But still using tiles? (or, large pixels, if you wanna compare it with paintArathorn wrote:What I was thinking of is more the pencil tool in paint (one you're probably quite familiar with). My idea is simply drawing the track on the 3d map.
![Tongue 2 :tongue:](./images/smilies/tongue2.gif)
Moderator: Transport Empire Moderators
But still using tiles? (or, large pixels, if you wanna compare it with paintArathorn wrote:What I was thinking of is more the pencil tool in paint (one you're probably quite familiar with). My idea is simply drawing the track on the 3d map.
Tiles yes, but (semi-)fluent tracks. See the attachment. The engine will make the wacky line fluent if it's smart enough.Purno wrote:But still using tiles? (or, large pixels, if you wanna compare it with paintArathorn wrote:What I was thinking of is more the pencil tool in paint (one you're probably quite familiar with). My idea is simply drawing the track on the 3d map.
)
Yes, that's true.Purno wrote:DominionSpy, very interesting idea. Tho you'd probably want several curve radiusses in case peeps want to build double track, or for speed-limit gameplay (smaller curves got lower speed limit).
(from the (current) end of this thread.)Zuu wrote:Minutes for the FRD special meeting of Mars 12, 2005 wrote:Code: Select all
* VOTE: freedom or cell-based? A) True freedom: track endpoints can be placed anywhere B) Cell based: a limited set of track pieces are available, which can be placed on the cells of the map. C) "In between", as freedom, but the endpoints snap to a grid that is smaller or equal to the grid of the map. RESULT: a: 0 b: 0 c: 5 * A long discussion about where to snap points will be located followed. * But we couldn't came to a decision, so we decided to postpone the decision until the coding phase.
Nopes, no such a poll. Such things is decided upon in the meetings. No multiple-choice there.M4rek wrote:thats probably because the poll had only triangular or square tiles to choose from
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests