What does overhead in README and similar files mean? I'm pretty sure that it's used for either portrait or landscape format, but after checking various online dictionaries I still can't tell what it's supposed to be. For hex tilesets based on an iso tileset this can be rather confusing:
Iso with width > height is in landscape format, and adding a horizontal hexside won't change this. But a vertical hexside should end up as portrait format even if the width is still greater than the new height. Likewise iso with width < height and a horizontal hexside could be considered as landscape format even if the new width is still smaller than the height.
"Overhead" in the context of the Freeciv tileset format is opposed to "isometric". That is, '/set topology ""' and '/set topology hex' correspond to "overview" tilesets; '/set topology iso' and '/set topology iso|hex' correspond to "isometric" tilesets.
The notion is that with an "overhead" tileset you are looking straight down at the world whereas with an "isometric" tileset you are looking at an oblique angle, although this is to some extent up to the tileset designer. The term "isometric" in iso|hex is probably a bit of a misnomer, but that's the terminology we have. This property doesn't cause Freeciv to place any requirement on the aspect ratio of the tiles.
(In current 2.6 snapshots, the new tileset selection UI uses "Overhead" to refer specifically to a non-iso, non-hex tileset; non-iso hex is referred to as just "Hex". That terminology is on my mental list to look at before release.)
JTN wrote:That is, '/set topology ""' and '/set topology hex' correspond to "overview" tilesets; '/set topology iso' and '/set topology iso|hex' correspond to "isometric" tilesets.
Okay, that's simple without hex, it boils down to non-iso, get no diamonds, get used to rectangles, and don't mention that perfect width=height squares would be mathematically isometric in addition to rectangular.
For hex it's still tricky, because iso-hex is not really related to iso, and non-iso hex is not really related to rectangular. One hex is "iso plus horizontal hexsides", the other is "iso plus vertical hexsides", and I always forget which is which.
I think the only reason iso-hex is called as it is, is because of the isophex tileset. That there's a satellite hex (overhead) in the opposite set up out there, with corner on top/bottom, reinforces our current system. I would think the corners at the top/bottom would make the 'regular' hex style actually the iso one. Of course, both can probably be considered 'partially' isometric either way, since both have diagonal corners.
What they're 'supposed' to mean, is that overhead views are as if looking straight down from a satellite, while isometric are like looking across the landscape from a helicopter. (That's why isometric is so 'smushed' vertically) But most of the tilesets actually show terrain and units isometrically anyway. It's just hard to distinguish things from directly overhead view for many people. There's only so much detail you can put into a unit's head and shoulders, after all.
In fact, there's a thought. Can cimpletoon's source be posed and have units made looking straight down on them from overhead in 8 directions? It might be an interesting experiment to see how they look like in two directions(cardinal and diagonal, other directions would just be flips of these), to see if the idea is at all tenable.
For Hex, the best descriptions might actually be horizontal and vertical hex(horihex/vertihex?), Depending on which movement direction is allowed.
I kinda wish it wasn't set up as two separate check boxes that combine, and instead just have a single setting with 4 choices.
Amusing note: Hex tilesets can actually be rectangular, generally with the direction of movement being double length. (Nobunaga's Ambition had this setup, at least for the NES and SNES)
Just in case, that's apparently a public mirror of the Gna! repo, and you're talking about r33227. Should this mirror be documented on Gna! and/or on the Wiki
Just in case, that's apparently a public mirror of the Gna! repo, and you're talking about r33227. Should this mirror be documented on Gna! and/or on the Wiki
I don't think the mirror is official. I used it because I prefer its web interface (Git web?) over the web interface (ViewVC?) used at Gna.
