Jump to content

RANDOM MAPS: Suggestions, Bug reports and Ideas about random maps here.


 Share

Recommended Posts

  On 13/08/2012 at 5:41 AM, wraitii said:

Borders are messy in RMs. The placer won't really let you place things out of the boundaries, but the check is a bit restricite, and probably should be abanonned for terrain placement (since all maps are squares displayed as circles).

Exactly. The check should only happen when creating areas.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I wrote a rmgen lib to support n-dimensional discrete vector analysis e.g. for simulating floating water erosion.

I'm not quite sure that's the best way to do it and I am sure it's not the fastest/best readable code.

I hope for someone more into programming/javascript to give me tips how to do better (but please without removing the generalized approach).

Indeed it might be possible to do all this with vector algebra as well and for that fully documented javascript libs might be out there so if anyone has information about that, plz let me know.

Here's the code (indentation missing due to erased tabs):

  Reveal hidden contents

...and the ziped rmgen lib: discreteVectorAnalysis2012-9-10.zip

And some test code:

  Reveal hidden contents

EDIT:

One problem is that defining divergence and gradient would shift the field by 1/2 of the maximum cell diameter of the grid and reduce the size of the hypercube the field is defined in by 1. The size reduction can be avoided by "wrapping" the cube's side in each dimension e.g. wrapping the left to the right. The shift comes from taking the difference of the cell itself to an appending field in each dimensions direction. So the "point" where the calculation "takes place" is between the cells. The shift can be avoided by ignoring the field the operation is applied to and use the previous and next field instead. That however leads to two decoupled grids like black and white fields on a chess board. Using such a decoupled approach for erosion leads to two smooth fields stacked in each other and together are extremely rough (so nothing is gained). The decoupling could be avoided by also taking into account the diagonal differences (like the last example here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrete_Laplace_operator#Implementation_in_Image_Processing )

Edited by FeXoR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much to our regret we must report the program has encountered an error.

Please let us know at http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ and attach the crashlog.txt and crashlog.dmp files.

Details: unhandled exception (Access violation reading 0x00000024)

Location: unknown:0 (?)

Call stack:

(error while dumping stack: No stack frames found)

errno = 0 (No error reported here)

OS error = 487 (Attempt to access invalid address.)

i found this error in the map editor it caused it to close down

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 17/09/2012 at 7:22 AM, zoot said:

Don't know if you are already aware of this, but sometimes walls are generated which exceed territory boundaries, which apparently causes them to gradually lose health and eventually die:

This happens because some wall parts are outside the map while the territory border can't expand over the map border. I could add restrictions not to place wall entities outside the map.

The better way to deal with that would IMO be a check in each random map for the size of the map and dependent on that and how close the player start locations can be to the border the map designer should disable Iberian walls (e.g. by placing them with "placeCivDefaultEntities(x, y, playerID, BUILDING_ANGlE, {'iberWall' : false});"). I just can't know well what the map designer wants/ how much space each map grants. I could change the default to: Map size = tiny -> no Iberian walls, map size = small -> Iberians get towers only, map size medium or greater -> Iberians get full walls.

Feedback welcome...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 17/09/2012 at 6:08 PM, Veridagorin said:

Much to our regret we must report the program has encountered an error.

Please let us know at http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ and attach the crashlog.txt and crashlog.dmp files.

Details: unhandled exception (Access violation reading 0x00000024)

Location: unknown:0 (?)

Call stack:

(error while dumping stack: No stack frames found)

errno = 0 (No error reported here)

OS error = 487 (Attempt to access invalid address.)

i found this error in the map editor it caused it to close down

Please attach the crashlog.txt and crashlog.dmp files. Also please tell us what you were doing in atlas at the time of the crash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just noticed that RMGEN function SimpleTerrain.placeNew() random placement angle is 0 to Pi but should be 0 to 2*Pi.

ATM I'm trying to figure out how to place a terrain with an actor similar to "terrain|entityPath" but it's not working with placeTerrain().

Edited by FeXoR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  On 04/12/2012 at 5:13 AM, Spahbod said:

FeXoR: Nice Idea. Although I'm afraid it won't have enough room if it is played with many players in small maps.

True and it's buggy on tiny maps with 4+ Players, small maps with 6+ Players and even on medium maps with 8 players:

post-14196-0-10170900-1354613135_thumb.j post-14196-0-19917800-1354613157_thumb.j post-14196-0-49764300-1354613182_thumb.j

But for reasonable map size to player ratio it's quite OK:

post-14196-0-64862100-1354613508_thumb.j post-14196-0-43898200-1354613593_thumb.j post-14196-0-38789700-1354613686_thumb.j

post-14196-0-97542400-1354613786_thumb.j post-14196-0-78504200-1354613897_thumb.j

The problem that maps don't work properly/are quite unplayable with to many players on to small maps is quite common for random maps.

My main concern is that most parts of the wall are to simple IMO. So if anyone has cool ideas plz let me know.

ATM I'm thinking of adding palisades in front of the main walls...

BTW: I found a typo in wall_builder.js. Replace:


wallStyles[style]["defenseTower"] = new WallElement("defenseTower", "structures/" + civ + "_defenseTower", PI, 0, -4*wallScaleByType[style]);

with:


wallStyles[style]["defenseTower"] = new WallElement("defenseTower", "structures/" + civ + "_defense_tower", PI, 0, -4*wallScaleByType[style]);

("_defenseTower" -> "_defense_tower")

It doesn't effect the official maps but raises an error if that wall element is used in other maps. It would be nice if you could fix that, Spahbod.

A side note: It feels like the tower upgrade that adds twice the number of arrows for each garrisoned unit is overpowered. Maybe scale it to 1 + ceil(1.5 * numberOfGarrisonedUnits) arrows? That way a tower garrisoned with 5 units (capable of adding arrows to the tower) would have 9 arrows which seams enough (compared to 11 arrow as is now or 7 arrows with the other tower upgrade). So ungarrisoned towers would have more arrows with the other tower upgrade while towers garrisoned with 3 to 5 units have more arrows with the upgrade in question (towers with 1 or 2 garrisoned units would have the same amount of arrows despite the upgrade chosen).

Edited by FeXoR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 05/12/2012 at 11:07 AM, Lion.Kanzen said:

looks very funny map, but i asked if works fine because the map Borders and some wall end segments. and obvious put it fauna and flora.

that i means.

UYXEOl.jpg

what happens if this happens xD

The wall outside the map will slowly fall apart (because the territory border is not expanded beyonf the map border).

This is a know issue and I put (untested code) for this (removes all objects outside the map border) here: http://www.wildfireg...=40#entry254333

(See the spoiler)

A better way IMO would be to just not place the civ default walls for Iberians on maps that don't grand space for it (by the map designer).

Edited by FeXoR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 05/12/2012 at 12:20 PM, FeXoR said:

The wall outside the map will slowly fall apart (because the territory border is not expanded beyonf the map border).

This is a know issue and I put (untested code) for this (removes all objects outside the map border) here: http://www.wildfireg...=40#entry254333

(See the spoiler)

A better way IMO would be to just not place the civ default walls for Iberians on maps that don't grand space for it (by the map designer).

I think we shouldn't place those walls in tiny maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 05/12/2012 at 12:35 PM, Spahbod said:

I think we shouldn't place those walls in tiny maps.

That would be this:

misc.zip

misc.js.diff

That does:

As long as the map does NOT explicitly set the defenses to add for Iberians it adds nothing in tiny maps and walls on non-tiny maps. Explicitly setting Iberians defenses to "walls" overrides the default and so walls will be place for any Iberian player on any map size.

Example to override default behavior:

placeCivDefaultEntities(x, y, playerId, BUILDING_ANGlE, {"iberWall": "walls"});

I think that is best.

EDIT: I should add the abiltiy to set the radius of the defenses, too. In the map "Snowflake Searocks" for example the radius is to big. That way RMS designers could tweak the iberian walls better. Please let me know when/if the patch is added, Spahbod, so I can add that functionality. THX.

EDIT2: While you're at it could you please fix the typo I mentioned in http://www.wildfireg...=60#entry257116 Oh!, Already fixed, thx!

Edited by FeXoR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a particular reason why the Iberians in Acropolis 7 (the southern acropolis) don't get any gates, when the Iberians in Acropolis 2 (the northern acropolis) get gates? In Acropolis 7, the southern ramp can be walled off but the wall segment is too short to support a gate, while the northern ramp can't even be walled off without rebuilding the walls. Also, the default AI in Acropolis 7 is Aegis Bot when at least most of the other maps have qbot as the default AI instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 20/12/2012 at 6:48 AM, Zeta1127 said:

Is there a particular reason why the Iberians in Acropolis 7 (the southern acropolis) don't get any gates, when the Iberians in Acropolis 2 (the northern acropolis) get gates? In Acropolis 7, the southern ramp can be walled off but the wall segment is too short to support a gate, while the northern ramp can't even be walled off without rebuilding the walls. Also, the default AI in Acropolis 7 is Aegis Bot when at least most of the other maps have qbot as the default AI instead.

i noticed that too. i report that, but i forgot about that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...