Juju Posted November 6, 2001 Share Posted November 6, 2001 Hi Guess you all (well, some) remember the pleas for buildings 'needing' to have a 3D rubble tile, instead of the flat thingy we have now. Now, I don't know the first thing about coding and stuff, but I'd like to suggest this: Whenever a building collapses wouldn't it be possible to change the entire building graphic/properties set into another graphic/properties set? What I mean is you could have two graphic sets for each building. One intact and one collapsed set. The idea would be that the properties of a building tile would be swapped with a 'rubble' tile (Thus eliminating roof, second floors and changing the cover/LOS properties of that tile) upon collapsing. Too wild? Or maybe just possible? I've tried toying with it a bit with paint, to see what a collapsed building might look like. Apart from the roof and the fact that one can only view no more than two sides of a building (meaning it's not transparant) it has possibilities. Here's a pic of an extremely basic try. For fun: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanks a Lot Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Juju: Hi Guess you all (well, some) remember the pleas for buildings 'needing' to have a 3D rubble tile, instead of the flat thingy we have now. Now, I don't know the first thing about coding and stuff, but I'd like to suggest this: Whenever a building collapses wouldn't it be possible to change the entire building graphic/properties set into another graphic/properties set? What I mean is you could have two graphic sets for each building. One intact and one collapsed set. The idea would be that the properties of a building tile would be swapped with a 'rubble' tile (Thus eliminating roof, second floors and changing the cover/LOS properties of that tile) upon collapsing. Too wild? Or maybe just possible? I've tried toying with it a bit with paint, to see what a collapsed building might look like. Apart from the roof and the fact that one can only view no more than two sides of a building (meaning it's not transparant) it has possibilities. Here's a pic of an extremely basic try. For fun: <hr></blockquote> What have you done to my buildings? Actually that is a good idea. I hope there is more flexibility with buildings in CMBB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted November 7, 2001 Author Share Posted November 7, 2001 Ah, yes, sorry. That was cruel of me. I intended to mention I was sorry for messing up your work. With a little luck you may be busting them up yourself in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 I believe Charles said this would have to wait for the engine rewrite. Said something about assigning damage states for individual walls isn't possible in the current system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted November 7, 2001 Author Share Posted November 7, 2001 Oh, but I'm not talking individual walls, I'm talking complete buildings. Wouldn't that be different? Like I said, I'm a complete dope when it comes to coding and game design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullethead Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 panzerwerfer42 said: <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>I believe Charles said this would have to wait for the engine rewrite. Said something about assigning damage states for individual walls isn't possible in the current system.<hr></blockquote> I don't think he needs to go that far. I'd be happy with something much simpler. We already have an acceptable, if abstract, system for destroying buildings. And the resulting flat patch of rubble still provides cover, concealment, and LOS degradation over it. I say keep all that the way it is. The only change would be that instead of using the flat rubble graphic, replace a destroyed building with a 3D building "wreck" like those in the pictures above. All game effects would be the same as now, it would just be eye candy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 That doesn't too hard to this person who knows nothing of programming. It would at least look better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted November 7, 2001 Author Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Bullethead: I say keep all that the way it is. The only change would be that instead of using the flat rubble graphic, replace a destroyed building with a 3D building "wreck" like those in the pictures above. All game effects would be the same as now, it would just be eye candy.<hr></blockquote> Thanks Bullethead. That was, in essence, what I wanted to say. It's for the eyecandy. But I wouldn't call it 'just' eyecandy. I believe it would add another level of immersion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts