Should all tilesets be the same?

[titi]

There are some differences in the current tilesets up to now:

in my opinion "normal" are:
Forest, Evergreen, Autumn, Mediterran, (New) Winter , desert2, jungle , hell  are all the same

Some kind of unusual are the following:
In Winter_forest the water object ( reed and so on,which is ice in winter_forest ) is not walkable !

Dark_forest, scrubland:
Custom 1 Object is walkable! ( Custom 1 is something like Tree/DeadTrees/Ilivetree/DeadPalm... )

[wciow]

Well I voted to keep all tilesets using the standard Glest convention.

However if you are making a whole mod rather than just a tileset then having a custom tileset for your mod is okay. 

[titi]

Well the problem is what is the glest standard? The three tilesets that come with original glest have different ones ( Forest/Winter_Forest/Dark_Forest )
But I think everyone played Forest first. Dark_Forest hits the market too late because everyone was using my evergreen tileset when it was released.

All my tilesets behave like the Forest tileset and I think this is the standard now .

I already started to "fix" Scrubland and Dark_Forest and I think I will fix Winter_Forest too

[John.d.h]

I think it's fine for different tilesets to work differently, and probably a good thing because it can change the way the game plays.  If they all play exactly the same, then the only thing that's different is the appearance, and what's the point of that?  Of course the obvious issue is that a map that works fine with one tileset might not work so well with another, but this seems like it would be rare.

[modman]

I would rather that the tilesets be all the same, so that each map can be tileset independent.

An alternate solution would be to somehow specify in the *.gbm file which tilesets the map works with.  But this can be a pain in the arse if you don't actually have the required tileset.

[ElimiNator]

Yes, I think they should be pretty much the same. Not all the modles of course though.

[Trappin]

Should all tilesets be the same?

Standardize the object list for walkable true/false compatibility - all generic tilesets should conform to a single format. The water object for the Winter_forest tileset (ice rock) walkable <false> but this object is normally walkable <true>. This creates problems for lots of maps and I've modified at least five maps because of this one non-conforming object.

The walkable object in scrubland is also problematic - map designers use object 1 to block or force units to choke-points or into pathing lanes.

Tropical tileset lacks a proper invisible blocking object.

      <object walkable="false">
         <model path="models/bamboo.g3d"/>  

The bamboo model creates a visible object in the slot dedicated to single cell/tile invisible blocking objects.

[jda]

Well I voted to keep all tilesets using the standard Glest convention.

However if you are making a whole mod rather than just a tileset then having a custom tileset for your mod is okay. 

Here is exactly the same, including the vote!

Trappin kind of lost me with his knowledge but for what I've seen of him on the subject, I'm pretty sure he's right! LOL

[Trappin]

Generic refers to tilesets which are not tied to a special function. The following list qualify as generic

• Generic Tilesets

    * 1.1 Autumn
    * 1.2 Desert
    * 1.3 Evergreen
    * 1.4 Freek Forest
    * 1.5 Dante's Inferno(Hell)
    * 1.6 Imladris
    * 1.7 Jungle
    * 1.8 Mediterranean
    * 1.9 Pine Woods
    * 1.10 New Winter
    * 1.11 Scrub Land
    * 1.12 Swamp
    * 1.13 Tropical
    * 1.14 Tileset

•  Functional tilesets still under development - beta

    * 2.1 Moon
    * 2.2 Volcanic

From the GlestMap wikia:

• Surface: When the surface radio button is selected, users can edit map surface type(s). Surface texture types vary between individual tilesets, but the default settings are:

    * Surface: 1 - grass
    * Surface: 2 - secondary grass
    * Surface: 3 - road
    * Surface: 4 - stone
    * Surface: 5 - undefined tit has upgraded surface5 textures for all megapack tilesets

• Object: When the object radio button is selected, users can place objects on the map cells. Objects depend on the tileset, but the default settings are:

    * Object: 0 - undefined
    * Object: 1 - tree walkable(false) - wood resource type
    * Object: 2 - dead tree/stump walkable(false)
    * Object: 3 - stones walkable(false)
    * Object: 4 - bush walkable(true)
    * Object: 5 - water object walkable(true)
    * Object: 6 - Custom1 - dead/big tree walkable(false)
    * Object: 7 - Custom2 - hanged/impaled walkable(false)
    * Object: 8 - Custom3 - statues obelisk/technician/broken walkable(false)
    * Object: 9 - Custom4 - mossy rock walkable(false)
    * Object: 10 -Custom5 - invisible object walkable(false)

• Resource: When the resource radio button is selected, users can place resources on a map cell. Resource types depend on the tech tree selected, but the default settings are:

    * Custom: 0 - none
    * Custom: 1 - gold walkable(false)
    * Custom: 2 - stone walkable(false)
    * Custom: 3 - undefined
    * Custom: 4 - undefined
    * Custom: 5 - undefined

[titi]

Thanks Trappin,
I should use your strings for the megaglest editor!

By the way, custom5 is already available in all tilesets in megaglest 3.2.3 ( for example in archmages install packages ).

[Trappin]

I should use your strings for the megaglest editor!

megaglest map editor? Please explain... heh.

Martino wrote the map editor guidelines - I just changed how the descriptions are presented/formatted..

[titi]

I just changed the strings in the menu of the megaglest Editor a bit. There are information like "walkable/harvestable" now.
If I can do it, I also want to put the corresponding color into the menu so you know which color is what.

[Trappin]

From the wiki:

    * Surface: When the surface radio button is selected, users can edit map surface type(s). Surface texture types vary between individual tilesets, but the default settings are:

    * Surface: 1 - grass
    * Surface: 2 - secondary grass
    * Surface: 3 - road
    * Surface: 4 - stone
    * Surface: 5 - undefined

Since titi has added Surface 5 to a number of tilesets we now need to name the surface slot- any suggestions?

[titi]

simply ground ?

[John.d.h]

Since surface 5 seems to vary so much and means something different for each tileset, maybe it should be called "special ground"?

[ElimiNator]

No I think it should be sand.

[Trappin]

Sand textures are in the road surface texture radio button slot.

Most of the older tilesets already have STC5 textures but they look terrible OR integrate poorly with other surface textures within the same tileset.

ground
special ground
secondary ground

[modman]

Did I miss something?  Is there a new, better map editor?

[wciow]

If you D/L any of the new MegaGlest packages they come with new builds of the mapper and g3d veiwer.

[Omega]

I'm all for keeping the conventions. For example, in military, all tilesets are modified to fit that convention (that's only winter2 (called simply winter) and dark forest). You can always use them. Commented XMLs too!