The CUBE

[ender516]

Well, they don't look like cups any more, but now they just seem flat.

[RedBaron0]

Ok, I have been fiddling with my balls and trying to stick numbers on them...however my balls were still too small so I had to stretch my balls a bit. Overall I'm happy with my balls now...

(ok, this is getting old...)

You're not serious, right?

Check the yellow army color on the yellow balls. I got a feeling they are too similar.

[natty dread]

Rb0: Good points about the yellow balls, I'll have to check.

ender: I'll try to make the balls more ballsy.

[natty dread]

Ok I tried to make the balls more ball-like, but it kinda bothered with the clarity of them... they're better this way.

But I did put in yellow numbers, and they seem to look fine to me:

[bigimg]http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9853/newcube4a.png[/bigimg]

[moldy780]

like it

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

Looks good to me

[natty dread]

I've been thinking... does the oblique perspective bother anyone? IMO It seems a bit unnatural... I could take a shot at creating a true 3d perspective.

(In case you don't know what I'm talking about, -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblique_projection )

[army of nobunaga]

I've been thinking... does the oblique perspective bother anyone? IMO It seems a bit unnatural... I could take a shot at creating a true 3d perspective.

(In case you don't know what I'm talking about, -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblique_projection )

This is what I was trying to explain on page 20 or so. I just dont have the terminology. To me it never looked 3d really unless I tryed to make it 3d in my mind. That is why I kept saying put stuff (artwork) in the middle of it and other tricks.

[paulk]

For everybodys knowledge, I initially called the balls for spheres, but that wasn't "liked" and then they were called vortexes, but I think that is a too complex word (and long) so I went back to calling them balls. Because that is what they look like.

About the design/structure. I kind of thought of this as a grid in space, maybe like a futuristic space station, maybe even a bunch of asteroids tied together by either energy fields or physical "tubes".

About the grid. Is it possible to make the grid to squares (like before) instead of rombs (as it is now)?

About the names. I notice we have 4 of each now. How is that supposed to be changed?

/paulk

[natty dread]

This is what I was trying to explain on page 20 or so. I just dont have the terminology. To me it never looked 3d really unless I tryed to make it 3d in my mind. That is why I kept saying put stuff (artwork) in the middle of it and other tricks.

Yeah, I've been experimenting on some 3d effects now... I have to say it's hard to find an angle of that would be suitable for a real 3d projection - the balls seem to overlap no matter what... I can try but it might be that the oblique projection is actually the best solution wrt. clarity. I'll keep experimenting though.

For everybodys knowledge, I initially called the balls for spheres, but that wasn't "liked" and then they were called vortexes, but I think that is a too complex word (and long) so I went back to calling them balls.

Calling them balls is fine IMO...

About the grid. Is it possible to make the grid to squares (like before) instead of rombs (as it is now)?

I can try, but not sure if it will fit in the image size restrictions. I'll give it a shot for the next version though.

About the names. I notice we have 4 of each now. How is that supposed to be changed?

The balls are named based on the layers (you can see the layer numbers on the translucent dark grey stuff) so that territories will be named like:

Layer 1 - A1
Layer 2 - B3
Layer 3 - A1
Layer 4 - B3

and so on... "Layer 1 - A1" will connect to "Layer 2 - A1", which will connect to "Layer 1 - A1" and "Layer 3 - A1" - and of course to adjacent balls on the same layer.

For the record, the layered naming scheme seems to be easy to grasp for most people. No offense, but the "number-snake" designation your latest version used was causing headache for many...

[army of nobunaga]

I think the only way you are going to make the mind automatically grasp that its 3d at a glance, is to change it up some how with art. The thing is, most of the balls and lines are identical. You cant really make different lines (like a squiggly one, a zigzag layer, so on) or balls. So you would almost have to make little art pieces scattered through out, lurking in front of and behind balls and lines to give it depth man...

for once natty, im glad im not in your shoes... this one is tough.

[natty dread]

Yeah... I do enjoy a challenge though

[paulk]

Is there not anyone that knows anyone that is great with 3D programs?

I saw, while searching for cube pictures this LED cube:



I just thought the angle was interesting.

[natty dread]

Yes, I actually just tried making a cube like that (I have a 3d plugin in paint.net which is able to render cubes, spheres and cylinders and texture-map them) the problem being that the central balls were too close to each other.... At least if you want to preserve the cubical aspect, I guess if you strecth it enough in the Z-axis it could work, maybe...

[natty dread]

Ok here's a little sketch on how this could be done... if you're happy with this perspective I can work a new version out of it.

[bigimg]http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/7995/cubed.png[/bigimg]

[RedBaron0]

yes.
yes.
yes.

[paulk]

pretty good! I like it!
Although, where should the legend fit?

Could you show a version of the "center perspective"? maybe its possible to extend the length deep wise (from light green to blue) to make the back center balls more visible? or make the cube slightly "cone shaped" in the 3d program to reach the same effect.

[natty dread]

Could you show a version of the "center perspective"? maybe its possible to extend the length deep wise (from light green to blue) to make the back center balls more visible? or make the cube slightly "cone shaped" in the 3d program to reach the same effect.

Ah, damn... I didn't think to save the cube I made with the 3d renderer, in that perspective... Anyway now that I think of it, it wouldn't be too good for gameplay clarity. In that perspective it's actually harder to see the cube shape, and when you have to stretch the z-axis it will look unnatural...

As for the legend fitting in this version, there's still 40 pixels that can be added horizontally to this image (the maximum is 840x800) so I think I can work something out...

[paulk]

[bigimg]http://123fresno.com/hypercube/hypercubeDevelopment38.jpg[/bigimg]

Tested.
Made some additions with background and legend.

[White Moose]

This map will be so awesome!

WANT TO PLAY NOW!

[paulk]

or maybe something with a small effect, like blinking...

[bigimg]http://123fresno.com/hypercube/hypercubeDevelopment38_anim.gif[/bigimg]

rather annoying, right

[MarshalNey]

I vote no blinking... Conquer Man is the only map that gives me problems when I'm forced to use a modem, and I suspect it's because of the animation.

The little astonaut saying, "Kill!" is pretty cute (genius)... but it took me a moment to get it. Maybe you could use a cartoon talk bubble?

[natty dread]

Yeah... I don't do GIF. It's an obsolete format which only allows 256 colours. When lackattack decides to allow APNG:s on the site, then I will consider using animations on maps...

For the record, conquer man could pull it off as it's style was based on an 80:s video game.

Also, I've been kinda busy with Lunar war trying to get it into stampable condition - but I'll try to get the new version of Cube ready & posted today.

[paulk]

How good is your 3D program?
Can it make the white lines slightly thicker and make the balls (or is orb a better word?) look 3D, with shadows? Right now it looks a bit flat.
Also, in my previous versions I had the rods stick out of the balls on one side.

[natty dread]

Eh, I'm not doing this with a 3d program... I'm using the same software I always have, paint.net.

I'm still working on the next version... been kinda busy lately, but I hope to have something up soon...