View Single Post
  #11  
Old May 30th, 2001, 01:42 AM
PvK's Avatar

PvK PvK is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 8,806
Thanks: 54
Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
PvK is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Straight vs. Diagonal

quote:
Originally posted by raynor:
I'm glad someone else finally mentioned the skewed movement system in the game. Though, I would keep it very simple and make every diagonal move cost exactly the same as moving along the horizontal and vertical. So, every diagonal move would require *two* movement points.


I think that would be a step in the wrong direction, myself. Ideally I think I'd like a coordinate system. I don't mind the existing system much though because it seems clear to me that the map (like many other aspects of the game mechanics) is a very broad abstraction of a game element where a representation would be some combination of very complex and inaccurate (i.e. 3 dimensions, inertia, gravity, orbiting planets, asteroid belt rings...).

I wouldn't mind if diagonals cost more, but the correct fraction is much closer to 1.4 than 1.5... ;->

As for SJ's questions below, I would answer no, no, and no. Then, fractional diagonals would also be relatively straightforward. I don't think it's a big deal for "realism" though, since the maps and movement are already clearly very abstract.

Oh, but if you do change tactical movement costs, then you MUST change weapons ranges to match. The AI might also need some re-tooling. All in all, I don't see this as an SEIV change MM will want to do, or that I'd want to see, especially compared with what else might be done with the programming effort!

PvK
Reply With Quote