Zugg Software :: View topic

Wizard Joined: 22 Mar 2007 Posts: 2320

I know you aren't ready yet for changes to the mapper, but you've now said it's on the list. So, when you get to it...

I would like to be able to move a room up or down a level through a trigger or alias. New functions like %roomx, %roomy, and %roomz would enable map modification by scripts, similar to the other %room functions.

Background: my mud-of-choice has a maze-like area in which you can't tell whether the exits (in cardinal directions) will go up or down a level until you go through them (and not always even then :P ). While mapping this area I have to continually move rooms up or down manually, which requires quite a few keystrokes and keyclicks.

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

Or %roommove(x, y, z)?

Maybe also %roomcoord(x, y, z) for getting and setting the absolute location on the grid for that zone.

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:49 pm

It'd be nice as well if there were a way to turn off the multiple levels and display all rooms in that zone on the same level.

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:06 pm

You can already access the X,Y,Z coordinates using the COM-based zMapper scripting. Keep in mind that if you are ever looking for enhanced map stuff, you should first look in zMapper. The intent of zMapper was to provide the advanced mapping stuff that not everyone needed. There is a *lot* of functionality in the zMapper API.

As far as displaying multiple levels, that can be done, but it will usually result in a complete mess of overlaying rooms. When different rooms overlap on the same level, CMUD displays each room offset by a couple of pixels so that you can see both rooms. But two rooms on two different levels might have exactly the same position, and when you "compress" that onto a single layer, then you'll have overlapping rooms but no visual indication that they overlap...the rooms will be exactly on top of each other, so it will look like just one room.

In any case, while you are mapping your maze, you can temporarily go into your View/Directions and change the Map direction for Up and Down to be something else (like NE and SW or something like that). That tells the mapper where to create new rooms in the given direction. This can also be done for anyone else that wants to keep rooms on the same level. Of course, if your MUD already uses the NW,NE,SW,SE directions, then you'll still end up with a mess no matter what you do.

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 5:25 am

I don't mean just compressing the map - though that would be nice regardless of those problems. You'd just have to set your map up in a way where that wasn't a problem. I mean totally disabling the levels, so when you're mapping, rooms are created on the same level instead of the level above or below. It's useful mostly because if you've forgotten what's up there, you can see at a glance (the current greyed-out thing isn't so useful if there are a series of up/down exit rooms representing, say, a mountainside). It also makes it easier to speedwalk to somewhere that's above or below you.

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

I think Zugg's point was the difficulty in knowing where on the same level to put the rooms that are not really on the same level... Any suggestions?

Maybe there could be a button to make the mapper find the nearest area of the map on the main level large enough to fit the rooms you have currently selected and move them there, together with the text "Level +1" or something if you have more than one room in your selection. This would be more automated than moving the rooms manually, which can be a bit tedious, especially over a long distance. I'm not sure it would work terribly well to be always creating rooms on the main level as soon as the rooms are mapped, as they might get in the way of rooms that really are on the main level but not yet mapped - when they do get mapped, you would get a mess.

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:43 am

Moving a bunch of rooms at once is easy enough just by selecting them all. You'd have to select them all to use that auto-move function, so I don't reckon it's really necessary.

They needn't be created anywhere except on top of the current room, either (offset like rooms currently are if they're created on top of one another). If you want them somewhere else, you can put them there. The major inconvenience is having to copy and paste rooms to get them onto the right level if you want to change the way an area's displayed, not dragging them into the right place on the same level, but I guess finding a space nearby for them if one's available would be nice. I think you're making a big issue out of this when there needn't be - all it really needs to do is create rooms on the current level instead of the a different one. The mapper already has all the tools you need for manipulating rooms.

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

Hey, it's not my idea! I just made a suggestion on how to do it. I have to say that I don't think your idea about having the rooms fractionally offset will be very usable unless you are operating at a high zoom level. I think we need more suggestions. One may to improve your idea might be to use the Level above color and solid settings from ones map config, even though they are displayed on the current level. This way the rooms would obviously be above or below the current level, but still accessible for speedwalking. Additional colors for more than one level above or below would also be useful. So, in effect, the rooms continue to have a z value other than 0, but are still displayed on level 0, and there are no other levels. This single-level view could then be toggleable, since the actual data for the rooms contains the z value.

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:14 pm

Maybe I'm way off base here, but why not have the mapper display one up level and one down level at a time? They could offset each other as they do now, but you'd be able to double-click on the rooms above or below as needed. Or perhaps make child maps that show the different levels across the top for upper, the bottom for lower. They would be smaller, yes, but more manageable. Just a thought.

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:38 pm

Sorry, Seb. Remind me not to post first thing in the morning - I came across much more hostile than I intended. I also wasn't thinking straight, because I do agree that just creating the room on the same level but offset wouldn't be ideal - it'd do, but it wouldn't be ideal. I do like the idea of putting single rooms in free spaces as they're created.

Wizard Joined: 22 Mar 2007 Posts: 2320

All right. Zmapper it is. I can certainly understand having advanced features available in a separate package. I've been considering zmapper occasionally, but this is the first thing I've wanted to do that actually requires zmapper. It's been a little frustrating being able to change almost every other attribute of a room in scripts, but to change the level I have to use five or six mouse clicks, most of which cannot be replaced by keystrokes.

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

charneus, yes, that's basically what I suggested in my last post, except you're saying only show one level above and below. Ideally the number of levels to show might be configurable (and this idea could also apply even without making the rooms on other levels clickable). But, really, I think speedwalking to rooms on other levels using this method would only be usable at 200 or 300% and greater zoom levels (or if you make the room sizes and offsets greater with zMapper). However, if I was using a whole screen for the map (which I might be if my main laptop screen was working properly), then I might often be running at zoom levels of 200 or 300%, so I reckon this idea is quite useful.

No worries Fang.

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:59 pm

I'll repeat something I said above that some people missed:

Wizard Joined: 14 Aug 2004 Posts: 1269

I didn't miss it, but does that cause them to be different colours? Some people may find your suggestion works for them, but others may prefer to have rooms different coloured depending on what level they are really on.

GURU Joined: 23 Dec 2000 Posts: 4834 Location: USA

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:36 pm

That's not quite it, Matt, because if you do, say, >up>e then the link is created east to west with the Other Com set. In order to use the up exit, you then have to press the macro for e.