Re: Zero-padded [map-raw] from CoMET

[Jens Granseuer <jensgr@xxxxxxx>]

On 29.01.2005 23:51, Dave Fancella wrote:
> On Saturday 29 January 2005 07:00 am, Jens Granseuer wrote:
> I can give a more serious use case, though.  Automatic map generator.  Someone 
> writes an automatic map generator, but what's showing up after the map is 
> compiled isn't making any sense.  So they check the source at the source 
> step, try tweaking by hand a few things, and it helps them to debug/improve 
> their automatic map generator.  (And no, I don't think that having one map 
> generator to rule them all works.  Consider that someone might want one to 
> generate specific maps for specific time periods, or generate variations of a 
> map based on previous maps, which might provide a solution to the branching 
> problem in campaigns.  So, yeah, this use case doesn't disappear just because 
> someone makes an automatic map generator :)  )

Yes, maybe... I'm almost persuaded.

> > > Here ya go.  How about being able to work up some cool shell scripts that
> > > take bad maps and turn them into good maps?
> >
> > I don't know what you have in mind here. What are bad maps and what are
> > good maps? And what do we need that for, anyway? Sure, you can turn any
> > arbitrary binary file into a 20x20 map that is technically correct, but
> > what use would that be?
> 
> Well, like, let's say I send a map to this list and you (or someone else) say 
> "Dave, your map really really really sucks.  Can you do something to make it 
> suck less?"  Then I could run a shell script or something that turned my 
> sucky map into a cool map.  Make more sense?

Not really. How do you algorithmically turn a sucky map into a fun map?
There's about a million ways in which a map may be bad, or just plain
broken, especially with regards to the potentially complex event stack.

Jens