New terrain features

[Thunderbrd]

I'm going to object, Hydro! I like those as terrain features... Now as for harvesting them... why not have buildings generate the resources for trade based on access?

Why have them as terrain features instead? Because they seem to fit better as more common on the map to me - especially with some of them being damaging elements. A desert with prickly pears or barrel cactus will have those quite prolifically throughout that desert, and the maps are very well designed where that's concerned.

Though I do feel there's FAR too much permafrost on most of these maps. And permafrost really shouldn't be half as bad as it is really - I mean all of Alaska gets permafrost and its pretty valid terrain though I suppose that's mostly due to forests, which was the inspiration on how tundra was handled originally.) Now, what permafrost should do that tundra tends not to would be increase maintenance expenses severely somehow... it tears buildings and roads and just about any non-highly specialized structure (thus expensive to build like the oil pipeline) apart at a much faster rate than most lands.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I'm going to object, Hydro! I like those as terrain features... Now as for harvesting them... why not have buildings generate the resources for trade based on access?

I currently do. Each have their own city vicinity buildings and produce the following resources ...

Prickly Pears = Fruit
Barrel Cactus = Drugs
Date Palm = Fruit
Coconuts = Nuts

Note these are generalized because of the buildings. It would be nice to have specialized map resources too.

Why have them as terrain features instead? Because they seem to fit better as more common on the map to me - especially with some of them being damaging elements. A desert with prickly pears or barrel cactus will have those quite prolifically throughout that desert, and the maps are very well designed where that's concerned.

You can still make them abundant if you want. I personalty want the date palms converted since they don't look as great in large numbers.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Problem is you can't have two resources on the same square right? So by having those as terrain features, they can be quite abundant while not impeding other resources from being placed there.

 

[BlueGenie]

I agree with Thunderbird on keeping special features, though maybe not exactly the ones we now have.

I have been thinking about the features we have, especially the "resource" features, and have been a little apprehensive too them the way they are. As resources on map it'd be fine with Coconuts and Dates and Prickly Pear Cacti but as terrain features I always ask my self: "Why those and not others, like apples, pears, bananas, grapes, oranges, basically anything that can grow in the wild as well as domesticated.

So my thoughts turn to having a different set of Terrain Features:
- Prime Fruit Trees. Any fruit really, could be required in City Vicinity for a bunch of orchards. Feature gives +1 food (as opposed to Forest Feature giving +1 hammer) and can have orchards and some plantations built on it without removing the feature. The Feature symbolises soil that's prime for growing trees and bushes with fruit. Can build Orchard without resource on plot.
- Fertile Lands. Feature gives +1 food with Farm and +1 Commerce with Plantation and isn't removed by Farms or Plantations. Can build Farm and Plantation without resource on plot.
- Prime Timber Trees. +2 Hammers. Made for Lumber Mills so +1 Commerce with Lumber Mill. This could be instead of placing Prime Timber Resource on map so feature is required to gain access to Prime Timber instead. Counts as Forest except for the one more hammer base yield. This would also solve the problem with not enough Prime Timber spread out across the world.

Other Features could be added to the list; mineral rich soil (maybe on Barren but certainly on Rocky), clear water spring (possibly near start of rivers), Delta Area (someone was talking about this before though as Terrain if I'm not remembering wrong), Oasis (Deserts, duh!).

Cheers

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

@Dancing Hoskuld

Can you convert the prickly pear, barrel cactus, coconuts and date palms into resources instead of terrain features so we can actually have the ability to trade them?

This will break save games and require changes to map scripts do we really want to attempt to do this so close to a release?

 

[Hydromancerx]

This will break save games and require changes to map scripts do we really want to attempt to do this so close to a release?

Ok wait until after release then.

 

[strategyonly]

I changed back alot of the terrain i had put in for the blends, didnt like the water color, the coastbleand, peaks etc, only thing i did like was the grassblend.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I changed back alot of the terrain i had put in for the blends, didnt like the water color, the coastbleand, peaks etc, only thing i did like was the grassblend.

Did you do it yet? Cause I don't see a change on the SVN.

 

[strategyonly]

Did you do it yet? Cause I don't see a change on the SVN.

No cause i dont like doing a FPK, because its too big, i wait till i have alot to add, then do it.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

No cause i dont like doing a FPK, because its too big, i wait till i have alot to add, then do it.

You noticed that I put some more stuff in the core art files for you? resources mostly. I could have a go at the stuff in the Units folder and move its art if you like.

 

[strategyonly]

You noticed that I put some more stuff in the core art files for you? resources mostly. I could have a go at the stuff in the Units folder and move its art if you like.

Yeah, i was just looking at that stuff infact today, but was concerned about all the terrain changes, so go for it, i will get them into the FPK them, and many many thx, do as much as you want, the more the merrier in the core files.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Perhaps you should make another FPK. Like a unit one, a building one, a terrain one, etc. That way updating would be smaller.

 

[strategyonly]

Perhaps you should make another FPK. Like a unit one, a building one, a terrain one, etc. That way updating would be smaller.

I could do that, but i found out there is a limit on the FPK's you can have also. I believe the limit is seven or so?

 

[Hydromancerx]

I could do that, but i found out there is a limit on the FPK's you can have also. I believe the limit is seven or so?

Ah ok nevermind then. We are already up to 5 and who knows who else will join the teams and need their own personal FPK. I suspect steampunk1880 will eventually need one of his own if he keeps modding.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Yeah, i was just looking at that stuff infact today, but was concerned about all the terrain changes, so go for it, i will get them into the FPK them, and many many thx, do as much as you want, the more the merrier in the core files.

There is a whole bunch of graphics stuff in the TrenchInfantry folder which isn't being used. cavalry, Flamethrower, Grenadiers, Machineguns and Stormtrooper. Are you referencing them elsewhere? or is it safe to get rid of them?

 

[Hydromancerx]

There is a whole bunch of graphics stuff in the TrenchInfantry folder which isn't being used. cavalry, Flamethrower, Grenadiers, Machineguns and Stormtrooper. Are you referencing them elsewhere? or is it safe to get rid of them?

You sure? We have a flamethrower and I thought the storm troopers are being used for the automatons. At any rat perhaps they should be put to use if they are not being used.

Screenshots would be helpful.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I've been thinking we should break up the one massive fpk somewhat because every time it gets updated it takes forever and a day to update the svn file... and if interrupted I have to start over - I usually get interrupted.

 

[Snofru1]

Why can´t we plant forest on lush terrain? Is this as intended?

 

[strategyonly]

There is a whole bunch of graphics stuff in the TrenchInfantry folder which isn't being used. cavalry, Flamethrower, Grenadiers, Machineguns and Stormtrooper. Are you referencing them elsewhere? or is it safe to get rid of them?

HUH never really looked at it, so really i have no idea? Sorry

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Why can´t we plant forest on lush terrain? Is this as intended?

People have not pointed out the problem. We added new terrain but missed the terraform stuff.