Currently Online

Latest Posts

Topic: Variable sight?

kaputtnik
Avatar
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 1858
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 16:14

Just an idea i got this morning:

What about giving buildings slightly more sight (the area which will reveal the Fog) if it is on top of a mountain?

I think this would give map designers more possibilities to create strategical POIs (points of interest). A Player might be interested to conquer elevated territory to get more sight, because he may see an opponent much earlier.

Would this be possible at all with the current implementation of how the visible area is calculated?

What do you think about it?


Top Quote
WorldSavior
Avatar
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 1617
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: North of Germany
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 16:35

kaputtnik wrote:

Just an idea i got this morning:

What about giving buildings slightly more sight (the area which will reveal the Fog) if it is on top of a mountain?

I think this would give map designers more possibilities to create strategical POIs (points of interest). A Player might be interested to conquer elevated territory to get more sight, because he may see an opponent much earlier.

Would this be possible at all with the current implementation of how the visible area is calculated?

What do you think about it?

-1 too complicated.

If it should be like that, why wouldn't mountains and other barriers lower the sight if they stand in the way?

Many maps are not designed to be fitting to that idea.

I guess it's hard to implement because not the height is important, but the difference between the heights for every field in a special zone.


“It's a threat to our planet to believe that someone else will save it.” - Robert Swan

Top Quote
niektory
Avatar
Joined: 2019-06-03, 20:06
Posts: 105
Ranking
Likes to be here
Location: Poland
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 17:40

I like this idea. It could work as long as the sight bonus is small.


Top Quote
Nordfriese
Avatar
Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07
Posts: 849
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: 0x55555d3a34c0
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 18:38

I also say +1. But we should also decrease vision slightly for buildings at the bottom of a steep valley. But first we will have to implement a vision overlay for milsites so players can see the exact vision prior to building. However this might be non-trivial to implement since the current code assumes that such areas are always round.


Top Quote
kaputtnik
Avatar
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 1858
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 19:30

Nordfriese wrote:

I also say +1. But we should also decrease vision slightly for buildings at the bottom of a steep valley. But first we will have to implement a vision overlay for milsites so players can see the exact vision prior to building.

Hm... i think this would be a point which is against my idea. If the exact vision would be seen in this overlay, f.e. one can imagine if there will be a hill in the unseen area to mine some resources.


Top Quote
king_of_nowhere
Avatar
Joined: 2014-09-15, 18:35
Posts: 1621
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 19:55

i like the idea. it should take into account the elevation difference between the corners. but it should not be major.

In fact, it would probably be complicated enough to be not worth the effort.


Top Quote
teppo
Joined: 2012-01-30, 09:42
Posts: 395
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 20:48

kaputtnik wrote:

Nordfriese wrote:

I also say +1. But we should also decrease vision slightly for buildings at the bottom of a steep valley. But first we will have to implement a vision overlay for milsites so players can see the exact vision prior to building.

Hm... i think this would be a point which is against my idea. If the exact vision would be seen in this overlay, f.e. one can imagine if there will be a hill in the unseen area to mine some resources.

Even with the change, vision range would still always be at least equal to conquer range? If so, mining is not harmed that much. Besides, geologist on the border would peek into darkness. EDIT: I read carelessly. You are right.

Edited: 2020-05-01, 20:50

Top Quote
Nordfriese
Avatar
Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07
Posts: 849
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: 0x55555d3a34c0
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 20:54

You can already have a good guess at nearby hills by clicking a buildable field near the border and hovering over the fortress. The highest radius you can get by this is ~ 12 whereas towers have a vision of 21 so the change is there but moderate. But then, some players also look at the map in the editor before playing so they know where to go…


Top Quote
WorldSavior
Avatar
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 1617
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: North of Germany
Posted at: 2020-05-02, 13:25

king_of_nowhere wrote:

i like the idea. it should take into account the elevation difference between the corners. but it should not be major.

In fact, it would probably be complicated enough to be not worth the effort.

Exactly! There are things which are more important

teppo wrote:

Besides, geologist on the border would peek into darkness.

They have a vision range of 2 themselves, which should be the minimal vision range of units.


“It's a threat to our planet to believe that someone else will save it.” - Robert Swan

Top Quote
kaputtnik
Avatar
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 1858
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2020-05-02, 20:06

I've made an enhancement issue. Maybe some time a developer has fun to implement (or to play with) it face-smile.png


Top Quote