Re: [Rails-devel] Tile orientation display

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

To summarize: the developers think it's a good idea, but the "real users" (if I may say so) don't really see a need for it.  So I suppose I will end up resting my case.

Indeed implementation would be very easy. The hard work is in comparing all tiles of all games with the Rails standard and update the XML for any differences found.  I would certainly not start doing that all on my own! 

The display options could be like (showing the result for the below example case):
- Rails (default)   #23/O10/SW
- Game   #23/O10/NE
- Rails[Game]   #23/O10/SW[NE]
But, as said, if interest remains as low as it is, I'll drop it.

Last call.

Erik.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: brett lentz [mailto:bre...@gm...]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:37 PM
> To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] Tile orientation display
> 
> If it's as easy as specifying the starting rotation in the XML, that shouldn't be
> too cumbersome and appears to be a usability win (for users mapping the
> physical game to the digital game).
> 
> It sounds useful to me. :)
> 
> ---Brett.
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Erik Vos <eri...@xs...> wrote:
> > The currently ongoing discussion in the [18xx] group on how to
> > describe tile lays is also of interest for Rails.  I'm in particular
> > referring to cases where the Rails (TileDesigner) tile orientation
> > (i.e., the tile number
> > placement)  is different from the physical game. I just checked 1830
> > and 1856. The 1830 tile orientations are the same as in Rails (except
> > tile #65), whereas with 1856 there are many differences.
> >
> > Take tile #23 as an example. The 1856 orientation of this tile is
> > upside-down as compared with 1830 and Rails.  Now assume tile #9 has
> > been laid before on hex O10 (connecting SW-NE) and is upgraded to tile
> > #23 (adding a connection NW-NE).  Now the question is: how to display
> > this upgrade in the map window and the game report?
> >
> > The Rails tile has the number as in 1830, on the SW side in this case,
> > so the upgrade is now coded as #23/O10/SW.  However, the physical tile
> > would have its number on the NE side, so in an FTF game the upgrade
> > would be denoted as #23/O10/NE.
> >
> > My question is: what do we prefer?
> >
> > I am thinking on adding an optional attribute to <Tile> in TileSet.xml
> > that specifies the 'base rotation' of the physical tile as compared
> > with the Rails tile (or vice versa). This 'base rotation' would then
> > be added (or
> > subtracted) to the internal value to calculate the displayed tile
> > orientation.
> >
> > So, to make the laid tile in this example be described as #23/O10/NE
> > we should add an attribute like 'baseRotation="3"'.
> >
> > Any need for this feature? Should it  be an option?
> >
> > Erik.
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------- AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community
> > by Eric Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on "Lean
> > Startup Secrets Revealed." This video shows you how to validate your
> > ideas, optimize your ideas and identify your business strategy.
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community by Eric
> Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on "Lean Startup Secrets
> Revealed." This video shows you how to validate your ideas, optimize your
> ideas and identify your business strategy.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel