Page 1 of 1
map design mod
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 8:09 pm
by Anendrue
Hey modders does anyone think they can stitch this type of map together. Noitce it is all hexes and an occasional pentagon to bring them all together. I wonder if MWiF product 2 could have a complete world map like this. Just spin it around similiar to google maps and zoom on in.
RE: map design mod
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:52 pm
by Neilster
I suggested this in 2004. I think it would facilitate Cold War stuff too (bombers over the poles, Boomers etc)
There has been plenty of discussion about it....
tm.asp?m=2028085
Cheers, Neilster
RE: map design mod
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:14 pm
by marcuswatney
The depiction at the top of this thread is not quite correct (too many hexagons). The attempt to map a sphere onto flat faces is achieved most elegantly by copying buckminsterfullerene C60. The rule is that each hexagon borders three hexagons and three pentagons; that is to say, each pentagon is two faces from another pentagon.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C60
For an everyday image of buckminsterfullerene C60, just look at a football with its black pentagons. It is the most stable and therefore 'natural' way of arranging sixty atoms of carbon into a single (remarkably flexible) molecule.
RE: map design mod
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:39 pm
by Neilster
ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
The depiction at the top of this thread is not quite correct (too many hexagons). The attempt to map a sphere onto flat faces is achieved most elegantly by copying buckminsterfullerene C60. The rule is that each hexagon borders three hexagons and three pentagons; that is to say, each pentagon is two faces from another pentagon.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C60
For an everyday image of buckminsterfullerene C60, just look at a football with its black pentagons. It is the most stable and therefore 'natural' way of arranging sixty atoms of carbon into a single (remarkably flexible) molecule.
Pentagons are incompatible with WiF.
Cheers, Neilster
RE: map design mod
Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 12:37 pm
by Anendrue
ORIGINAL: Neilster
ORIGINAL: marcuswatney
The depiction at the top of this thread is not quite correct (too many hexagons). The attempt to map a sphere onto flat faces is achieved most elegantly by copying buckminsterfullerene C60. The rule is that each hexagon borders three hexagons and three pentagons; that is to say, each pentagon is two faces from another pentagon.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C60
For an everyday image of buckminsterfullerene C60, just look at a football with its black pentagons. It is the most stable and therefore 'natural' way of arranging sixty atoms of carbon into a single (remarkably flexible) molecule.
Pentagons are incompatible with WiF.
Cheers, Neilster
Technically yes, it is incompatiable but with a few movement rules adjustments it seems like it would work quite well. Oh well, maybe in MWiF3.
RE: map design mod
Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 7:45 am
by Skanvak
I don't see why pentagon won't be compatible with Wif? If the pentagon are about the same size as the hexagon, I don't really see the problem. ok, you get some hex that can only be attack by 5 instead of six side, is it really a problem?
There are other projection (like the one using triangle as in WitP) that allow to keep a fully hexagonal spherical map. Which I think is really a must and in the logic of all the expansion of Wif.
RE: map design mod
Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 4:13 pm
by Shannon V. OKeets
ORIGINAL: Skanvak
I don't see why pentagon won't be compatible with Wif? If the pentagon are about the same size as the hexagon, I don't really see the problem. ok, you get some hex that can only be attack by 5 instead of six side, is it really a problem?
There are other projection (like the one using triangle as in WitP) that allow to keep a fully hexagonal spherical map. Which I think is really a must and in the logic of all the expansion of Wif.
Pentagons do not form a complete tesselation on a flat surface. Cut out 4 and you can prove this yourself.
RE: map design mod
Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 5:13 am
by paulderynck
I think the idea would be to have large areas composed of hexagons but the areas would be pentagon and hexagon shaped. Like covering an orange in tiny hexagons and then peeling it. The problem is where the borders meet. If the majority could fall into sea areas, it might work. Pseudocylindrical might be easier and give almost a good a result, again trying to get all the borders where gaps open up to fall into the sea. Like this...
RE: map design mod
Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:31 am
by Skanvak
Ok, so using pentagon will mean that we need a 3D map (which is out of question for the time being). I though of a question of rules not a technical limitation, my bad.
I think that the triangular (big area) system used in WitP is the best for 2D Wargame. I really like to see it in WiF because I remind how I find the cylindrycal projection of civilization have deceived me (m'a déçu) when fighting near the pole.
RE: map design mod
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 4:13 am
by Skanvak
I have just have an idea for a spherical map easy to do : replace hexagon with squares. If the row not aligned (look at map of Great war at sea or the spherical map of Wif sea lane, so actually it is already done) it work like hexagon : each square has 6 adjacents squares but they will nicely be translated to a spherical surface!
The solution was already done and we have not seen it.
RE: map design mod
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:39 am
by Anendrue
Perhaps a zoom level of zero that just lets you turn a spherical map of the world like Civ 4 or google maps. You could grab and turn the globe to a new focal point. Then when you zoom in it could switch to the flat map centered on that same focal point. Oh well just dreaming.... By the way Civ5 has switched to hexagons. So maybe we will see a true version of a buckminster ball in action this fall.