Re: [MUD-Dev] Room-based vs. coordinate-based

["Jon A. Lambert" <jlsysinc#ix,netcom.com>]

> From: Chris Gray <cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA>
>
> Brings up the topic of room-based versus co-ordinate based representations.
> 
> My surface thinking on this has been that a given set of co-ordinates
> will define a room, and that within that room things are room-based.
> The coords could also define a building of several rooms, etc. This
> is sort of a cop-out on my part, but it seems to be a way to get some of
> the advantages of both systems. If I can get some of the advantages of
> the coord system without having to do all of the proximity stuff for all
> of the commands, I'll take that cheat!
> 
I've been skipping by these 3d and/or coordinate threads for some time since
I was planning a locational-based system.  I think this is a good idea.
Sort of a way for a locational based mud to cheat into coordinate-based 
system.  By simply adding a pair of (x,y,z) coordinate attributes to every 
room, character and object, one could gradually migrate into such a system?  
Coordinates are all relative to a single fixed location with the z
representing elevation and assumption of rectangular rooms.  At the minimum 
adding these to rooms might produce better maps.


JL
  
-
"If I'd known it was harmless, I would have killed it myself"
*- Through a Scanner Darkly - PKD -*

----------