Re: Documentation about Crimson Architecture?

[Dave Fancella <davidfancella@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Saturday 08 January 2005 03:19 am, Sascha Flohr wrote:
> He misses the regard of different heights for units. Now you can not fly
> over your own units (or drive underneath). He is apparently in the fear
> of loosing his copters in our current fight :-)

Heh, this is a topic that won't die until you make it happen, Jens.  ;)

In any case, I'm finding myself siding with Jens on this, these days, when in 
the past I was adamantly his adversary on this issue.  It's an interesting 
tactical situation that air units can't fly over ground units.  But there are 
some things to consider.

1.  How many units can occupy a space?  Right now, only one.  If air units can 
flyover other units, then can they occupy the same space?  At the end of the 
turn, is it ok for an air unit to be in the same space as a ground unit?  (or 
ship)  I would suggest that it could be implemented in a way that preserves 
the one unit per square rule as long as air units can't end their turn where 
a ground unit sits.  That will make moving air units a little more cumbersome 
than they are now.

2.  How will it unbalance existing maps?  It will unbalance some, others it 
won't hurt, others it won't affect.  But this one change will require 
revisiting all existing maps.  The upside is that if it's done now (or soon, 
as in "before there is a buttload of maps") revisiting each map isn't that 
big of a deal, compared to when there's, say, a hundred maps.  But it's still 
a task to be done.

3.  There is no #3.

I would suggest keeping this issue on a backburner until we've got enough 
story that it makes sense to revisit every map already.  (speaking of 
whiches, I'm soon going to be doing a lot of pencil and paper work, and I've 
moved in next to a family with a scanner, so that world map might finally 
materialize  :)  Don't get your hopes up quite yet, but we'll see)

> > have to wait for tomorrow). As the coding part of CF has be almost
> > exclusively a one-man effort it hasn't been needed (although some might
> > argue this attitude is causing kind of a chicken-and-egg problem...) and
> > as documenting stuff consumes precious time I've always found other "more
> > urgent" matters to spend mine on.
>
> I know this little problem :-)

I just want to point out that while I've been here (probably about a year, 
maybe a little less), there hasn't been anybody coming up that showed they 
were going to stick around long enough to turn coding into a 2+ man effort.  
(i've seen patches appear, though)  So I'd say that's the main bottleneck on 
contributions.  Most contributors, while I've been here, have volunteered 
work that is supportive of the coding but not actually coding (myself 
included).  For the size of the project it's worked, but if a dozen 
map-makers materialized I honestly don't know if I could keep up with the 
story, and I'm already waaaaay behind with the soundtrack.  (More musicians 
and/or more writers would be helpful :)  )  And Jens has kept up with 
everything that's been discussed, when coding has been needed as a result of 
discussions.

I don't know about Jens, but from my point of view what we're needing more 
than coding is graphic design, writing, and music/sound effects.  And 
map-makers.  Map-makers probably more than anything else.  There's a lot of 
the game that looks good, but could be fleshed out more with these people.  I 
did try to muster up some help from the Armagetron community, but those guys 
are still serving their tron addiction.  Heh.  Anyway, that's just me.  
Admittedly I've only been paying half attention recently...

Dave

> Regards, Sascha.

-- 
Visit my website!
http://www.davefancella.com/?event=em

This is Unix we're talking about, remember.  It's not supposed to be
nice for the applications programmer.
		-- Matthew Danish on debian-devel