Tiled Building

[Lava Croft]

The keybind is needed to disable any kind of snapping that is being done, because if you force buildings to snap to other buildings you basically are back at Odin's idea for grid-confined buildings.

[player1]

Thank you. I see what you mean.

[David]

Code Select Expand


+----+
|  A |+----+
|    ||  B |
+----+|    |
      +----+

     <--- Builder stood here.


Should building B snap up to be in-line with A?  If it does it allows that perfect alignment, but would screw you.   Thus a toggle bind is needed.  And the whole scroll wheel to change range thing would help too.

[Lava Croft]

Over-adding functionality in the form of mousewheel controlled range of the snapping is a really bad idea that will just overly complicate things.

Oh, and it will break my builder binds.

[==Troy==]

3 methods of snapping :

1) Snap to the last green position if the current one is red.

2) Snap to the last green position, align rotation to the current obstruction. and snap the position to the obstruction

3) Snap to the last green position, align rotation and position to the centre of current obstruction. and snap the position to the obstruction



Id go for the first.

[David]

4) Snap to the last green position, align rotation and position to the [near|far] edge of current obstruction.
Also, aligning the rotation doesn't matter, as all buildings are square anyway.

And the changing the distance thing doesn't have to be the mouse wheel, you could put it anywhere.  I would probably have it while I hold some button.

[Lava Croft]

@Troy: The first type of snapping sounds the 'easiest' all around.

@David: That does not combat the fact that it's a case of too much functionality. If people are in need of an extra button to set the distance of the snapping, maybe the initial snapping code just needs to be better.
[EDIT] Just to be sure, you want the obvious added control to turn snapping off alltogether, and an added control to set the range of the snapping, right?

[David]

Its not too much functionality, just ignore it and it will work like v1 / like now / whatever.
More flexibility is, IMO, never a bad thing, as long as it can be disabled.

[Lava Croft]

Well, I guess I'm going a bit off-topic here, but adding an extra control is the cheap way of solving a problem that should be solved in a much more graceful way. Now people have to bind 2(?) additional keys, just for the 'snapped' building. Tremulous is an FPS-game, not a flight simulator. Look for example at something completely different, namely DOOM3 and it's way of handling computer screens and what not. No extra controls required, only a lot of extra coding. That's the way a situation like this should be solved in my view, instead of going down the obvious 'let's add another control' route.

[Odin]

I don't see why you would ever want to turn it off.

[Lava Croft]

I don't see why you would ever want to turn it off.

Player freedom of choice. Just like you can buy a Jetpack and a Flamer, if you desire. This freedom is what makes Tremulous such a neat game!

[David]

This freedom is what makes Tremulous such a neat game!

And yet you are arguing to remove a feature that adds more freedom.
And how does an extra control cause any problems?  You don't want it, you ignore it.  Its not like there's a limit.

[Lava Croft]

How is not adding a certain feature 'limiting freedom'? I'm just saying there are probably far more elegant solutions for this 'problem' than just blindly adding an extra control. And that I am a strong believer in as little controls as possible.
If you really do not see the simple math behind "extra controls=bad", then I will stop using this thread for trying to convince you. Let's just see what comes out of the person who is actually going to code this all.

[David]

Extra unneeded controls are bad.  Removing functionality is worse.
If you don't want to talk about it, that's fine by me.

[Lava Croft]

If you don't want to talk about it, that's fine by me.

Not adding a certain functionality in the form of an added control is different from removing said functionality. You keep on saying I want to remove functionality, while all I am saying is that adding said functionality in the form of an added control is a bad solution.
If you really, really want to keep on talking about this, just start a new thread!

[Odin]

Fine give users an option to have it set as a bind, or on all the time. That way, the one Lava Croft out there can have his bind, and the rest of us can enjoy the extra feature at no cost to us.

[dan003400]

i don't like the tiled building other than the glow range, the rest of this idea will just mess up gameplay, although it could be used to make a completely separate rts q3 mod that would be fun