Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#40309) What to do with the expanded terrain (was:Meta-ticket for 2.2 release)
URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40309 Attached patch reverts new terrains other than oceans. I'll commit this as it is, but future patches should address these: 1) Removing of extra ocean terrains. This requires rewrite of hardcoded ocean terrain identifiers. 2) Reverting resource related stuff, if needed 3) Removing unnecessary code translating between identifier of different rulesets. This has no use whatsover, but just makes things more complicated and risks savegame compatibility. Speaking of savegame compatibility, this patch somewhat breaks savegame compatibility with older S2_2 development branch savegames. OTOH it's more compatible with S2_1 savegames than current svn. - ML RevertTerrains_40309.diff.bz2 Description: BZip2 compressed data ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#40309) What to do with the expanded terrain (was:Meta-ticket for 2.2 release)
URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40309 On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:14:57 +0900, Per I. Mathisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40272 On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Daniel Markstedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMHO another must-fix for 2.2 first beta is some kind of update to the default tilesets. William's new terrain rules have outdated all 2.1 tilesets. Wooded hills provide different resources from verdant hills, for example, but use the same sprite and often exist in the same general area. If we release a beta without doing anything about this, I can promise it'll generate alot of negative buzz among veteran users. For starters, I will make ugly-but-usable tweaks to the current default tilesets, while trying to recruit the services of our artist community. I would rather suggest these terrain code changes are reverted. I see no good reason for them other than the inane we have to do it like game XYZ. Even with new graphics they will be quite confusing. - Per How about this solution: Keep the code but edit the rulesets to restore 2.1-equivalent gameplay. For example, 'desert plain' and 'desert hills' have the same values and look the same for now, while we leave the window open for ruleset creators to add complexity and artists to add visual variety. I just recalled another 'bug' that the new terrain code has introduced: less accuracy of civ1 and civ2 rulesets. Both share the same terrainset as default, which is needless to say far from the original rules for those games. I remember trying to create a 'classical' terrainset late last year but ran into various issues; the current terrain code is not flexible enough to reimplement a simpler terrainset. ~Daniel -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#40309) What to do with the expanded terrain (was:Meta-ticket for 2.2 release)
URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40309 [dmarks - Mon Jun 23 11:07:33 2008]: On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:14:57 +0900, Per I. Mathisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40272 On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Daniel Markstedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMHO another must-fix for 2.2 first beta is some kind of update to the default tilesets. William's new terrain rules have outdated all 2.1 tilesets. Wooded hills provide different resources from verdant hills, for example, but use the same sprite and often exist in the same general area. If we release a beta without doing anything about this, I can promise it'll generate alot of negative buzz among veteran users. For starters, I will make ugly-but-usable tweaks to the current default tilesets, while trying to recruit the services of our artist community. I would rather suggest these terrain code changes are reverted. I see no good reason for them other than the inane we have to do it like game XYZ. Even with new graphics they will be quite confusing. How about this solution: Keep the code but edit the rulesets to restore 2.1-equivalent gameplay. For example, 'desert plain' and 'desert hills' have the same values and look the same for now, while we leave the window open for ruleset creators to add complexity and artists to add visual variety. I think the new terrains should be in their own ruleset (civ3?), leaving the default, civ1 and civ2 rulesets more closely as they were in previous versions (before 2.2). Incidentally I checked the civ3 manual's appendix where the terrain types are listed and they don't match these new terrains in 2.2 and trunk. So are the new terrains supposed to be for civ4 emulation or some other game? :? I just recalled another 'bug' that the new terrain code has introduced: less accuracy of civ1 and civ2 rulesets. Both share the same terrainset as default, which is needless to say far from the original rules for those games. I remember trying to create a 'classical' terrainset late last year but ran into various issues; the current terrain code is not flexible enough to reimplement a simpler terrainset. I don't like that at all. Isn't one of the stated goals of freeciv the ability to emulate civ1 and civ2 rules? :( So my opinion would be to revert the terrain changes, unless someone is willing to do the work to restore civ1,2 terrain rule compatibilty and move the new terrain types to their own ruleset (and later to actually include the great quantity of necessary new graphics). -- 委員会は何日もそのことについて話し会いました。 ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#40309) What to do with the expanded terrain (was:Meta-ticket for 2.2 release)
URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40309 Madeline Book wrote: So my opinion would be to revert the terrain changes, unless someone is willing to do the work to restore civ1,2 terrain rule compatibilty and move the new terrain types to their own ruleset (and later to actually include the great quantity of necessary new graphics). No need to revert code changes but the ruleset terrain info should be reverted. Among other things all the terrain-drawing bugs need to be fixed (most deal with lack of graphics probably?). And afaik civ1 and civ2 do have their own terrain.ruleset... -jason ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#40309) What to do with the expanded terrain (was:Meta-ticket for 2.2 release)
URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40309 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Mon Jun 23 20:53:07 2008]: Madeline Book wrote: So my opinion would be to revert the terrain changes, unless someone is willing to do the work to restore civ1,2 terrain rule compatibilty and move the new terrain types to their own ruleset (and later to actually include the great quantity of necessary new graphics). No need to revert code changes but the ruleset terrain info should be reverted. Among other things all the terrain-drawing bugs need to be fixed (most deal with lack of graphics probably?). And afaik civ1 and civ2 do have their own terrain.ruleset... Actually if you now try the new editor in S2_2 and trunk with the civ1 or civ2 rulesets you will find some very weird stuff in the terrain list. For example volcanoes and oceanic ridges that were never in civ1,2, and multiple duplicate terrain types. It's a big mess and the ruleset files should probably be reverted (but will the old versions still work with the new code?). -- さあ、行って見て。 ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#40309) What to do with the expanded terrain (was:Meta-ticket for 2.2 release)
URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40309 2008/6/24 Madeline Book: Actually if you now try the new editor in S2_2 and trunk with the civ1 or civ2 rulesets you will find some very weird stuff in the terrain list. For example volcanoes and oceanic ridges that were never in civ1,2, and multiple duplicate terrain types. It's a big mess and the ruleset files should probably be reverted (but will the old versions still work with the new code?). All rulesets require all terrain types when used with this new code (William himself told so, I don't know all the details) At least all the numerous ocean types are required because code uses hardcoded terrain identifiers and game probably crashes if ruleset does not provide ocean type for certain identifier (and there can be only one identifier for each terrain). My plan is to restore code flexibility so that ruleset can decide how many, and which kind of terrains, it provides. This is not necessarily done by reverting earlier code changes (and I'm afraid it's not easy to revert such big patches after all the code alterations since original patches went in). - ML ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
