Re: [glob2-devel] flags vs. areas: getting the best of both worlds

[Kai Antweiler]

> Actually, the radius can be smaller than the distance following my
> suggested definition above.

Oops!  I forgot about "the continues set of ...".
Your right.

I think distance should have a quadratic influence, so that flag
has locally me power.
Also the radius isn't the best choice determine the strength, as it
already influences which areas of cells will be considered to be
governed. 
There should be a strength or precedence value instead.

For example you might want Flag B to govern most cells to it's left
were it competes with Flag A, but not touch any of the cells to its
right.  Let's say on the right are some cell that you want to be inactive
now, but active at a later time.  And you can't make Flag A smaller
without fragmenting the areas that it should govern.


>>> A minor addition:  It might be useful to allow moving a war flag to
>>> optionally move the set of cells it governs.  This could allow things
>>> like "lines of battle" or help to make flanking attacks.
>>
>> Do you mean that the flag will have a noncircular region that
>
> You didn't seem to complete your sentence.  What was your question?

I was wondering if you meant that those flags must be moveable like
it flags are today, or something absurd.
But I guess you mean that when moving a flag there should be an option
to drag the fields that are governed by it along.

When we are already thinking about moving, we can think about
approximating a stretching, shrinking and turning effect as well.

-- 
Kai Antweiler