywhere? The links on http://www.illwinter.com/dom2/maps.html currently do not work.
thanks! Verax |
Re: New map by Jason Lutes
Quote:
|
Re: New map by Jason Lutes
I have an idea regarding the passability/impassability of terrain that has been discussed in this thread.
There has been mentioned two example scenarios that Dom2 can't handle, that 1. Rivers. It should be possible to have rivers that can't be crossed by units on foot. 2. Mountains and mountain ranges. It should be possible to cross these with flying units. But how to implement these features with a minimum of work, and complete backwards compatibility? I have a suggestion. The neighbours part of the .map file looks something like this: </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">#neighbour 141 152 #neighbour 141 165 #neighbour 142 167 #neighbour 142 154</pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If we could append a tag to a connection, banning a certain mode of travel, we could have the above mentioned scenarios. Suppose we wanted the second connection to be across a wide river, which would make an ulmish army stop in it's tracks. But the hordes of Ermor would march across the bottom of the river, and Caelum would just fly over it. The third connection could be across a mountain range, meaning that only flying units could cross it, and walking and swimming units would be stopped. In my hypothetical solution it would look like this: </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">#neighbour 141 152 #neighbour 141 165 nowalk #neighbour 142 167 nowalk noswim #neighbour 142 154 </pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The concept is that you can append "nowalk", "noswim" or "nofly" to any connection to prevent specific modes of travel. I'm not sure what the point of "nofly" would be, but it should be there for the sake of completeness. "noswim" would include both amphibious and swimming units. Of course, I don't know how difficult this would be to implement, but at least it would be backwards compatible. This could of could of course be expanded to include such tags as "noundead", "nosacred", "nomages" and so forth. They could also be inclusive, like "onlypretenders" or "onlymbeings, you get the idea. But I'm rambling, what do you think? |
Re: New map by Jason Lutes
Something else that ought to be fixed for Jason's Parganos map - province ... 31 should be nostart. It's the little island in the southwest - 4 neighbors, none of them land. Had to call for a mulligan on that yesterday.
|
Re: New map by Jason Lutes
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.