[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2369) iso-view eye candy

[Jason Dorje Short <vze49r5w@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Anthony J. Stuckey wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 07:19:50AM -0500, Jason Dorje Short wrote:
>
> > An example of the limitations the old system runs in to is that 2^4=16 
> > tiles simply is not enough.  If you manually blend this tile with the 
> > adjacent one, you have to assume all adjacent tiles look the same.
>
>         Why?  Are you saying that you have to choose a specific tile type, and
> create the blended area to match that assumption?
In Trident, when two terrains border each other there is always 
grassland (dark green) in between.  The tileset tries to "round" the 
terrain, but it assumes the adjacent terrain matches grassland.
It may be possible to work around this with the current civ1 system, but 
I don't see how.
> > I've put up some screenshots at http://freeciv.org/~jdorje/.  Compare 
> > trident.png to isotrident.png.  The difference between the two is 
> > incredible.  The new system is overwhelmingly better.
> > Especially, look at the border between the grassland and desert in the 
> > upper right of the screenshots.  Even this common scenario can't be 
> > handled by the old system.
>
>         ??  It looks fine to me.  The desert meanders through.  What looks bad
> are the coastlines, and your middle section with
> grassland/plains/arctic/desert intermixed.
Although the plains is surrounded by desert, there is grassland in 
between the plains and desert.  Perhaps our opinions differ, but this 
looks far worse than it does in isotrident.
The border of the artic does look far worse, though.

Why do you think the coastlines look bad?  Again there is the grassland 
problem here, but to me it doesn't seem as bad as the plains boundary.
jason