Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Davion]

It's not like the dwarf or the kitten occupies the ENTIRE tile. But I don't think most people here would want a "realistic" representation of a 2x2 pixel @ for dwarf vs a 16 x 16 pixel D for dragon. They're all big for readability's sake.

I am talking about scalability in terms of isometric graphics. If they were all big for readability sake, even in an isometric environment, then it doesn't seem like there would be much of a point in having isometric graphics, other than for z-levels and elevation you wouldn't even see as much.

Maybe as a minimap or view that just shows the elevation and construction going on, but if creatures weren't to some kind of scale you might as well just be playing top-down.

[nornagon]

With an isometric view, all the tiles would have to be cubic in dimension... or else how would the dwarves fit into them when they dig?

An isometric view also has the problems of: a) occlusion -- stuff will get hidden behind the landscape (especially when you have cubic tiles), and b) displaying tunnels/caves/other concave structures is tricky.

[numerobis]

I think the side bar could still be there because that's the easiest way to show the information, since there are usually so many options. That, or have it in a floating menu that pops up, but until something is done about window sizes and number of tiles on screen it'd probably obstruct too much.

Hmm... My expertise in this is tapped out now, but y'all can figure out some nice suggestions for the display issues.  I'm a fan of keeping it visually similar to the current.  I want the user interface to be better, don't care so much about it being prettier.

I am not sure about the best way to start a community interface flow chart, maybe using something like Dia to map it all out, it can export many different file types.  I am not sure how practical having a flow chart would be since the data would just consist of stuff like "Designation (d) ------> Designate menu ----> List of options", etc., but it'd probably help point out areas that take too many keystrokes to access or whatever.

If it's just going to be command1 -> command2, then we can use graphviz which has a truly human-readable file format (as in, you just write command1 -> command2 and a tiny bit of boilerplate at the top).  I'm just wondering what other information would be useful.  For instance, figuring out the +/- and up/down schizophrenia would please me, but wouldn't be easy to analyze with just that graph.

In the end, the goals I see for this flowchart-or-whatever project are twofold: (a) something to hand to Toady to help him improve the UI, (b) something to hand to newbies to help them figure out the UI.

[Davion]

That's true, it could help a lot of new people get comfortable with the interface because they could see all the commands and input as well as output.

Checking out Graphvis right now.

[numerobis]

Here's a start:

Code: [Select]

digraph DF {
  main -> "[d]esignate"
  "[d]esignate" -> "[m]ine"
  "[d]esignate" -> "[b] properties"
  "[b] properties" -> "[d]ump"
  main -> "[m]ilitary"
  main -> "[x] control squads"
}
Save that into df.graph, then run dot -Tpdf < df.graph > df.pdf, then open up df.pdf

[Davion]

Is it just me or is the scrolling for the Set Building/Item Properties broken?

[Red Jackard]

anime-styled dwarf tiles

[Davion]

Here's a start:

Code: [Select]

digraph DF {
  main -> "[d]esignate"
  "[d]esignate" -> "[m]ine"
  "[d]esignate" -> "[b] properties"
  "[b] properties" -> "[d]ump"
  main -> "[m]ilitary"
  main -> "[x] control squads"
}
Save that into df.graph, then run dot -Tpdf < df.graph > df.pdf, then open up df.pdf

I've got most of the designation area done, going circo is probably the easiest way to view everything from test renders.

[Torak]

anime-styled dwarf tiles

I think the first picture is a better representation.




It also looks cooler and less like a midget who rapes overdeveloped children.

[Tormy]

Some good lookin' dwarf lads here:

http://warhammerinfo.com/art-dwarfs.shtml

 

[Red Jackard]

clearly you two are missing the point of the joke, the man mentioned anime dwarves

[Torak]

clearly you two are missing the point of the joke, the man mentioned anime dwarves

I CONSIDER GOOGLE IMAGE SEARCH TO BE THE TRUTHER.

[Davion]

clearly you two are missing the point of the joke, the man mentioned anime dwarves

I CONSIDER GOOGLE IMAGE SEARCH TO BE THE TRUTHER.

Yoda says that is why you fail

[Sergius]

It's not like the dwarf or the kitten occupies the ENTIRE tile. But I don't think most people here would want a "realistic" representation of a 2x2 pixel @ for dwarf vs a 16 x 16 pixel D for dragon. They're all big for readability's sake.

I am talking about scalability in terms of isometric graphics. If they were all big for readability sake, even in an isometric environment, then it doesn't seem like there would be much of a point in having isometric graphics, other than for z-levels and elevation you wouldn't even see as much.

Maybe as a minimap or view that just shows the elevation and construction going on, but if creatures weren't to some kind of scale you might as well just be playing top-down.

Oh I agree with that. I'm not very fond of isometric myself.

[Sergius]

clearly you two are missing the point of the joke, the man mentioned anime dwarves

Fixed.