View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0005170||AI War||Suggestion - Campaign Management And Setup - Map Styles And Generation||Nov 11, 2011 4:22 pm||Jun 14, 2013 7:26 pm|
|Fixed in Version||6.047|
|Summary||0005170: Map Planet Location Jitter Button|
|Description||A good mediation between the chaos of the random maps and the grid-like maps (grid, maze, etc.) would be to introduce a 'jitter' button. This would adjust the planet locations slightly, and randomly, to produce a map that still has the properties of a rigid map type, but with a more organic look. This melds the randomness that seems to be intended with the tree and vines type maps, but without the horrible layout associated with these map types.|
How this would look is:
Figure 1 (see attachment) player selects a map type, in this case, Maze D.
Figure 2 (see attachment) player clicks a 'jitter' button to randomly bump planet locations to make things look a little more random, but still retaining the sensibility of the chosen map type.
Rationale: the Maze map types are quite compelling. They have a good layout, but they lack the organic look of the other maps. Randomly assigning locations will give that organic look of other map types, but will retain the readability of the maze map.
Additional option: player can adjust the degree to which planet locations can be skewed, so they can retain control over how "far out" the map looks.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|Internal Weight||Feature Suggestion|
||Another option besides making yet another lobby option, would be to always jitter those map types, but set up the alternate map view for all players to the non-jittered map that is currently generated.|
More thinking on this. This could be a checkbox in the lobby's map selection tab. Checking the box would "jitter" the points on the map displayed to a subtle degree. Unchecking the box removes jitter. Repeatedly checking and unchecking the box applies other random shakeups.
Also my example up there is a little bit too chaotic, but gets the point across.
Wouldn't "unapplying" jitter to things like tree, snake, and spokes require those map types to have an "unjittered" version to begin with.
BTW, I would really happy to get such "unjittered" versions.
I'd call it "straightened out" or "flattened" rather than unjittered, but yes, I'd love that also. for those maps. The criss-crossing of the wormhole lines gives me a headache trying to sort of what is connected where, so I generally avoid these types though I'd be happy to use them otherwise.
My guess is that it would be easier to just generate them already straightened out, and provide the jitter option, than try to implement an "unjitter"
||This feature is somewhat addressed by the "untangle" option new to this version. Repeated double-clicks on the "untangle" button will have a fair enough jitter effect for my purposes.|
||Closing per your comment, glad it's working out :)|
Lol, using an "untangle" feature for making the map more "messy".
Well, whatever works.
|Nov 11, 2011 4:22 pm||doctorfrog||New Issue|
|Nov 11, 2011 4:22 pm||doctorfrog||File Added: Screenshot_2011_11_11_13_16_10.png|
|Nov 11, 2011 4:23 pm||doctorfrog||Category||Suggestion - New Features => Suggestion - Campaign Management And Setup - Map Styles And Generation|
|Nov 11, 2011 4:23 pm||doctorfrog||Product Version||=> 5.020|
|Nov 11, 2011 4:26 pm||tigersfan||Internal Weight||=> Feature Suggestion|
|Nov 11, 2011 4:26 pm||tigersfan||Status||new => considering|
|Nov 11, 2011 4:40 pm||doctorfrog||File Added: Screenshot_2011_11_11_13_18_56.png|
|Nov 11, 2011 5:29 pm||Hearteater||Note Added: 0017499|
|May 21, 2013 5:40 pm||doctorfrog||Note Added: 0032553|
|May 21, 2013 6:16 pm||TechSY730||Note Added: 0032556|
|May 25, 2013 6:50 pm||LintMan||Note Added: 0032627|
|Jun 8, 2013 1:03 pm||doctorfrog||Relationship added||related to 0011793|
|Jun 12, 2013 11:39 pm||doctorfrog||Note Added: 0032876|
|Jun 12, 2013 11:39 pm||doctorfrog||Resolution||open => fixed|
|Jun 12, 2013 11:39 pm||doctorfrog||Fixed in Version||=> 6.047|
|Jun 13, 2013 11:54 am||keith.lamothe||Note Added: 0032904|
|Jun 13, 2013 11:54 am||keith.lamothe||Status||considering => closed|
|Jun 13, 2013 11:54 am||keith.lamothe||Assigned To||=> keith.lamothe|
|Jun 14, 2013 7:26 pm||TechSY730||Note Added: 0032930|