Why Squares

[Mongol Horde]

Looks like you were right, taken from www.rjcyberware.com/rj/plan04-15-00.html

And then things began to go wrong. The difficulty lies in that spherical world we had designed. The basic problem was that you simply cannot tile a sphere with hexagons. We knew this from the start, but had several deformation ideas in mind which would make it possible. There were several designs which were started, and then rejected as we determined there was some problem with them. We lost about two or three months in this stage. Finally, we came up with a method which we were pretty sure would work. In this attempt, we simply layed down a series of hexagons and stretched the entire thing horizontally, like a peice of rubber, until each part lined up as we needed it to. It took roughly six months to get this right, and some very complex calculations. Intermediate stages of the engine did some very psychadellic things! Finally, in the end, we had a working system, but it was terribly slow. Every pixel on the main map was being put through a whole series of calculations before being displayed, and by the time you put everything together, the frame rates were abysmal.

 

[R]

Quite of topic:

Do you know a game that would be cool to play using a sphere built up of triangles. Do you think it would work with a tiangle- minesweeper?

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.missionsos.org/urkraftkallan/civsignatur.gif" border=0>
...................................(R)

 

[GenghisK]

Kindly note that we're slipping to a mathematical subject...
Anyway, I submit my humble opinion:
_ hex = wargame. Civ is all but a wargame.
_ I wish Civ will <FONT size="3"><FONT COLOR="red">never</FONT c></FONT s> be turned into full 3D based game. It would lose its charms. And 3D is not suited for those kind of games, since your global vision is limited. To be honest I find that the isometrical view of Civ2 had already reduced that large vision offered by Civ1. So I don't hope Sid to make the situation worse.

------------------
Genghis K.
<IMG SRC="http://wsphotofews.excite.com/003/LZ/ic/CX/Kx78690.jpg" border=0>

 

[BorderPatrol]

I am with Leowind, hexes would seem more realistic. I don't see why it would have to seem like a war game if you used hexes. Also if you use hexes you mo longer have to worry about a unit 2 places away diagonally not being in the city radius. I always used the hex maps instead of the square ones when making maps for D&D when it came out. The hex map makes for equal distance.

And you arn't giving up 2 squares of movement you are giving up cheating movementwise. Those extra 2 squares shouldn't be there proportionally.

Now, there is an even better option in using triangles. It makes for perfect 3d maps. However, it does require an entirely different way of thinking for unit movement that would definitely take some getting used to. The best way to look at unit movement on a triangular map is to have the unit moving between intersections of the triangles, the cities would be at the intersections too. This would be 6 point movement like with a hexagonal map, but you get 24 city resource squares, which would be 3 more than currently. It is the way they probably actually do the movement in 3 demisional games, if we could see all the little triangles.

That being said, I would like a hexagonal map.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>If you cross the border, you better have your green card!<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>

[This message has been edited by BorderPatrol (edited May 10, 2001).]

 

[andy6474]

I think squares are the better way to go in terms of playability, BUT why can't the squares be displayed (or have the option to be displayed) the proper way (ie: civ1) instead of this isometric 3d imitation that looks terrible, makes movement a nuisance and worst of all, and in my view a capital crime, takes away almost all the 'atmosphere' from the game. Civ II and III just don't feel as engaging as civ1 and its due to the way the map is displayed.
I guess everyone else has got used to it, but I never did. :-(
I just wish civ1 would work on this computer. Im suffering withdrawal symptoms!

 

[BorderPatrol]

ok I know I said I wassn't going to contribute anything else because of my Dead Indian Post being closed but I found a url that shows exactly what I am talking about here in my previous post and just had to include it since it makes for enormous possibilities for our beloved game!

This is what a triangle grid would look like:

<IMG SRC="http://forum.swarthmore.edu/varnelle/images/trianglegrid.gif" border=0>

As you can see, if you placed a city at any intersection (not on the triangles them selves but on an intersection point), you would have access to 6 resources immediately and then the next out would give 3 times as many resources (18), for a total of 24 resources available. This makes more sice since as your city grows it should be symetrical and exponetial. The way movement should work on this grid is BETWEEN THE INTERSECTIONS, this would give a unit 6 choices and the main thing is that all movements would make since proportionally distancewise unlike the square system. (see other poasts in this thread)
Another thing i like about this is that being on an intersection would give a worker the ability to improve all of the six surrounding spaces without moving. And a worker can improve the first six spaces while having the protection of fortified city defence units!
I know this requires an entirely different way of thinking, but you have to admit it had great possibilities! Questions?

------------------


[This message has been edited by BorderPatrol (edited May 21, 2001).]

 

[TimTheEnchanter]

That triangle grid is interesting, and you bring up several good points, but it still doesn't lend itself as well to navigation using a 9 key number pad.

Also, on a minor note, describing directions would be much more difficult. In your example, you can move E & W, but not N&S. I think the lack of familiarity would make it difficult to work with.

------------------
DEATH awaits you all...with nasty, big, pointy teeth.

 

[BorderPatrol]

it still doesn't lend itself as well to navigation using a 9 key number pad.

The navigation is very minor, if you do it for very long you will just forget the 8 and 2 keys are even there. If you want to go north, then simply do a 7 followed by a 9. If you want to go south then somply do a 1 followed by a 3. And the directions will be easy to describe as well, it will still be N,S,E,W,NW,NE,SW,SE just like it is now.

Where the benefits of this triangle grid <u>really</u> kick in is if you want to make a spherical map. I don't mean a map like we have in Civ II where you can go east and west forever but you can't cross the poles. See triangles are the only shapes that can always work for 3 deminsional mapping. And 3 demensional mapping would make civilization incredibly realistic, and you don't have to take away from the flavor of the game to add it. You can still keep it a turn based game. Well, there I go again getting long winded... <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/smile.gif" border=0>

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>If you cross the border, you better have your green card!<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>

[This message has been edited by BorderPatrol (edited May 22, 2001).]

 

[Elias Haviola]

Originally posted by BorderPatrol:
The way movement should work on this grid is BETWEEN THE INTERSECTIONS, this would give a unit 6 choices and the main thing is that all movements would make since proportionally distancewise unlike the square system. (see other poasts in this thread)

Creative thinking, I like that. However, if you think about the triangle model for a moment you'll realize that it equals a hex map, the representation is just different.
Every triangle intersection can be replaced by a hex with no consequence.

If you don't spot it right away, do it like this: draw a dot in the middle of every triangle. Then connect every dot to the three dots in the three adjacent triangles.
You'll get the hex representation of your triangle model.

Personally I would support hexes. I don't see how the fact that you don't get to press the 4 and 6 in the numpad makes it any more complex. It is obviously quite the opposite.

It seems to me that the main part of the hex opposition is due to not being accustomed to a new thing. Once you have spent a couple of hours moving on hexes you'll think of it as a completely natural thing, and since there are no other negative aspect to hexes compared to squares, only positive, it will all be for the best.

 

[BorderPatrol]

If you read my first post in this thread Elias you will see that I am in support of hexes. With the triangle grid proposal I am just trying to think outside of the norm.

Posted by Elias Haviola:

Every triangle intersection can be replaced by a hex with no consequence.

While every triangle intersection can be replaced by a hex. It entirely changes the concept I was proposing.
The triangle grid proposal not only involves a new kind of map but also involves a whole new concept of placement and movement where you are moving and placing between the triangles instead of on them.
The workers can improve any of the triangle tiles around them, and can continue improving the rest around him without having to move! This would be more efficient and make it easier to protect your workers. The result would be that it would make it easier to manage and grow your empire.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>If you cross the border, you better have your green card!<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>

 

[walkergrae]

If you want a spherical map, just use a geodesic sphere. Geodesic spheres/domes are made with hexes with a few pentagons (12 minimum for a sphere) at the right places to give curvature, take a look at a soccer ball or the geodesic dome in front of Disney's Epcot Center. When you first look at the Epcot Center's geodesic sphere it looks like triangles, but closer examination reveals that these are the basic shape used to build the hexes and pentagons of a geodesic sphere.

The result would give a nice globe made up of hexes with the occasional pentagon. Just think, you'd want to avoid putting cities on the pentagon's because of the reduction of hexes for resources in the city radius. Of course if it's not done right you could end up with a globe resembling a 20 sided gaming dice with 12 pentagon corners and 20 flat, triangular sides made of hexes, every other hex along the edge bent around the corner between adjacent sides.

Of course you could add screen wrapping vertically but that would lead to going onto the arctic pole and exiting off the antarctic pole, rather a peculiar world picture that.

Personally I'm happy with the isometric square grid even though a sphere would allow movement across the poles.

 

[Matt99]

Keep the

S*Q*U*A*R*E*S
Q***********E
U***********R
A***********A
R***********U
E***********Q
S*Q*U*A*R*E*S

They are the only ones with good movement (8)
Why are u people never satisfied with what you have - you always want more, more, more, more, MORE!

'apreciate what you have while you still have it'

<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/satanlook.gif" border=0>Mattezuma<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/satanlook.gif" border=0>
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/smile.gif" border=0><IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/smile.gif" border=0><IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/smile.gif" border=0>

<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/smile.gif" border=0><IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/smile.gif" border=0>

[This message has been edited by Matt99 (edited May 23, 2001).]

 

[BorderPatrol]

They are the only ones with good movement (8)
Why are u people never satisfied with what you have - you always want more, more, more, more, MORE!

LOL, and 6 movement is more than 8? I don't want more, I want better. and you didn't even bother to address all the other stuff I talked about.

 

[Matt99]

Boarder Patrol, that was aimed at u alone I was mainly talking to the person who suggested hexagons , as that would be more. Anyway, when I said more, I meant more as in change not literally more as in a higher number. I am very sorry if I did not make myself very clear.

Squares are the only easy to move around on format though!

Mattezuma

King of the Aztecs

 

[Xenophon]

And the Hampsters keep chasing each other on the same wheel.

Long live Sparta.

 

[EntirelyBS]

Anything that leads to more options is better (current version allows 8 options, 6 is limiting). Also, since we have used the NSEW approach for some time now, how would that translate if you wanted to move units due EAST, but did not have that option?

 

[BorderPatrol]

Originally posted by EBS:

how would that translate if you wanted to move units due EAST, but did not have that option?

To move due east you just go NE followed by SE and you are due east of where you started.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.firaxis.com/civ3/images/artarchive/rifleman_render_thumb.jpg" border=0><font color="green">If you cross the border, you better have your green card! </font><IMG SRC="http://www.firaxis.com/civ3/images/artarchive/abrams_render_thumb.jpg" border=0>

[This message has been edited by BorderPatrol (edited June 06, 2001).]

 

[Loaf Warden]

Thereby requiring two moves to do what we can do with only one move now. Hence, movement is more limited, making this a less palatable option than the squares we already have.

 

[BorderPatrol]

The ONLY argument for the current squares system is the 8 moves as opposed to 6 with the triangle system.

There are several reasons to consider the triangle system:

1)workers would have more protection
2)workers could improve multiple spaces without having to move
3)more resources available to cities
4)realistic city growth
5)movement distance is equal (with the square system you are atually moving further when you are moving diagonally than if you are moving horizontally or vertically)

It is important to consider all the arguments for this before disregarding it based on the notion of it being different than the current system.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.firaxis.com/civ3/images/artarchive/rifleman_render_thumb.jpg" border=0><font color="green">If you cross the border, you better have your green card! </font><IMG SRC="http://www.firaxis.com/civ3/images/artarchive/abrams_render_thumb.jpg" border=0>

[This message has been edited by BorderPatrol (edited June 06, 2001).]

 

[Magnus]

Yes, leave our squares (diamonds?) alone. Let the bees keep their honeycombs.