This is the mail archive of the
xconq7@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Xconq project.
Re: Coatings
- From: Elijah Meeks <elijahmeeks at yahoo dot com>
- To: Lincoln Peters <sampln at sbcglobal dot net>, Eric McDonald <mcdonald at phy dot cmich dot edu>
- Cc: Xconq list <xconq7 at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: Coatings
> Interesting. However, I wanted to be able to track
> vegetation
> separately from physical topography, since I suspect
> that the data from
> the GIS would contain so many different combinations
> of those two
> properties (as well as others) that implementing
> each combination as a
> separate cell terrain type would be even more work.
I think that making the coating system work better
would prove advantageous in the long run. Certain
unit actions, like clearing or irrigating terrain,
would make more sense and therefore be easier to
program if the action more resembles the actual,
physical act (i.e. removing the 'deciduous-forest'
coating instead of changing the terrain from
'deciduous-forest' to 'plains').
The first major change I'd recommend for coating,
though, is that it accept real images, and not the
(ugly) transparent effect it has now. It would look
about ten thousand times better.
And in regard to napoleon.g, it seemed like the
problem was with some unit images and not the weather
code. Well, unit images and the incredibly ugly cloud
effect that XConq uses... Okay, I admit it, I'm a
graphics snob.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail