Tilelayers (For Stefan!)
 

This is going to be my bump thread for tilelayers support. I know it's already been mentioned but I don't want Stefan to forget to add it. Feel free to contribute with suggestions for tilelayers.


Right now, tilelayers need

Tilelayers need layers that can draw over player, under player, etc. This can make level editing pretty awesome.

I just want to make sure this (very necessary) functionality isn't left out of the new client. Tilelayers need to be able to draw over player!

I think it would be interesting to change the tilelayer that the player is on too although I'm not sure how well it would work. That way all other layers would be nonblocking. This would enable things like bridges, balconies, etc with no scripting required.

I support this because of the awesome abilities we could have for creating new levels!

I support this :)

Yes please, for convenience.

Bridges, trees, mountain ranges...

Hell, I dont script and even I see the use in this! :O
BumperdieBUUUUMP

It would eliminate 30% of the images used online.

For the children Stefan, for the children.

Great Idea. :)

Yes, please.

If possible, instead of a scripting feature can't we infuse the script in to the editor as a built in component? I know you probably won't understand this, however; there are built in features already in the editor such as the flowers, there are 4 flowers on the tileset, the one top left of the tileset has a prominent part to change to the other tiles once used thus making it look like the flower is blowing in the wind. As a level designer I believe this would be easier and more efficent to add this advancement as a built in feature for everyone to use in a non difficult manner.

Yeah but you know that Stefan will never update the Level Editor for some strange reason.

I have made an online level editor that already supports tile layers and is fully functional just like the offline editor. It doesn't save level updates yet though and it's not quite done.

I could perhaps show progress updates sometime, not sure.

I can say one thing so far: it friggin rocks.

This would be helpful

Oooh! That'd be fabulous! I'd love to see it :D

Shameless bump :(

Levels could also hold information like:
For example, inside of the level file it could hold:
This would cause tilelayer 1 to draw over player and also to be non-blocking. This layer could be used for certain things like trees, etc.

Oh please oh please. Let's see this happen!

Yes please! And congratulations to post #3400. Still working on your online editor?

I haven't worked on it for quite a while :( I'd like to finish it eventually still though.

Hmm, wouldn't it be better to have player's have a relative layer variable? That way we can change the layer the player is drawn on relative to tilelayers to get more useful effects. For example, if you have a bridge drawn on layer 3, all players with a relative layer under 3 would walk under the bridge, while players with a layer of >3 would walk OVER the bridge. This way we could allow our own player to have the bridge drawn over them without having the bridge also draw over players who are actually on it.

With your method it would be a lot like changing the layer of an image, and it just doesn't work when taking multiple players/NPCs into consideration.

I think if this suggestion were implemented, it shouldn't be related to current image layers, as tile layers can exceed 4.

No, not really. If you just changed the players' layer, then if you wanted to go back later and make a new tilelayer that draws under the player, you would have to change all of your layers around to make sure all of them stay above the player correctly. With the method that I suggested, you can easily expand your levels later and not have to worry about what the player's layer is while still achieving the desired affect.

Then how would you create a bridge effect if the drawing of the layer is the only thing changing? Like I said, it'd be no different than the issues we currently have with images.

Hmm, I see what you mean... That's tough. Do you know if that's how other games handle it?

I think even if there was a player variable, there would still be the problem that I suggested with difficulty expanding things.

Oh so necessary, oh so possible. Because nothing is impossible. Dusty is right, it's important to be able to do things like bridges with relative ease. Perhaps layer links, much the same way as level links, that alter the players layer as they pass through.

I know in LttP they forced the player to change their layer. This was usually done via interactions like stairs(hence why you lose control of the player and are forced up stairs when you touch them). Thus even though the player(Link) was on a bridge, the NPC's/baddies below the bridge would still be drawn under it.

As far as other games go I don't know. The only other editor I've used with layers was RPG maker and that was a LONG time ago. I believe layers were pretty much hardcoded, and you could'nt quite change anything with them. They were simply used to draw trees/houses and the such over the player, not exactly letting them do anything more complicated.

As for future expansion... well layers are going to be troublesome to expand regardless. But since it's a script you at least give scripters the chance to have better control over it, no? It would just take a little more planning. Try to plan layers out beforehand. Ideally if it was working like I suggestion, and if I started a new server to use layers, I'd at least designate 3 or 4 layers strictly for the ground. That'd give level editors more than enough room to play around and get creative. Then try to control and organize layers for things like trees/roofs/bridges. However, per level basis shouldn't be hard as like I said, it's a variable. You can put individual NPC's in levels to control the drawing on a per-level basis.

But yes, like I said layers are going to be troublesome regardless of how they're implemented. Graal wasn't created with layers in mind and tacking them on this later only makes it harder. They really aren't as fun to develop with as the outcome they offer.

You could just code those. Not a problem.

I see the light. I agree with you dusty, it would be nice to have a player.tilelayer variable. All players below that player's tilelayer would draw under the player, and all above would draw above, and all on the same layer would draw as they're drawn now.

That still leaves designating whether or not a layer should be blocking or non-blocking or if it should depend on which tiles are there. I personally would like all three of those options.

True, and you should be able to code it too, I was just thinking for simplicity for levelers to be able to make complex levels alone.

You've got a point *nod*

This would probably be more accustomed to the earlier suggestions you made?
level.tilelayers[x].tilesblock = true/false
Which would designate whether the layer tile data is ignored or not. Either way this sort of thing needs to be expanded more as with custom scripts you can't even detect walls and such on layers higher than 0.

It may be something totally different, but something like this is already on graal classic, just check out the bridge to the right of futaids house.

It is.

I found a way to do this just simply setting a client.var when a player 'touchs' an npc (like going up a ladder or hill), basically it sets to a "layer" the player is on and the image detects what layer and adjusts what parts it blocks and is it drawn above or below the player.

Yes, that would indeed work. At least on the clientside. The troubles begin when there are more players around.

Exactly. If you "drawoverplayer" to draw the bridge over yourself, then the bridge will draw over ALL players whether they're on the bridge or under it.

just a thought experiment, boat could you possibly make the bridge a gani and work with the layers from there or would the same problem arise as before in script?

Also wouldn't changing changing just changing a var like player.layer work the same?

Someone needs less chemicals.

Bump! Come on Stefan, do want.

I agree! I'v heard of this LE in the making for to long! It would make life so much easier.