next »

[Moonkey]

How many blocks tall is the height map? Like let's say from the bottom of the map (Bottom) to the top? (Sky)... Or does it have no limit  .

If it doesn't i'm going to say "Good bye minecraft".

Also how do you create a new world instead of going to the same one over and over?

[pspeed]

I'm afraid it has to have a limit given the way I've architected it... but the build height limit in Mythruna is 159.

When there are flying vehicles then you will be able to fly higher than that (I think I will cap it at 200 just to be reasonable).

[Moonkey]

I'm afraid it has to have a limit given the way I've architected it... but the build height limit in Mythruna is 159.

When there are flying vehicles then you will be able to fly higher than that (I think I will cap it at 200 just to be reasonable).

That's a very strange height limit... Minecraft has a smaller height and it is 128. Since people made mods for minecraft there have been ones that give minecraft 256,512,1024 block height limit. BUT 1024 takes too long to load chunks... How does mythruna load its blocks? Also NEW MAPS I would love to spawn in a new area  .

[pspeed]

The real height limit is 160... 5 x 32.  But if I let people build at 160 then the blocks don't have tops.

I could up the limit as it's rather arbitrary.  As I recall, there is a constant somewhere that controls it... though there are a few places with a hard-coded 160.  160 meters high was chosen because it works best with the clip ranges.  And I wanted something higher than Minecraft.  In fact, I get a little more boost because my sea level is slightly lower than Minecraft's, I think.  Sea level in Mythruna is 57, I think.  (And to forestall any questions about how odd that is, the original fractals produce positive and negative heights relative to sea level.  When I did a general sampling of min/max values to adjust the heights into 0-160, 57 is where the original 0 mapped.)

The world is divided into 32x32x32 blocks that I call "leafs".  That's what you see reference to in the lower right.  So even if I expand the height, it only affects load time minimally unless there are lots of tall things.  Empty leafs take almost no time to send because of the compression.  It does start to affect some things like map and terrain type generation since those have to process a whole "column" of leafs.

And for the curious, the leafs are organized into "nodes" which are 32x32x5 leafs... or 1024x1024x160 meters.  If you look in the mythruna.db the first level of directories are the nodes with the leaf files underneath that.

[BenKenobiWan]

With 160 you can't really have mountains or deep caves (where things like diamonds would form). I do hope you can expand it, as some of the climate stuff you've spoken of wouldn't work without mountain ranges. 1024 or 2048 is more realistic, but somewhat unreasonable.

[Trecool]

Hello,

160 is good for construction etc.. If Paul increase the height, I think...performance will increase too..
For the New world.. It's a good ideas.. More liberty, no games end

Ciao

[pspeed]

With 160 you can't really have mountains or deep caves (where things like diamonds would form). I do hope you can expand it, as some of the climate stuff you've spoken of wouldn't work without mountain ranges. 1024 or 2048 is more realistic, but somewhat unreasonable.

Well, you can have all of that stuff if you scale them appropriately.  There are costs to increasing the height and 160 so far has been a nice balance.  The mountains can look pretty tall and the gorges can go pretty deep.

Also, the terrain generator only generates up to 128... I save some head room for mountain top castles and stuff.

See, there are things I haven't done yet that will really benefit from not having max elevation be too tall.  I still may eventually add another 32 meters or so.  Still, 160 is pretty darn high.  In both Mythruna and Minecraft, the camera field of view is setup in such a way to make far things look even farther.

Anyway, you can make an object like a boat and use it to fly up super high if you want to see what that looks like.  Above 160 or so the world starts to look like a postage stamp below you.

[Moonkey]

Hello,

160 is good for construction etc.. If Paul increase the height, I think...performance will increase too..
For the New world.. It's a good ideas.. More liberty, no games end

Ciao

You're completely wrong, because i've tried different heights on minecraft. Guess what happened, It took too long loading the chunks it generates otherwise freezing the game. If you were to set the height on this it would turn down the performance but have an effect on the landscape as well. Because when I tried 524 oh jeez... Mountains with holes... So height map might be 194 in the future? Suggestion: VOLCANOS FTW.

[Trecool]

I was mistaken. I have forgotten a word after "performance". I wanted to write performance problem will increase too..

However, Mythruna is not Minecraft and Mythruna will be not a Minecraft...
160 Is confortable.. 1024-512 is too much, 256 is a limit I think..
160 is a good ratio. 100 block to build.. That's right in general.. But that's true, if you want to build a skyscraper or another higher building.. It's limited

Stop thinking that Mythruna will be a new Minecraft.. There are No comparison to make

Games Inspiration : Ok
Imagination : Ok
Copy : No
Evolution of Minecraft in Mythruna : No..
etc...

The Mythruna reputation at the moment is : "Mythruna will be a excellent game" but Mythruna have a another reputation "Mythruna is a Minecraft copy.."
I hate this last reputation because Minecraft is not a good example to be followed..

[BenKenobiWan]

I dunno if it'll work, but maybe you could just add leafs on top or below the normal limit in some cases such as high mountains or deep caves. You probably thought of that, but hey...

[pspeed]

Yeah, it's problematic at this point.  Elevation is one of the only thankfully non-dynamic things in the engine.  The one thing I can rely on.

I have some ideas I was toying with for making floating islands that I may eventually try out.  Potentially having a sparsely populated world a layer above the regular world.  It is not without it's problems though... and the point of the second world layer was that it would move around slightly... which means having buildings and things protrude into it would be problematic.

But anyway... the terrain generation is where I like it.  I'm loathe to change it because of how time consuming and emotional little tweaks are.  When I was adding caves and gorges, I frequently had to put the work aside for a day just to come back at it with a clear head.  You get attached to cool things you find in the world and it's tough sometimes to tweak the algorithm knowing it will destroy those cool places.

So even if I had more height... it would take a lot to get me to change the terrain to grow higher.

[caesar]

Trecool is right, usually people think of Mythruna as a Minecraft-Alpha-Copy.
But thats wrong.

Mythruna is in a proof-of-engine version. Paul creates the world generator, placeable blocks, miniblocks, physics etc. to have the engine to make actually a game out of it. Placing blocks will be an option to play Mythruna but you will not have to place blocks or dig around.

Stay tuned, there is a LOT to come

[pspeed]

Yeah, if you want to write a block engine... the single best way to test the heck out of it is to let players place whatever they want anywhere.

[Moonkey]

The only reason why Minecraft is mentioned: Because of blocks. Num num num...