Angband 64 x 64 pixel tileset

[buzzkill]

If you've never played with tiles, the you're probably overestimating the "grave danger" that arises from having a smaller world view. It's not that bad, though certainly a disadvantage of sorts. I always play 32x32 and seldom look outside the visible with the express purpose of scanning for (yet undetected) dangerous enemies. I've always felt that in game messages "A foo appears (off screen, west)", or even an audible warning as simple as a "ping" would suffice. The only time it gets kinda harrowing is when wandering through the FA wilderness, the plains to be precise. 64x64, well that might be a different story.

[d_m]

FA has a handheld option which reduces the max range/LOS variables to something much smaller for small screens.

It might be interesting to experiment with this in V. I'm not sure if the game gets easier, harder, or just different, but it would certainly help the situation with large tiles!

[Derakon]

How would that make it easier to support larger tiles?

Currently there's a significant knowledge advantage to being able to see a large amount of the dungeon. The less you see, the easier it is for you to get blindsided by a monster. This has a lot to do with the massive spell and sight range. By reducing those ranges, you stop penalizing players for having a close-in view of the action, which in turn means that large tiles are more feasible.

[awldune]

And this would be what it'd look like playing "Shockbolt" @ 32x32 pixels (once 2.5D dungeons is added to the game)

Thanks Raymond, sorry if I missed a mockup earlier in this thread.

My concern is the obvious one, that it will be difficult to differentiate tiles that are partially obscured. I suppose that the two-height monsters will tend to be the most powerful ones onscreen, which mitigates that a bit.

The tiles still look great at 32x32, although 64x64 would be glorious.

[Shockbolt]

Which reminds me that if in the misty far-flung future I ever make a variant, it'll have to be more claustrophobic than current Angband -- which among other things means that you'd never be in LOS of something that's more than maybe 10 tiles away from you. Among other things, that makes big graphics easier to support.

How would that make it easier to support larger tiles?

[Derakon]

Which reminds me that if in the misty far-flung future I ever make a variant, it'll have to be more claustrophobic than current Angband -- which among other things means that you'd never be in LOS of something that's more than maybe 10 tiles away from you. Among other things, that makes big graphics easier to support.

[Shockbolt]

And this would be what it'd look like playing "Shockbolt" @ 32x32 pixels (once 2.5D dungeons is added to the game)

[Shockbolt]

Cure Critical Wounds.

Yeah, I'm a noob when it comes to the Angband abbreviations

[Shockbolt]

Raymond, do you have a mockup of what the two-height tiles would look like in practice?

Thanks

Yes, here it is. I've used Boldor in several examples, showing him what he'd look like behind a tall tile and at the same time standing next to it. I imagine that for 128 pixel tall tiles, you'd only be able to "select" them by their lower 64x64 pixels.

Also, I do hope there'll be a function to scale them down to 32x32 pixels also.

[awldune]

Raymond, do you have a mockup of what the two-height tiles would look like in practice?

Thanks

[Derakon]

Cure Critical Wounds.

[Shockbolt]

A cask of CCW. Finallly, a use for the empty bottles.

CCW = cold cellar water?

[buzzkill]

A cask of CCW. Finallly, a use for the empty bottles.

[Shockbolt]

More Angband tiles:

[Shockbolt]

Less than 100 NPC tiles left to paint now, painting Bert, Tom and Bill before getting some well deserved sleep