Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Re: Anything changing with circular LoS vs. diagonal movemen
This is the most common misconception.
Do not misconceive.
Although the central place for design discussion is ##crawl-dev on freenode, some may find it helpful to discuss requests and suggestions here first.
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4031
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37
Location: France
MrMisterMonkey wrote:The trick here is that it's not a shorter distance because we're not in Euclidean space.
This is the most common misconception.
Do not misconceive.
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1533
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
MrMisterMonkey wrote:Even then it won't be true euclidean space, even looking past chunky squares and other aliasing silliness; there will still be multiple shortest paths between a whole bunch of pairs of squares, and there is nothing you can do about that.
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4031
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37
Location: France
MrMisterMonkey wrote:there will still be multiple shortest paths between a whole bunch of pairs of squares, and there is nothing you can do about that.
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4031
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37
Location: France
danr wrote:I had a crazy idea for LOS
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Approximation of a straight line
..
.....
...2..
...#...
..#.....
..#.....
.#......
.#.......
1........
Equivalent geodesic under "euclidean" crawl space
..
.....
...2..
..#....
.#......
#.......
#.......
#........
1........
Equivalent
..
.....
...2..
...#...
...#....
...#....
..#.....
.#.......
1........
And for contrast, one in current crawl space:
..
.....
...2..
...#...
..#.....
.#......
..#.....
.#.......
1........
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4031
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37
Location: France
MrMisterMonkey wrote:True euclidean space requires that there may be only one shortest path between any two points; crawl's grid does not allow this.
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
galehar wrote:MrMisterMonkey wrote:True euclidean (...) but would create several other problems.
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1533
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52
galehar wrote:danr wrote:I had a crazy idea for LOS
This is indeed a crazy idea.
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
MrMisterMonkey wrote:upsets purists like me (but who cares about them).
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Spider Stomper
Posts: 195
Joined: Thursday, 3rd February 2011, 13:14
evilmike wrote:Now consider retreating from melee range.
You are @, and O is an ogre. If you retreat one square to the left, the ogre can simply follow you by also moving left. You'll probably be safe for that turn, though. However, if you move one square down-left, you would be less likely to be safe: this is because if you spend 1.4 turns to move diagonally, the ogre could just move 1 square to the left and be adjacent to you again, and would sometimes be able to attack you. Again, this means that if you want to be as careful as possible, you should retreat orthogonally.
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3618
Joined: Thursday, 23rd December 2010, 12:43
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 3037
Joined: Sunday, 2nd January 2011, 02:06
Spider Stomper
Posts: 195
Joined: Thursday, 3rd February 2011, 13:14
dpeg wrote:vintermann: This has nothing to do with Euclidean. Many metrics have this property, among them the one currently in use and Chebychev (square). And in fact, genuine Euclidean distance would make diagonals more expensive, which only very few are prepared to accept (I don't).
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 3037
Joined: Sunday, 2nd January 2011, 02:06
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
KoboldLord wrote:If you start charging variable time for moving from tile to tile, you undermine the entire point of measuring distance by tiles in the first place. If you want realistic Euclidean movement, then you are not going to be well-served by any sort of grid at all.
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4031
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37
Location: France
KoboldLord wrote:You want the movement of taking a simple step on flat, open terrain to take different numbers of turns?
Spider Stomper
Posts: 195
Joined: Thursday, 3rd February 2011, 13:14
KoboldLord wrote:If you start charging variable time for moving from tile to tile, you undermine the entire point of measuring distance by tiles in the first place. If you want realistic Euclidean movement, then you are not going to be well-served by any sort of grid at all.
Ziggurat Zagger
Posts: 3037
Joined: Sunday, 2nd January 2011, 02:06
galehar wrote:What about spriggans, nagas, ponderousness, swiftness, shallow water and Leda's liquefaction? Variable movement rate isn't new, it's already in the game. If we use euclidean, we should change the show_real_turns option to default to true, so the effect is obvious. It will help dispel the illusion that crawl's turns are equal and that its movement system can be compared to chess.
Snake Sneak
Posts: 112
Joined: Friday, 25th February 2011, 01:38
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
zrn wrote:But uh, in all seriousness, square line of sight sounds like the easiest and most suited solution to the los problem, if you could even call it that. It just makes more sense.
Snake Sneak
Posts: 112
Joined: Friday, 25th February 2011, 01:38
dpc wrote:zrn wrote:But uh, in all seriousness, square line of sight sounds like the easiest and most suited solution to the los problem, if you could even call it that. It just makes more sense.
This is not an argument against euclidean geometry.
Slime Squisher
Posts: 332
Joined: Friday, 4th February 2011, 18:04
Location: The South, US
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Spider Stomper
Posts: 195
Joined: Thursday, 3rd February 2011, 13:14
KoboldLord wrote:Realism is not a fantastic or even a good reason, because realism is utterly and irrevocably shattered by the very presence of the grid itself. The battle of realism is lost.
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1533
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
danr wrote:Circular LOS / spell radii is simply an attempt to simulate a false "realism" at the expense of consistency.
Slime Squisher
Posts: 332
Joined: Friday, 4th February 2011, 18:04
Location: The South, US
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
minmay wrote:Not on a grid, it isn't.
Spider Stomper
Posts: 233
Joined: Monday, 20th December 2010, 20:58
dpc wrote:minmay wrote:Not on a grid, it isn't.
And why is that?
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
acvar wrote:I could go on, but what is the point. This is simply an example of aesthetics over function, and no amount of reason will win the argument.
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4031
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37
Location: France
MrMisterMonkey wrote:bringing up again (even I forgot!) that it's not even true euclidean and also inconsistent:
viewtopic.php?p=3988#p3988
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
MrMisterMonkey wrote:bringing up again (even I forgot!) that it's not even true euclidean and also inconsistent:
viewtopic.php?p=3988#p3988
the first question here:
will you embrace these inconsistencies or try to ignore them and pretend it's euclidean?
MrMisterMonkey wrote:the second question:
if you're embracing it, why not go chebyshev?
if you're ignoring it, why? I'm guessing all of interface, gameplay, and aesthetic reasons. good job. this is what squarelos is, too. You can also ignore this stuff and use a squarelos system. Both of these are ugly, but I rather like keeping fractions and icky stuff like that out of the mix.
MrMisterMonkey wrote:Euclidean movement doesn't work nicely on a grid at all (without tracking wacky stuff like fractional squares), but if you want to argue for a pretend-euclidean system, or do all that wacky stuff, yes I guess it is functional.
MrMisterMonkey wrote:i'm not really sure what you mean by "functional"
MrMisterMonkey wrote:Aesthetically, this is highly subjective. I, for one, prefer squares, and think chunky circles are incredibly gross. I'm not really sure why you're using this as an argument.
MrMisterMonkey wrote:On realism, (...) Yes, you have to deal with some griddy details, but there's no avoiding that with a euclidean approximation, either.
MrMisterMonkey wrote:I could just as easily bold up something saying chebyshev space is functional, aesthetically great, and much more realistic. The only problem with it is people who are prejudged about the idea. If it's not, show me why and convince me.
but that is most likely a waste of time
MrMisterMonkey wrote:Further on keeping fractions and icky stuff like that out of the mix, this is one of the reasons I prefer squares.
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
KoboldLord wrote:You wouldn't charge more time for moving button-press right than left unless there's an absolutely fantastic reason, and you shouldn't charge more time for moving one button-press diagonal up-right unless there's an absolutely fantastic reason.
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4031
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37
Location: France
MrMisterMonkey wrote:to illustrate that the matter is grounded heavily in taste.
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
MrMisterMonkey wrote:I don't think you understand the purpose of that post; it was not to argue for squarelos/chebyshev, or give any drawbacks of a pretend-euclidean system, but to illustrate that the matter is grounded heavily in taste.
MrMisterMonkey wrote:As for fractional ickiness (by which, in that context, I meant increased diagonal movement cost; sorry if that was confusing), I don't like it because when I retreat or approach monsters or what-have-you, I don't want to do any fancy math to make sure I'll do it well.
Vestibule Violator
Posts: 1567
Joined: Friday, 21st January 2011, 22:56
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Mines Malingerer
Posts: 36
Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 11:28
Galefury wrote:A quick recap
Vaults Vanquisher
Posts: 447
Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10
Return to Game Design Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests