Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

For discussion on the most 'core' concepts and ideas for the first version of the SOTE project. This is for absolutely necessary mechanics and ideas that form the backbone of the game.
User avatar
soy de river beaver
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 9:49 pm
Location: Argentina

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by soy de river beaver » Wed Jul 05, 2017 3:36 am

kukumarro wrote:
Tue Jul 04, 2017 1:32 pm
About the bridges and rivers... if the tiles are going to be around 5-10km wide, most rivers (except extremely big ones) will have to modeled as frontiers between tiles, rather than tiles.
it depends on the size of the tiles, we dont know how big they are going to be.

if there were to be big, it could be posible to either do what you said or maybe just feature water vs land separetly, you know, a percentage of over 20% is river, over 70% coast, over 90% water.

Demiansky
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:03 pm

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by Demiansky » Wed Jul 05, 2017 12:04 pm

It might make sense for rivers to be frontiers between tiles because we could guide a river's path based on basic geologic elements of the tiles themselves. The standards are relatively simple to determine drainage. So for instance, rivers always flow toward the lowest point of gravity. Next a river will always erode toward the direction of softer sediment, so rocky soil will shunt the water toward softer soils. If there is no hard soil, of lower altitudes, then it ends up just cutting through rock and mountain (thus how you get canyons).

Khardinal
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2017 9:18 pm

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by Khardinal » Thu Jul 06, 2017 5:01 pm

Right, with this POV about tile size, rivers are gonna be specific, which is nice because a city was usually spreading on both sides of a river is it was available.
So a river can be an impassable frontier between 2 tiles, apart bridge or low point. But in the same time a route of quick exchange/transport for trade. Plus what said Demiansky, it will be something that will influence adjacent tiles, in many ways.

pełpeł
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by pełpeł » Sun Jul 16, 2017 8:26 pm

I still think, that most efficient would be make certain information, like rivers and elevation mapped with graphical file. Especially information like rivers would be best written as vectorized image, making them tile based gives less possibilities - best scenarion would be 10km rivers, right? (smallest division). If information on rivers would be in separate vector image, than it would be simply put over the top of the file (and game wouldn't have to think as hard how to generate it, as width could be set in graphic, as well as flow of water (via colors of connections between nodes).

We can give tiles information about rivers, but rather something simple like "has_river = yes" or "access_to_water = yes" to be more generic. I don't know much about programing, but I would rather try to keep information saved as efficient as possible and vector file would be best for at least rivers and division between deep sea, shallow water and coastline

User avatar
kukumarro
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 8:06 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by kukumarro » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:30 pm

From the calculation I made at the beginning, the reasonable size for the edges of the hexagons would be in the order of 5 or 10km. Some people were already making assumptions for other mechanics considering tiles 10-100 times smaller, which means 100-10000 times more tiles and memory: completely impossible. We will see at the end, but if you need to make assumptions, i suggest you to go with 10km.

Rivers should be coded as entities consisting of a flow-ordered collection of edges, as each section of the river "feeds" mostly on what it receives from upstream. The way to generate the rivers would be to use the topographic map to calculate the drainage areas, this way we define where river path and the relation of flow rate to rain/snowmelt inside the drainage area. This way the game can easily take an input from the climate system and translate it into floods/droughts. Whenever something (cataclysm, channel-digging or beaver dam) changes the course of a river, we run again the river-creator function on the affected area to calculate how the new path of the river is.

Demiansky
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:03 pm

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by Demiansky » Sat Jul 22, 2017 12:08 pm

kukumarro wrote:
Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:30 pm
From the calculation I made at the beginning, the reasonable size for the edges of the hexagons would be in the order of 5 or 10km. Some people were already making assumptions for other mechanics considering tiles 10-100 times smaller, which means 100-10000 times more tiles and memory: completely impossible. We will see at the end, but if you need to make assumptions, i suggest you to go with 10km.

Rivers should be coded as entities consisting of a flow-ordered collection of edges, as each section of the river "feeds" mostly on what it receives from upstream. The way to generate the rivers would be to use the topographic map to calculate the drainage areas, this way we define where river path and the relation of flow rate to rain/snowmelt inside the drainage area. This way the game can easily take an input from the climate system and translate it into floods/droughts. Whenever something (cataclysm, channel-digging or beaver dam) changes the course of a river, we run again the river-creator function on the affected area to calculate how the new path of the river is.
I agree, anything smaller than 10km becomes rather impractical. You always have to give something up somewhere. Go too small with your tiles and your game map is the size of someone's back yard, and go too big and you lose all of the ecological resolution. Not to mention, you are also playing a give and take game with the volume of your calculations as well. If you want a big game map but tiny tiles, you have to give up a bit on the complexity of the system as a whole.

User avatar
David Buunk
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:46 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by David Buunk » Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:45 am

kukumarro wrote:
Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:30 pm
From the calculation I made at the beginning, the reasonable size for the edges of the hexagons would be in the order of 5 or 10km. Some people were already making assumptions for other mechanics considering tiles 10-100 times smaller, which means 100-10000 times more tiles and memory: completely impossible. We will see at the end, but if you need to make assumptions, i suggest you to go with 10km.
I too made such calculations, and concluded 10 km² was the way forward, good to find such agreement.

I really dislike the idea of rivers as edges, and would much prefer them going through the middle of tiles. If you put the rivers at the edges you get all sorts of problems with storing the info on them, and associating them with the tiles.
Programming SotE.

Strossi
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 3:56 pm

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by Strossi » Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:08 pm

Demiansky wrote:
Sat Jun 24, 2017 6:25 pm
Unfortunately, I think trying to faithfully represent a true globe or anything resembling it is definitely beaver with top hat at this point in game development. We already have the immense complexity of the systems slated to deal with, and going through the trouble of having a true globe for a world doesn't add much for the complexity of dealing with it (especially when you consider that we are, afterall, noob game developers). My impression is that once we become more experienced and have working prototypes, we're going to be sacking a lot of our old work because OMG-HOW-COULD-WE-HAVE-BEEN-SO-STUPID-TO-DO-IT-THAT-WAY?? At that point, we can revisit the concept of a proper globe.
Just make a cyclindrical world with equidistant latitudes.


On another note; are you modelling your worlds according to terran astronomical parameters.

Concretely, the 24,6* angle of the planetary axis to the solar plane (which is the reason why seasons change above the tropical regions). This means seasonal changes in climate patterns also.

Conversely, you can go simple with a 0* angle to the solar plane and have constant solar radiation values based on the latitude and no seasonal changes.

Another important parameter is the duration of the revolution around the Sun, which decides season lenght and severity.

Also, the distance to the Sun decides the average temperature of the planet.

Maybe these could be a parameters in the world generation =D.

User avatar
David Buunk
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:46 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by David Buunk » Fri Aug 25, 2017 6:44 pm

Strossi wrote:
Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:08 pm
Maybe these could be a parameters in the world generation =D.
This all sounds top-hat beaver to me. Getting a climate model and everything that follows right is difficult enough with earth as an example.
Programming SotE.

Strossi
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 3:56 pm

Re: Provinces: Layer on Layer action!

Post by Strossi » Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:23 pm

David Buunk wrote:
Fri Aug 25, 2017 6:44 pm
Strossi wrote:
Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:08 pm
Maybe these could be a parameters in the world generation =D.
This all sounds top-hat beaver to me. Getting a climate model and everything that follows right is difficult enough with earth as an example.
Ungrateful to say from the outside, but my opnion would be that astronomic factors would be simpler to implement than a dynamic geography based climate model?

The distance to the sun is pretty much a linear function in relation to temperature. Revolution around the sun is logarithmic function in regards to seasonal temperature amplitudes. Only the planetary axis tilt is complex with exponential effects on seasonal temperature variations.

Note, temperature is alpha and omega when it comes to climate and solar radiation is its n1 source for the planet (followed by geothermal by a long shot).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests