Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6721) A Quincuncial topology
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6721) A Quincuncial topology

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: mburda@xxxxxxxxx, rt-guest@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6721) A Quincuncial topology
From: "Jason Short" <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 09:48:29 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6721 >

Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6721 >
> 
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Jason Short wrote:
> 
> 
>><URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6721 >
>>
>>Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I don't understand what these formulas are supposed to mean but presumably 
>>>you want
>>>
>>>   ABCDEFGH
>>>   IJKLMNOP
>>>   QRSTUVWX
>>>   uvwxqrst
>>>
>>>instead of what you wrote.
>>
>>No.  It is flipped/mirrored in the X direction, not shifted.  The above 
>>map is not legal because (for instance) Q and q do not have the same 
>>adjacent tiles.
> 
> 
> But they do!  Q: I, u, R, X
> q: U, x, r, i

The set of adjacent tiles is the same, but the order is not.  So if you 
imagine tile Q displayed on the mapview, and then imagine tile q 
displayed there, there is no way for them to be the same.

> I would say your picture is less legal, because if the width is odd, there 
> are two "fixed points": you go north from Q and you end up in q.

This is a singularity and pretty ugly for the player, but there's 
nothing absolutely (mathematically) wrong with it.

jason




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]