New terrain features

[0100010]

I'll throw my new feature Ideas here:

Tropical Forest:
Basically like a forest but can show up in the tropical zones alongside jungle.
Art wise (for easiest approach) I suggest using the small (non-palm) tress currently used by the Jungle Feature, and leave out the palms. It will at least loko distinct.

Small, Medium and Large Rivers:
Possible harder to pull off, but variations on the river graphics.
Small Rivers: (our current river graphics)
Medium Rivers: New graphic about twice as wide as small rivers
Large Rivers: New Graphic about three times as wide as small rivers

Placement of type should be automatic and controlled during map generation following a simply pattern which sums up the prior river tiles. something like so:

Small River Edge (source) = 1st river tile
After X small river tiles means the next river tile must be a medium river tile.
After Y medium river tiles, the next river tile must be a large river tile.
note that in the case of two rivers which join together, the river tile after the join sums up both rivers to determined which graphic type it should use.

Later on River type can be used to determine units ability to cross, or even ships ability to navigate and so on, plus not all route type will be able to cross all river types, and so on. There are alot of options here.

 

[Sparth]

Manipulation with rivers models is beyond my skills. There tons of models for rivers and all of them are linked with others.

 

[0100010]

Qoted from other thread...

I want to fet rid of all the health and unhealth on features like jungles and forests for some time.

I think this is perfectly viable now. The pollution and disease effects are enough to have made positive and negative health effects on terrains and features obsolete now.

 

[AIAndy]

Qoted from other thread...



I think this is perfectly viable now. The pollution and disease effects are enough to have made positive and negative health effects on terrains and features obsolete now.

Would it be useful to have auto-features on plots similar to how we have auto-buildings in cities at certain property levels? (there is also auto-promotions at given property levels on units but it is unused as we don't have any properties on units at the moment)

 

[Thunderbrd]

I certainly intend to use the auto-promotions on units based on properties. Question on that... (wrong thread but you mentioned it here soooo...) Can properties be tracked only in the context of the owner? Thus, I have a plot to plot propagator but it shouldn't cross boundaries. I have a unit to unit propagator but it shouldn't cross between units of different owners. That sort of thing. Is there any way to limit them in this manner when a propagator is setup?

 

[AIAndy]

I certainly intend to use the auto-promotions on units based on properties. Question on that... (wrong thread but you mentioned it here soooo...) Can properties be tracked only in the context of the owner? Thus, I have a plot to plot propagator but it shouldn't cross boundaries. I have a unit to unit propagator but it shouldn't cross between units of different owners. That sort of thing. Is there any way to limit them in this manner when a propagator is setup?

Currently not as the TargetCondition and the Active tag only depend on one object so you can't say something like same owner (which would depend on both objects).
Although I guess it would not be that hard to add something like that, for instance as a relation type.

 

[primem0ver]

So the the graphic for karst needs some improvement if we are even going to considered improving it.

Also how will its stats differ from the other terrain types?

||||| from Rivers|Improvement Time|Damage|Defense| Cities?
Ice|0|0|0|4|+1|+75%|Yes|0%|Coastal OR Freshwater
Permafrost|0|0|0|3|+1|+50%|Yes|0%|Yes
Tundra|1|0|0|2|+1|+25%|Yes|0%| Yes
Marsh|1|1|0|3|+1|+25%|No|0%|Coastal OR Freshwater
Muddy|1|1|0|2|+1|+25%|No|0%|Coastal OR Freshwater
Lush|3|0|0|0|+1|0%|No|0%|Yes
Grass|2|0|0|0|+1|0%|No|0%|Yes
Plains|1|1|0|0|+1|0%|No|0%|Yes
Barren|0|0|0|0|+1|0%|No|0%|Yes
Rocky|0|1|0|2|+1|+25%|No|+25%|Yes
Scrub|1|0|0|2|+1|0%|No|0%|Yes
Desert|0|0|0|3|+1|+25%|Yes|-25%|Coastal OR Freshwater
Dunes|0|0|0|0|+1|+50%|Yes|0%|Coastal OR Freshwater
Salt Flats|0|0|0|0|0|+25%|Yes|-25%|Coastal OR Freshwater

For a Karth I am thinking maybe a cross between Rocky and Muddy so like ...

||||| from Rivers|Improvement Time|Damage|Defense| Cities?
Karth|1|1|0|2|+1|+25%|No|+25%|Yes

Also it can build mines on it like Rocky terrain.

As I mentioned in the improvements thread (this is a better place for the karst discussion IMO), there are TWO types of Karst.

Here are some things to keep in mind about Karst topography when considering its stats.

Normal Karst Topography
Karst topography can provide limestone, caves, travertine (and other minerals found in caves), and subterranean rivers (spring water). However, wide-scale building on Karst topography is inherently problematic in the long run. The more advanced the technology, the less of a production advantage Karst topography should bring (IMO). Cave ins and sink holes can develop. Building a village (and subsequent improvements) on karst topography should reduce the output of the village.

Tower Karst Topography
IS RARE. It's inherent natural beauty and rarity would provide tourism commerce with appropriate technologies and improvements. It may increase food because fishing is generally a bit more profitable in the waters surrounding Tower Karst. However, an advantage in production would be negligible and possibly even negative. The reason for this is that Tower Karst only exists in thoroughly eroded karst terrain. All the production benefits found in normal Karst topography would have disappeared except by chance on the towers themselves (which are not practically accessible). The presence of the towers and the swampy nature of such an area may interfere with production.

EDIT: My suggestions for raw values based on the above descriptions:

||||| from Rivers|Improvement Time|Damage|Defense| Cities?
Karst|0|1|1|2|+1|+50%|No|0%|No
Tower Karst|1|-1|1|3|+2|+75%|No|25%|No

 

[Sparth]

Ok i design new karst terrain. As you see some textures are stretched but i cannot fix it. It because there is no NIF model to be similar to this sort of terrain and I must use other models. I can add some vegetation to this model if you want.

Also I added some grass to savanna. Im not 100% sure its ok. What do you think guys?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The grass is a bit big compared to the trees. I am not sure that with my eyesight I would be able to tell the difference between the new very long grass and this savanna.

 

[0100010]

Grass is a bit big and, perhaps a bit too pale

 

[Hydromancerx]

Ok i design new karst terrain. As you see some textures are stretched but i cannot fix it. It because there is no NIF model to be similar to this sort of terrain and I must use other models. I can add some vegetation to this model if you want.

Also I added some grass to savanna. Im not 100% sure its ok. What do you think guys?

Yikes! The stretching looks horrible. I may need to take a crack at this.

 

[Hydromancerx]

How about this for the karst?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Not flat enough on the top for tower karst. Completely wrong for karst. The arches are wrong for both.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Isn't this a Karst Arch? Or this?

 

[primem0ver]

Isn't this a Karst Arch? Or this?

How about this for the karst?

Sorry hydro. I don't think you have the right idea about Karst topography. While the color is pretty good, the shapes are all wrong. The kind we are discussing does not develop in dry climates. Natural arches are formed by a fairly different process. I am not familiar with any natural arches in Karst topography. See below.

Ok i design new karst terrain. As you see some textures are stretched but i cannot fix it. It because there is no NIF model to be similar to this sort of terrain and I must use other models. I can add some vegetation to this model if you want.

Also I added some grass to savanna. Im not 100% sure its ok. What do you think guys?

This is better. However, I have created nifs from other nifs by pasting and resizing objects before. I think that is what is needed here. I am not sure what feature this is but I think it would serve as a better starting nif:

Would it be possible for you to use/add these models in your TOWER Karst improvement? And the tower karst should not have the sinkhole in the middle.

Please... there are TWO SEPARATE WET KARST FEATURES:

1) Sinkhole karst and 2) Tower Karst
THE SINKHOLE KARST SHOULD BE A SEPARATE GRAPHIC.

Here is a a basic description of Karst topography and how Karst topography evolves.

1. Karst topography starts as an exposed thick bed of limestone (deposited at the bottom of oceans that later become dry land).

2. Karst topography in dry regions does NOT evolve in the same way that Karst topography in wet regions does. In dry terrains, it simply forms caves where water is consistently present.

3. In wet regions, the evolution of Karst topography is much more complex. Here is the process:

A. Groundwater dissolves away less resistant limestone and it is carried away forming caves

B. Erosion and other processes eventually lower the water table, leaving caves. Some caves are large enough that the eventually collapse leaving sinkholes. Other caves form in the limestone as more and more gets dissolved.

C (dry path). In regions of limited seasonal rains (semi-arid/plains), the water table can lower quickly enough to avoid excessive dissolution and result in a more pronounced version of the above picture

C (Wet path). In regions of pronounced rainy seasons the dissolution will occur more quickly than the lowering of the water table, leaving complex patterns of "mountains" that are places that have been more resistant to erosion.

D. Eventually all of the limestone will erode away. Under certain conditions however (which have too involved of an explanation for this discussion), some of the limestone will remain resistant to weathering long enough to form "tower Karst."

We could really use a feature for both B/C and D. You have been focusing on a graphic for D. However this graphic was better for B/C (except that you should make the green areas more transparent and perhaps mix in a little earthy brown with the grey):

 

[primem0ver]

Hydro... the second arch may exist in Karst terrain but arches are not generally a karst feature. The only reason I suspect that particular arch is because the white vertical streaks on the arch do look like they could be travertine/calcite deposits from dissolved limestone left by dripping water.

 

[primem0ver]

I'll throw my new feature Ideas here:

Tropical Forest:
Basically like a forest but can show up in the tropical zones alongside jungle.
Art wise (for easiest approach) I suggest using the small (non-palm) tress currently used by the Jungle Feature, and leave out the palms. It will at least loko distinct.

You are basically referring to a monsoon forest which is equivalent to a regular forest on a "lush" terrain. (Technically this is inaccurate but this is how it would work in our current set of terrains).

Jungle is essentially a forest with a specific type of foliage. As far as I understand the Civ system, Jungle is essentially tropical rain forest.

 

[Sparth]

Guys, remember about Occam's razor

 

[Sparth]

My newest works.
1. added some dirt and water to Skinhole Karst
2. new Tower Karst model with vegetation (jungle and grass)
3. little remodeled grass in savanna

 

[primem0ver]

My newest works.
1. added some dirt and water to Skinhole Karst
2. new Tower Karst model with vegetation (jungle and grass)
3. little remodeled grass in savanna

Better! Only two more issues:

1. Is the sinkhole karst a feature or a terrain? Because it also needs to be a feature. If possible, make the green areas semi- or mostly transparent so that the underlying terrain can peek through (in small bits).
2. Am I seeing shadows? The tower karst is better now. However it still looks like it is more based on the original crystal looking nif. I think reducing the number of crystal nifs and mixing a majority of smaller, slightly stretched copies of these nifs would be better...