On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 17:38:35 -0500, John McNabb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I largely agree with your rational for wanting to make this change. I > do think that rather than having the base movement costs be 3 or > four, it might be better in the long run to develop a rational way to > have "floating point" movement costs. While this has the disadvantage > of needing to actually change code instead of just WML, it has the > appeal of adding more flexibility. The other disadvantage is slightly > cluttering the UI with decimal places. Still, I like the idea of most > units movement costs being 1 on whatever their ideal terrain is.
I would suggest avoiding floating point as there can be rounding issues. Using rational numbers (which is essentially your scale factor suggestion) will preserve exact values. I also have a question for Eric. Is the assumption here going to be that the entire hex is filled with road? Because another way I could see proceding with this is to make road type separate from the base terrain type, so that the terrain type would set the defense values for units, but having having the road type would replace the normal movement cost for the terrain with that of a road. I though (but could easily be wrong) that bridges worked like that. _______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
