Holy Cow you got Trip on board?

Dude. DUDE. Trip, mad <3, if only you had been here to pre-empt the whole squares instead of hexes thing. Looking forward to seeing you in action professionally again!

 

Kael was a big addition, especially with his business software background, but I'm mad pleased to see someone coming from the other end jumping aboard. 

That said, apparently Brad is a worse poacher than the MLB. Next it'll be batters from Cuba and perhaps even a certain green gent from the Red Sox. 

29,268 views 27 replies
Reply #1 Top

sorry for sounding ignorant... but who is trip?

Reply #2 Top

Quoting IBNobody, reply 1
sorry for sounding ignorant... but who is trip?

 

Jon schafer

Reply #3 Top

if only you had been here to pre-empt the whole squares instead of hexes thing.
Stop the crap.

:rolleyes:

Also one unit per tile?

Maybe turn the game into "a whole bunch of your favourite game mechanics"?

Reply #4 Top

Quoting Wintersong, reply 3

quoting postif only you had been here to pre-empt the whole squares instead of hexes thing.
Stop the crap.


Also one unit per tile?

Maybe turn the game into "a whole bunch of your favourite game mechanics"?
Honestly, for a game with no tactical battles, hexes and one unit per tile is really the best way to get actual tactics happening. Elemental has tactical battles, though, so we need not delve into that sort of thing.

Reply #5 Top

Elemental has proper tactical battle 'screen' (or you can call it 'window') unlike in CiV series where Sid himself rejected such idea.

 

....More thinking of it, the reason why Civ5 is in such mess is that it does not have proper tactical battle system thanks to Sid (as Sulla pointed out, with 1up system the whole game had to be dumbed down.)

Reply #6 Top


Dude. DUDE. Trip, mad , if only you had been here to pre-empt the whole squares instead of hexes thing. Looking forward to seeing you in action professionally again!

 

Kael was a big addition, especially with his business software background, but I'm mad pleased to see someone coming from the other end jumping aboard. 

That said, apparently Brad is a worse poacher than the MLB. Next it'll be batters from Cuba and perhaps even a certain green gent from the Red Sox. 

Humbled by your kind words, sir. Will do my best to fulfill your expectations.

Jon

 

+1 Loading…
Reply #7 Top

The third hired guy is Derek Smart !

 

*runs before Plymouth, MI burns to the ground, set on fire by the anrgy Elemental community.*

Reply #8 Top

I doubt Mr Smart is interested in leaving his air conditioned gaming fortress/warehouse just to make some games. 

Hexes are superior to squares, this is common knowledge. If you'd like to read the quadrillion bits of data on why, just do a google search. Hash is bad enough, rehash is even worse. Applies to Elemental, where all the tactical battle maps use squares, all the exploration uses squares, and everything is pretty much squared the f* up.

 

All you gotta do to impress me, Trip, is shoot purple lightning from your fingers while tap dancing your way through the entire Butthole Surfers discography. Oh, and if you could have the SDK out by Friday I'd be pretty much golden. Heck, I'd skip out on date night for that! DATE NIGHT!

As to expectations, I expect you to enjoy your new job. Hope the workload isn't hectic enough for that to be unpossible!

Reply #9 Top

Hexes are superior to squares, this is common knowledge.

Maybe in game design.   But as a coder, I would take squares over hexes any day.   Your map is a 2-D array.  It's not rocket science.  Adjacency is really easy to determine:   if abs(x[1]-x[2]) <= 1 and abs(y[1]-y[2]) <= 1 and (1 != 2), they're adjacent.  Pretty simple stuff.  And you're coding pathing and AI algorithms off of that.  There has to be a convincing reason why hexes are better for gameplay than squares--and if it's not there, please, code the squares.

Reply #10 Top

Quoting tetleytea, reply 9

Hexes are superior to squares, this is common knowledge.
Maybe in game design.   But as a coder, I would take squares over hexes any day.   Your map is a 2-D array.  It's not rocket science.  Adjacency is really easy to determine:   if abs(x[1]-x[2]) <= 1 and abs(y[1]-y[2]) <= 1 and (1 != 2), they're adjacent.  Pretty simple stuff.  And you're coding pathing and AI algorithms off of that.  There has to be a convincing reason why hexes are better for gameplay than squares--and if it's not there, please, code the squares.

 

You do realize that hexes are essentially rows of squares that are staggered? You can make a 2-d array out of it pretty simply.  Besides, hexes are much better for gameplay.

Reply #11 Top

No offense, but I and a number of other SD game owners I know are not happy about this.

Civ 5 was (in my own opinion and plenty of others) watered down to the point of embarrassment and effectively killed the Civ series for a lot of old time Civ fans.  Alot of us came to Stardock games since they are still one of the few studios making strategy games that require a bit of thought.

Civ 5 is by all appearances a big commercial success.  I pray to god that SD isn't adopting the same mindset that proved so "successful" for Civ 5.

 

Everything else aside, good luck Jon and I hope folks like me are wrong in our fear of this.

 

Reply #12 Top

Quoting dizzymonkey, reply 11
No offense, but I and a number of other SD game owners I know are not happy about this.

Civ 5 was (in my own opinion and plenty of others) watered down to the point of embarrassment and effectively killed the Civ series for a lot of old time Civ fans.  Alot of us came to Stardock games since they are still one of the few studios making strategy games that require a bit of thought.

Civ 5 is by all appearances a big commercial success.  I pray to god that SD isn't adopting the same mindset that proved so "successful" for Civ 5.

 

Everything else aside, good luck Jon and I hope folks like me are wrong in our fear of this.

 

 

I am quite sure that the idea for a "dumbed down" Civ game wasn't Jon Shafer's. That sounds more like a corporate idea to streamline the game and simplify it in order to make the game palatable for the mass market and casual gamers. 

Stardock is in a quite different situation than Firaxis thankfully.

Frankly, I'm not concerned at all. I think Jon Shafer will thrive here.

 

Reply #13 Top

I like Civ V, but I would recommend waiting until Civ V: Warlords and Civ V: Beyond the Sword. :D. Civ IV currently has a lot more gameplay options (spies, religions, corporations, hamlets/villages/towns, even though Civ V has a better 'framework', IMO.

As for hexes vs. squares, hexes are superior for calculating range, and cost of diagonal movement. Also it lends itself a little better to surround mechanics. As a programmer it's a bit more overhead using a hex map, but while you'll spend a few days more making the mechanics work flawlessly, that should not enter into the calculations on how to do it unless it's a very basic game.

However, if you've tried designing a game map for hexes, anything building like becomes a pain. Buildings are almost allways made of square or rectangular shapes, and fitting them on a hex map is like trying to bludgeon a square peg into a hexagonal hole. As such, this is not a problem in civ 5, but in many, many cases it IS a problem, so I wouldn't say it's true in all cases.

 As for elemental, yes, the cities are based on a square system, and it makes a lot more sense for the city building bit. (Buildings do tend to be square-ish.).

For my part, I'm happy to see Jon Schaefer join the community.

Reply #14 Top

Quoting Thormodr, reply 12

I am quite sure that the idea for a "dumbed down" Civ game wasn't Jon Shafer's. That sounds more like a corporate idea to streamline the game and simplify it in order to make the game palatable for the mass market and casual gamers. 

Stardock is in a quite different situation than Firaxis thankfully.

Frankly, I'm not concerned at all. I think Jon Shafer will thrive here.

 

Hard to say IMO.  Every studio operates differently and most don't talk openly about their internal process.  I am a software engineer myself and depending on the project often handle directly the architecture and major design choices.  At some places I had pretty complete control over the design and could be fairly held responsible for any / all faults in the design.  At some other places, I didn't have the same degree of control and was forced to sometimes do things I didn't wan't to do.

In the case of Civ 5, I never saw any explanation of how much control Jon actually had.  Most of the discussion regarding Civ 5 revolved around not even acknowledging the failings of the game or simply saying the series had moved on and for the old timers to "F" off in so many words.  As his role was never clearly explained (least before I gave up on it)I don't think any of those folks could be held to blame for assuming the lead designer is primarily responsible.  Tough spot I know as a employee basically can't come out and say "Yeah, I know this sucks but my boss made me do it".

If Jon didn't have control over the things they did to that game then I feel somewhat bad for him as I have been there.  Having been there though and looking back, I feel that when you are lead designer you must still take alot of the responsibility.  In my own personal cases, I failed to make my own case well enough or simply stand up against poor direction.  If you are lead designer then part of that is fighting for what you think / know is the right way and if you fail to do that you still hold a variable degree of blame for the result.

I respect FrogBoy but he definately f'ed up with Elemental and he knew it and had the integrity to admit it and even better fix it with 1.1 thus giving us the incredible game (IMO) that we have today.  For whatever reason Jon never addressed (or was never allowed to) the feedback on Civ 5 and I think that is what spawned his horned reputation.  Who knows, maybe Jon's next game will kick ass and we will all send him thank you cards and invite him over for dinner.

Ultimately, I don't buy a game because a person is or isn't involved in the project.  If the game is good I will buy it but the people involved will make me look much much closer at it and cause me to give it more or less of a chance if I am on the fence.

If Jon is here to work on GalCiv 3 then I hope he does a good job because I want me some GalCiv 3 since MOO long since took a dirt nap.

 

Reply #15 Top

You do realize that hexes are essentially rows of squares that are staggered?

Hex = 6 sides.   Square = 4 sides.  So no, I guess I don't.

Reply #16 Top

Quoting tetleytea, reply 15

You do realize that hexes are essentially rows of squares that are staggered?


Hex = 6 sides.   Square = 4 sides.  So no, I guess I don't.

go back and have a look at the grid system in Atlantis that did a hex grid in a standard XY coordintes.  Topologically equivalent for pathfinding, the number of sides is just the graphics.

Reply #17 Top

I see Brad as more of a Frank Wren Braves type then doing the Sox/Yankees open checkbook.


Getting Kael is like getting Dan Uggla for an overhyped though lovable modern Jose Oquendo and a disposable LOOGY.

 

 

Reply #18 Top

go back and have a look at the grid system in Atlantis that did a hex grid in a standard XY coordintes.  Topologically equivalent for pathfinding, the number of sides is just the graphics.

Really?   So...when you chose to move from hex to hex in the Atlantis grid, did you have 4 adjacent hexes to choose from or 8?  Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that one.   You may be able to represent a hex grid in a 2-D array--just not a 2-D array of squares.

 

Reply #19 Top

A hex grid is totally possible with squares. It is just a normal grid with column of squares offset from the previous column so that the edges of the squares line up with the middle of the adjancent square, rather than the edge. Probably not explained well, but hey-ho. Shows that an opinion can be wrong though...

Reply #20 Top

Quoting Werewindlefr, reply 7
The third hired guy is Derek Smart !

 

*runs before Plymouth, MI burns to the ground, set on fire by the anrgy Elemental community.*

LOL!

Reply #21 Top

Quoting Alstein, reply 17
I see Brad as more of a Frank Wren Braves type then doing the Sox/Yankees open checkbook.  Getting Kael is like getting Dan Uggla for an overhyped though lovable modern Jose Oquendo and a disposable LOOGY.

I had to have Jon translate this for me since I don't know anything about baseball.  But we still aren't sure if this is a compliment or an insult.

Reply #22 Top

I think its meant as a compliment...  but as an Uggla detractor I would take it as an insult ;) 

Reply #23 Top

Quoting tetleytea, reply 18

Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that one.   You may be able to represent a hex grid in a 2-D array--just not a 2-D array of squares.
 

 

Sure you can.  You stagger every other row (or column if you want the other grain as shown in this image) by half a square.  War games have been doing this on the computer for decades.

Reply #24 Top

Quoting TheRealWarpstorm, reply 23

Quoting tetleytea, reply 18
Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that one.   You may be able to represent a hex grid in a 2-D array--just not a 2-D array of squares.
 
 

Sure you can.  You stagger every other row (or column if you want the other grain as shown in this image) by half a square.  War games have been doing this on the computer for decades.

It's not that bad from a coding perspective either, you can represent hexes as a 2d array, it's just an array where only half the diagonals are considered adjacent.

So in a 4-direction square grid, (1,1) is adjacent to:

{ (0,1), (1,0), (1,2), (2,1) }

If it's an 8-direction grid, i.e. squares with diagonal movement allowed, you get the above points plus the diagonals:

{ (0,0), (0,1), (0,2), (1,0), (1,2), (2,0), (2,1), (2,2) }

A "hex" or 6-direction grid is just one where you allow half the diagonals - you can go up+right, or down+left, but not down+right or up+left for example:

{ (0,0), (0,1), (1,0), (1,2), (2,1), (2,2) }

Visually you can think of this as a square grid with half the diagonals drawn in, only the ones that go up+right i.e. positive slope (closest to the way the code actually deals with it), or a hex grid or an offset square grid as above (which make more sense visually to a human, but are functionally identical). I wish I could draw a pretty picture like Warpstorm did, but I'm bored at work with nothing except ms paint to work with.

As far as actual code, it does add a few extra checks, but it's not too horrible. Say you've got a "tile" class that includes, among other things, int x and int y variables to describe its position on this hypothetical grid. Now you want to add a testAdjacency method to your class that, provided a second tile t, returns a boolean telling you if the two are adjacent. Note I left out a check to make sure the two tiles aren't identical (I'm sure you can imagine how that works, it'd be the same in each case anyway), and the xdif/ydif variables aren't strictly necessary but just to improve readability.

8-direction method, the easiest actually:

boolean testAdjacency( tile t )
{
int xdif = t.x - this.x;
int ydif = t.y - this.y;
if( math.abs( xdif ) <= 1 && math.abs( ydif ) <= 1 )
    return true;
return false;
}

4-direction method, a little more complicated:

boolean testAdjacency( tile t )
{
int xdif = t.x - this.x;
int ydif = t.y - this.y;
if( ydif == 0 && math.abs( xdif ) <= 1 )
    return true; //adjacent if t is right or left of this tile
if( xdif == 0 && math.abs( ydif ) <= 1 )
    return true; //adjacent if t is up or down from this tile
return false;
}

And 6-direction i.e. hex method (this uses the up+right or down+left convention above, you could just as easily do it the other way):

boolean testAdjacency( tile t )
{
int xdif = t.x - this.x;
int ydif = t.y - this.y;
if( xdif <= 1 && xdif >= 0 && ydif <= 1 && ydif >= 0 )
    return true; //adjacent if t is right, up, or up+right from this tile
if( xdif >= -1 && xdif <= 0 && ydif >= -1 && ydif <= 0 )
    return true; //adjacent if t is left, down, or down+left from this tile
return false;
}

Apologize for shameless thread derailing. I like hexes.

Edit: bugfixing! gah.

Reply #25 Top

[quote = tetleytea]Hex = 6 sides.   Square = 4 sides.  So no, I guess I don't.[/quote]

Hexes have six sides, squares have eight. Angles are treated as sides for connectivity purposes.

 

I wonder how many other people discovered a sudden illness when they woke up to snow? Watching it fall in the LES, NYC, and thinking today might be a good day for some patched up Elemental. 

Side note, I hope Trip finds a chance to pop out a blog or two on what he'll be up to at SD. Other than adding in the unholiest of unholies, python. Ok, it's not that bad, but dear lord I hate whitespace delimited stuff.