Rollable 3D Map Yes or No

Venus · Post by **Venus** » Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:03 pm

Well, what do you think? We've heard alot of ppl comment on this in the nav bug thread I made recently, so I figured maybe a poll would help.

verbosity · Post by **verbosity** » Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:11 pm

I honestly can't vote (yet), I'd need a really good explaination of what your thinking of. Why? well simply put this has been something I'd like to see for a long time but it needs to be simple, functional and accurate ( and seeing as I don't have soase I'm not 100% about what has been talked about in other threads).

Post by **Marvin** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:59 am

I prefer a flip-able navigation chart. Admittedly, scrolling could be improved but a 3-D map might be a bit disorienting. Yeah, it works for radar ... but the radar screen is always oriented to your ship's bow.

Post by **Vice** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:17 am

Yeah, it works for radar ... but the radar screen is always oriented to your ship's bow.

Plus, you're not trying to plant precise waypoints on it at the same time.

Earl · Post by **Earl** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:01 am

I like it as is. Possible improvement to allow for more 3D information, though.... Color coding the names of objects, along a gradient, or maybe a box around the symbol. Meaning, if something was at zero elevation (sector) relative to the player maybe it has a green box. If it's lower, it changes color progressively to blue. If higher, shift to yellow. The color mixing could give us a lot of information, but still maintain the easy to manage 2D platform. It'd even allow more 3 dimensional star systems, if it became easy to use.

DennyMala · Post by **DennyMala** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:03 am

A 3D view for the navigation map would be good for browsing the space, but it is unlikely that you'll be able to plot waypoints in 3D when you only have 2 dimension available to your mouse.

This can be an addition when you want a quick look at your surroundings and may be useful if radar contacts would get plotted there, as jumpgates, containers...and so on.

If it is for navigation, 2D is more than enough.

A map that upgraded itself with new discoveries such as point of interest (containers, planets, stations, wormholes and jumpgates) when you discover them and hit the ping button will be great. More than any 3D out there.

IckleChesh · Post by **IckleChesh** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:27 am

2D is better for plotting co-ords, but I did like the 3d style map in RiftSpace. That format would be good for an overview of the local space, but plotting is hard work.

Post by **Marvin** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:27 pm

Originally posted by DennyMala
A 3D view for the navigation map would be good for browsing the space, but it is unlikely that you'll be able to plot waypoints in 3D when you only have 2 dimension available to your mouse.

Good point.

SVB · Post by **SVB** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:42 pm

Why so much No's !

verbosity · Post by **verbosity** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:50 pm

Originally posted by SVB
Why so much No's !

I think generally people are in favour of the concept of a 3d map, the simple fact is that no-one has suggested ( or been able to suggest) a 3d system that is both simple and accurate on a scale that we are looking at in legends ( or beyond ). Rather than saying "lets have a 3d map" it might achieve a more favourable result to actually suggest some systems.

It might have been cleared out, but I once made an attempt at suggesting such a system, it proved unworkable, but it was a pro-active suggestion at least.

Accountant · Post by **Accountant** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:53 pm

Originally posted by SVB
Why so much No's !

Because I honestly cannot think of a way that a 3D map can be implemented which will be as easy to use as the current NAV map. A 3D map presents some really difficult user interface issues, not the least of which is, at what location does the player click when (s)he clicks the map? The extra dimension turns what is normally easy into something incredibly difficult to account for. Until we get 3D screens this will continue to be a problem, because it is not very feasible to depict a 3D map on a 2D plane and make it user-friendly for precise navigation.

-Accountant

TGS · Post by **TGS** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:24 pm

Ok I have Sins of a Solar Empire and I have to be honest... with Evochron as nice it as may seem in theory... practically it couldn't work without over complicating the whole process. Even in Sins I often find myself shifting the map around when I don't want to which completely messes up my orientation of everything because in Sins if we were to use that as an example there is no lock or "snap" system to prevent or minimize unintentional movement.

What I would actually like to see more than anything instead of making the map 3d as such I think the coordinate inputting system should be made more functional. For example When I want to manually input coordinates I have to click each set of coordinates. It would be nice if you entered the first one and it automatically went to the next you entered that it automatically went to the next. That way if you have a good or even general idea of how to navigate in 3d space you can click to get into it... then simply enter the coordinates you want without using the mouse from that point on.

Furthermore I think the universe/sector map (Can't remember off the top of my head what its referred to as in EL) needs to be made functional. Maybe not to the degree that the local map is... but currently that particular map gives a very rough and sometimes wildly inaccurate account of where you are vs where you want to be.

Pastro · Post by **Pastro** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:47 pm

2D map work fine. Better things for add.

verbosity · Post by **verbosity** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:56 pm

Originally posted by TGS
Ok I have Sins of a Solar Empire and I have to be honest... with Evochron as nice it as may seem in theory... practically it couldn't work without over complicating the whole process.

I would rather see people suggesting methods that a 3d map would/could work, can we not have a constructive debate in how such a map would be possible ( I know that given a viable 3d map concept, Vice would consider putting it in)

wolis · Post by **wolis** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:47 pm

The magic would come from a default view being top-down 2D and flip side view (as is) but a mechanism to rotate and spin that view (CTRL+mouse for example) to get a sense of perspective/distance.

Possibly no clicking to set waypoints but you could click to select objects in a 3D view.. then reset back to 2D for waypoint setting.

Also setting (adjusting with scroll wheel up/down) a plane so you you ahve mouse X, Y and plane Z all relative to your current view of the 3D map could work.
(Had to do this in an ancient 3D drawing program.. it was quite functional)

And finally, check out Ad Astra and how it has implemented 3d Galactic and Solar system maps.. needs some refining but excellently done and do-able.

Ravenfeeder · Post by **Ravenfeeder** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:07 am

I've used 3d maps in the past. Little lines with a circle on the end - no thanks. Whilst we still have 2d screens, 3d maps, imho, are a waste of space (pun intended)!

Daedalao · Post by **Daedalao** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 12:30 am

I'd honestly like to set the coords using a similar method to actual military map coords... preferably with similar accuracy when calling fire... not sure if anyone knows exactly what I mean... So instead of multiple coords boxes, I type in one... with the SX and SY coords as the first digits (so sapphire would be 00000000) and a location within sapphire would be added to the end. Although this seems more complex, it really isn't. The number of coords to remember would be difficult with some systems all the way out in the five digit region. I doubt it would work, but the accuracy for plotting coords would be better imo.

Post by **Marvin** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:02 pm

Personally, I think one of the problems with the 2-D map is how the X-Y view is labeled ... the title isn't all that intuitive. "Rear View" might be better called "Side View" ... either that or change both views to "Horizontal Axis" and "Vertical Axis." Or maybe just a description of what the button does: "Rotate Map Axis."

SVB · Post by **SVB** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 8:19 pm

I have a problem with the 2d map, I cannot plan my coords correctly.

Maybe we need at least a graphical 2d map? So you can actually see the color of the planet and star (Maybe only if you explored it) and the picture of a jumpgate, sort of like a black hole - though it still lacks it....

Nigel_Strange · Post by **Nigel_Strange** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 11:49 pm

The current 2d map would work if you could zoom out to the galaxy level and zoom back in again instead of switching between modes. Some kind of logarithmic scaling factor would be needed so you wouldn't have to spend a half hour zooming out to see everything. The advantage here would be that you could more easily see where you are with respect to the nearest star systems.

I'd also like for hidden places that you've discovered to be automatically added to your map. So, you have the standard, known areas by default, but when you discover a hidden system or hidden base, it's added to your map so you can see them.

[Edited on 7-5-2009 by Nigel_Strange]

Post by **Marvin** » Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:13 am

Nigel, the Log does a pretty good job of marking hidden systems that you've discovered. Just remember is to set your coordinates to your current location before making a log entry (oh, how many times have I had to backtrack and correct an entry).

DennyMala · Post by **DennyMala** » Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:10 am

Originally posted by SVB
I have a problem with the 2d map, I cannot plan my coords correctly.

Maybe we need at least a graphical 2d map? So you can actually see the color of the planet and star (Maybe only if you explored it) and the picture of a jumpgate, sort of like a black hole - though it still lacks it....

I don't get the point.

Why you cannot plot cohords correctly in the 2d map?

Colors? What about colors with plotting cohords?

Please explain.

Nigel_Strange · Post by **Nigel_Strange** » Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:31 am

Nigel, the Log does a pretty good job of marking hidden systems that you've discovered. Just remember is to set your coordinates to your current location before making a log entry (oh, how many times have I had to backtrack and correct an entry).

The log does a pretty good job, but you can only see your markers when you're within scanner range. I would like to be able to zoom out much further so that the map encompasses several systems. That way, I can see map markers for hidden systems that I have visited. As it is, the map markers tell you the coords and you have to figure out where they are with respect to other landmarks.

I guess what I'd like is a starmap that is more of a map than a long-range scanner. That way, I wouldn't need to be within 10 sectors of a star to see it on my map. I know there is a map of the entire Evochron system, but it is not really useful except for figuring out where your known system is with respect to other known systems. You can't really plot anything on it, in other words. For instance, suppose, for the sake of argument, that I wanted to plot a point directly at the center of the loop of Orion, Sapphire, Sirius, etc... I want to see that point on the starmap. Or, suppose I discover a hidden system near Alpha Centari. Is it closer to Alpha Centari or to Deneb? I could use graph paper, but an astro-chart would be a handier way of doing it.

Or, what if I want to see the layout of a distant system. I'm in Sapphire and I want to look at how many planets are in the Sierra system. I shouldn't have to go to Sierra just to read a map. I should be able to pull it up and look at it.

I think smooth scrolling would be cool too.

So, the 2d map can still work, but with some tweaks to make it more useful for longer distances.

Waltorious · Post by **Waltorious** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 5:01 am

I'm with wolis on this one... I like the mechanism for setting nav points in 2D the way it is now but it would be nice to be able to roll the view around when one is just looking at the map to get a better sense of where things are.

Also, I was wondering if a more short-term change could be made so that mouse-over text would appear on the map even when zoomed out. I like to keep the labels turned off so I can see where objects are, but then it gets annoying to have to zoom in on the map just to see where the jump gates go, for example.

Another thing that would be great would be enabling the use of the right-click to lock the nav point onto stations or jump gates even when they are out of plane (or when zoomed out)... for instance there is a station in Sapphire that is above everything else, and if you want to jump to it it's a real pain to set the nav point to the station hangar because neither the top view nor the rear view screens allow easy zooming in on its sector box. I think doing a direct jump basically requires typing in coords, or making two separate jumps simply because it's annoying to deal with.

A lot of people have mentioned smooth scrolling... that could be cool, but currently I just zoom out to see nearby boxes and then zoom back in on them, which isn't too bad.

Post by **Vice** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 5:16 am

Also, I was wondering if a more short-term change could be made so that mouse-over text would appear on the map even when zoomed out. I like to keep the labels turned off so I can see where objects are, but then it gets annoying to have to zoom in on the map just to see where the jump gates go, for example.

I've wanted to do just that. Unfortunately though, that system uses its own dedicated variable stack in a routine that requires in-sector/localized values to work. I haven't given up on the idea, it is something I want to implement. I may move it over to a set of loops with unique arrays for each value, but I'll need to analyze the risks involve of breaking things that work now while making sure there's enough variable space for all of the object classes.

A lot of people have mentioned smooth scrolling... that could be cool, but currently I just zoom out to see nearby boxes and then zoom back in on them, which isn't too bad.

It's probably also faster and more precise, especially with a centered system like the nav map uses (that way you're not losing track of where the center of the sector is, which could result in some guesswork with coordinates).