RE: spherical maps (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

coregames -> RE: spherical maps (5/3/2005 7:28:12 AM)

Highway to the Reich doesn't use a global spherical map does it? On a two-dimensional map, discrete location is much easier to keep track of without the use of "spaces". I understand about great circles and pathfinding, but it's not as simple as vector addition, since the geometry is non-euclidean (a vector cannot be extended indefinitely, and curvature comes into play). Of course, area movement compensates for this by an unusually huge Greenland on the Risk map... but hexes or a triangular grid projected onto an icosahedron are more accurate if polar distortion is to be avoided. I'm certain even HttR uses a grid of some kind, even if the increment is smaller than the units themselves, otherwise how could you ever calculate range? With a sphere, there is simply no way to map a square grid onto it without gross distortion, as in latitude and longitude. Some kind of discrete location must be available, no matter how small, and the best grid fit to reduce overall distortion is the icosahedral hex-based map.



coregames -> Earth at 250 miles per hex (5/4/2005 1:26:49 PM)

This scale is pretty generalized... It Makes the Adriatic less than a hex wide for instance. A global scope game may be able to utilize this with the right rules, but I still think the above-mentioned 10-mile-per-hex breakdown scale would be useful for assembling fronts to allow tactical finesse.


[image]local://upfiles/13587/A9260CAD21C44C1FBA81857EA11647F0.jpg[/image]



coregames -> RE: Earth at 250 miles per hex (5/6/2005 9:21:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames

I still think the above-mentioned 10-mile-per-hex breakdown scale would be useful for assembling fronts to allow tactical finesse.



As an example, imagine playing the game during a WWII scenario... most of the world is being handled at 250 mph scale when, in May of 1944, the Allies call for tactical maps of the north coast of France. In response, the German player calls for tactical maps of southern England, so air units have to count full range from their air bases. The corresponding 250 mile hexes from the strategic map would be assembled into a front, allowing smaller scale of units and time, as well as more hands-on management of operations in that theatre. The map of that theatre might resemble this if the scale were 12.5 miles per hex:




[image]local://upfiles/13587/E0324FE90B1A4FE69AB9845B1AEAC7C1.jpg[/image]

and then, at 10 mph for comparison:

[image]local://upfiles/13587/B04F2B46C34B4E03867E434B040B1B50.jpg[/image]



coregames -> RE: spherical maps (5/8/2005 2:26:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raverdave

Why the hell do you guys from the north insist on always showing Australia on the bottom of the map?[:-]


Raverdave, Rowland (and Pinder, God rest his soul) are from Australia, and they placed your country down under as well! Not that I wouldn't love to live there...



pasternakski -> RE: spherical maps (5/8/2005 3:10:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raverdave

Why the hell do you guys from the north insist on always showing Australia on the bottom of the map?[:-]

Better?


[image]local://upfiles/6977/C4C623B9F89E4BEE8313A784126B8508.jpg[/image]



coregames -> RE: spherical maps (5/8/2005 5:26:01 PM)

I never noticed before how much the Earth looks like a surrealistic smiley face! And Indonesia is the Charlie Chaplin mustache...



coregames -> invasion: earth (5/16/2005 12:20:58 PM)

I mentioned GDW's 1981 award-winning sci-fi game Invasion: Earth, set in their Traveller future history, earlier in this thread. The map is at 1140 km per hex, definitely grand strategic, but the idea was very much in keeping with the content discussed here. Obviously, computers could handle a much finer scale for such a map.


[image]local://upfiles/13587/95350F1B7ABA42A2B115EDA62A63D38B.jpg[/image]



rhondabrwn -> RE: invasion: earth (5/16/2005 3:41:41 PM)

Hmm... I had lots of Traveler stuff,never picked that one up. Very interesting concept for the time and, as you state, very much in keeping with this thread's topic.

GDW always did have some interesting concepts for sci-fi game. Do you remember "Double Star" where the planetary systems orbited the two suns so that you had to anticipate that movement when trying to attack an enemy planet? The game was kinda of "ho hum" but the concept was cool.



coregames -> RE: invasion: earth (5/17/2005 10:35:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn
Do you remember "Double Star" where the planetary systems orbited the two suns so that you had to anticipate that movement when trying to attack an enemy planet?


I never played Double Star, but I enjoy creative mechanics for games. Planning ahead to catch a planet at the right place in its orbit must be a fun challenge.

One of the interesting things about Invasion: Earth was the way they handled the situation in space around the planet. One box denoted close orbit, another, far orbit (with a space to denote the moon in it), etc... all the way to an outsystem box. It seems to me the game would have benefited from an orbital mechanic to handle where the moon was at a given moment in time, rather than simply using an abstract unmoving box.

In a computer game such as we are discussing in this thread, the surface of the moon can include its own icosahedral hex/triangle map, to differential between various moonbases and installations. Of course, orbital mechanics are fairly easy to simulate with a computer.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.015625