Bug #858226
String tweaks to standardise topology-related terminology
0%
Description
Mainly, stop using 'classic' in some places to refer to non-iso, non-hex maps.
History
#1
Updated by Jacob Nevins 5 months ago
- File m-30-strings-topology.patch m-30-strings-topology.patch added
- File 26-strings-topology.patch 26-strings-topology.patch added
- Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
#2
Updated by Marko Lindqvist 5 months ago
I'm not particularly fond of using "overhead" and "iso" with hex topologies. After all the only difference between "regular" hex and iso-hex is how the hexes are rotated. For one of them (I always forgot which) vertical sides are direct, for the other horizontal ones. I don't think either is necessarily more "overhead" than the other.
Not that I have suggestions for better terminology.
#3
Updated by Jacob Nevins 5 months ago
- File m-30-strings-topology-bis.patch m-30-strings-topology-bis.patch added
- File 26-strings-topology-bis.patch 26-strings-topology-bis.patch added
Mm.
I've removed "overhead hex" and standardised on "hex"/"hexagonal" and "iso-hex"/"iso-hexagonal", which de-emphasises 'isometric' and makes them more like arbitrary names (the same as what you specify in the 'topology' setting, ISO|HEX).
A quick look at the Internet doesn't give good consensus terminology (not that I would suggest changing ours substantially at this point); there are horizontal/vertical ('grain'/rows), pointy-topped/flat-topped. (And it suggests one reason flat-side-up, our 'iso-hex', gets used for isometric views is that no edges/walls are edge-on to the viewing perspective.) (1, 2)
#4
Updated by Jacob Nevins 5 months ago
- Status changed from Resolved to Closed