Should the map author define the Camera height?

[titi]

With the upcoming cliff maps there are more requirements regarding the camera height. Heigher cliffs means heigher terrain too, so the normal camera height is maybe not enough. But how to solve this problem?

Currently I have put in an automatic height calculation based on the highest hill in the map. But maybe its not reachable because its blocked with rocks and its not meant to navigate into it. Thats something only the mapper knows...

Thats why I got the idea to do the following:
1- the mapper specifies the max height of his map. Is it not set the automated calculation is used.
2- in a second step its maybe possible to disallow/block camera placement on hills which are higher or nearly as high as the camera height itself.

What do you think about these thoughts?

[will]

how about setting the height to the highest tile currently in-view, with nice quaternion animation when scrolling around?

Anything less will never please everyone

[titi]

I also thought about that, but I think people will get thick with all this up and down. So I skipped this idea.
( Something like a smoothed curve will be needed for flying units ... )

[will]

I also thought about that, but I think people will get thick with all this up and down. So I skipped this idea.
( Something like a smoothed curve will be needed for flying units ... )

yeah, I meant by "nice quaternion animation" that any change in viewing angle/altitude would be nicely smoothly animated rather than jerky or instant

[Coldfusionstorm]

a big _NO_ to automatic height adjustment CnC3 had this if you dindt specify the map height youself, and if you had lots of clifs, this would turn into one bumpy ride.

Im all in for (1), the Author specifys the default, and if none the engine does the automatic calculations.