Terraforming - Revision history

Mfb: updated to the current situation

2011-12-26T16:43:13Z

updated to the current situation

Tneo: Updated to reflect blog post

2009-05-27T13:29:14Z

Updated to reflect blog post

Sian: added short Info about No-terraforming

2007-08-28T19:24:27Z

added short Info about No-terraforming

Red1: Grammer corrections

2007-08-11T20:59:39Z

Grammer corrections

Mucht at 16:42, 12 June 2007

2007-06-12T16:42:54Z

Mucht at 13:30, 6 May 2007

2007-05-06T13:30:31Z

Mucht at 12:35, 6 May 2007

2007-05-06T12:35:00Z

Mucht: /* Coop-Terraforming */

2007-04-10T11:55:20Z

‎Coop-Terraforming

Ammler: /* No-Terraforming */

2007-04-09T08:48:03Z

‎No-Terraforming

Osai: typo

2007-04-08T13:37:01Z

typo

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 === Medium terraforming ===
-The most used terraforming style and also the most unclear one in ways of what exactly is medium. With medium terraforming you don't flatten mountains to suit your building needs, but you terraform those tiles that are needed to obtain fluent networks that will not slow down trains.
+Also known as coop terraforming. The most used terraforming style and also the most unclear one in ways of what exactly is medium. With medium terraforming you don't flatten mountains to suit your building needs, but you terraform those tiles that are needed to obtain fluent networks that will not slow down trains. This is the most used terraforming style on our servers; if nothing else is written or discussed, this style is implied.
 {|
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 [[Image:TF_high.png|none|left|200px|thumb|Free style]]
 <br style="clear: both;" />
 [[Category:Guides]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 __NOTOC__
-Terraforming is a difficult thing in #openttdcoop games. Sometimes we try to build our networks as realistic as possible while making minimalistic changes to the landscape, instead using the existing geography of the mountains and valleys. In other games we flatted everything due to the most effective network construction like massive stations with big and fast entrances. Both ways of playing are in their own way interesting and therefore you should all styles of terraforming defined in this article.
+Terraforming is a difficult thing in #openttdcoop games. Sometimes we try to build our networks as realistic as possible while making minimalistic changes to the landscape, instead using the existing geography of the mountains and valleys. In other games we flatten everything due to the most effective network construction like massive stations with big and fast entrances. Both ways of playing are in their own way interesting and therefore you should all styles of terraforming defined in this article.
-Before a game starts a !network plan will be created; things like train length, network layout, and the kind of game will be discussed and finally planned. One part of this discussion is the style of 'terraforming' that will be used (if I miss something here, please add it).
+Before a game starts a !network plan will be created; things like train length, network layout, and the kind of game will be discussed and finally planned. One part of this discussion is the style of 'terraforming' that will be used and is given with all other information about the plan.
-=== Terraforming doesn't matter: ===
+=== No-Terraforming ===
-In this style you can feel free to flatten the landscape to fit your needs.
+We had a try on the late Public Server Game 59 where we tried to have No-Terraforming. And other than some few tricky problems by stationand Hub building that forced people to think outsite the box it all in all went rather painless ([[PublicServer:Archive#gameid_59|NO TERRAFORMING]] not working yet)
-−
-=== Coop-Terraforming ===
-If playing with Coop-Terraforming a lot of landscaping can be done if it is needed for our network. The aesthetics of the network plays a role, but the functionality of the design is the most important thing. In fact it is more important to provide a network (with all its buildings: Hubs, Entrances, Exits, LB and so on) which has a high capacity/no jams instead of having an eye-candy like network. Either way you should keep the aesthetics of the network in mind. This is the most used terraforming style on our servers; if nothing else is written or discussed, this style is implied.
-[[Image:Coop_terraforming.png|left|thumb|200px|Correct Terraforming]]
-[[Image:Wrong_terraforming.png|left|thumb|200px|This was too extreme.]]
-−
-<br style="clear: both;" />
 === Low-Terraforming ===
 This terraforming style is often misunderstood and people mistake it for No-Terraforming. This style is the effective reversal to Coop-Terraforming. The network layout will be created according to the given landscape. You should use the existing mountains and valleys and create eye-candy tracks. The use of tunnels is quite important, because in reality trains often use tunnels instead of going over a mountain.
 The aesthetics of the network is more important than the capacity and speed of the network.
-=== No-Terraforming ===
+Sample game: [[MemberZone:Archive#gameid_08|Werkloze Desyncs, Inc.]]
-We had a try on the late Public Server Game 59 where we tried to have No-Terraforming. And other than some few tricky problems by stationand Hub building that forced people to think outsite the box it all in all went rather painless ([[PublicServer:Archive#gameid_59|NO TERRAFORMING]] not working yet)
 [[Category:Guides]]

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 === No-Terraforming ===
-This is not possible, is it?
+We had a try on the late Public Server Game 59 where we tried to have No-Terraforming. And other than some few tricky problems by stationand Hub building that forced people to think outsite the box it all in all went rather painless ([[PublicServer:Archive#gameid_59|NO TERRAFORMING]] not working yet)
-We have to try it on [[Public Server]]. ;)
 [[Category:Guides]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 __NOTOC__
-Terraforming is a difficult thing in #openttdcoop games. Sometimes we try to build our networks as realistic as possible without any too big changes on the landscape using the given geography of tales and mountains. In other games we flatted everything due to the most effective network buildings like massive stations with big and fast entrances. Both ways of gaming are in their way interesting and therefor you should stick to the definitions made in this article.
+Terraforming is a difficult thing in #openttdcoop games. Sometimes we try to build our networks as realistic as possible while making minimalistic changes to the landscape, instead using the existing geography of the mountains and valleys. In other games we flatted everything due to the most effective network construction like massive stations with big and fast entrances. Both ways of playing are in their own way interesting and therefore you should all styles of terraforming defined in this article.
-Before a game starts a !network plan will be created, things like train length, network layout and the kind of game will be discussed and finally planned. One part of this discussion is the way of 'terraforming'. We have several grades how terraforming should be used in the game and if I miss something here, please add it.
+Before a game starts a !network plan will be created; things like train length, network layout, and the kind of game will be discussed and finally planned. One part of this discussion is the style of 'terraforming' that will be used (if I miss something here, please add it).
 === Terraforming doesn't matter: ===
-In this case everything can be done as you like. Feel free to flat the landscape to your needs.
+In this style you can feel free to flatten the landscape to fit your needs.
 === Coop-Terraforming ===
-If playing with coop terraforming a lot of landscaping can be done if it is needed for our network. There is an aspect of the good look and feel, but the functionality is the most important thing. In fact it is more important to provide a network (with all its buildings: Hubs,Entrances,Exits,LB and so on) which has a high capacity/no jams instead of having an eye-candy like network. But anyway you should keep that aspect of the good look in your mind. This is the most used terraforming level on our servers, if nothing else is written or discussed, this level is meant.
+If playing with Coop-Terraforming a lot of landscaping can be done if it is needed for our network. The aesthetics of the network plays a role, but the functionality of the design is the most important thing. In fact it is more important to provide a network (with all its buildings: Hubs, Entrances, Exits, LB and so on) which has a high capacity/no jams instead of having an eye-candy like network. Either way you should keep the aesthetics of the network in mind. This is the most used terraforming style on our servers; if nothing else is written or discussed, this style is implied.
 [[Image:Coop_terraforming.png|left|thumb|200px|Correct Terraforming]]
 [[Image:Wrong_terraforming.png|left|thumb|200px|This was too extreme.]]
@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 === Low-Terraforming ===
-This is often misunderstood and people think its No-Terraforming. This style is vice versa to coop-Terraforming. The network layout will be created according to the given landscape. You should use mountains and tales and create eye-candy tracks. The use of tunnels is quite important, because in reality trains use often tunnels instead of going over a mountain.
+This terraforming style is often misunderstood and people mistake it for No-Terraforming. This style is the effective reversal to Coop-Terraforming. The network layout will be created according to the given landscape. You should use the existing mountains and valleys and create eye-candy tracks. The use of tunnels is quite important, because in reality trains often use tunnels instead of going over a mountain.
-The priority of the good look and feel is higher than the capacity and speed of the network. Anyway there are games which have also a high capacity, but that takes a lot of time ([[MemberZone:Archive#gameid_08|Werkloze Desyncs, Inc.]])
+The aesthetics of the network is more important than the capacity and speed of the network.
 === No-Terraforming ===

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:42, 12 June 2007
Line 21:		Line 21:
	This is not possible, is it?		This is not possible, is it?
	We have to try it on [[Public Server]]. ;)		We have to try it on [[Public Server]]. ;)
		+
		+	[[Category:Guides]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:48, 9 April 2007
Line 20:		Line 20:
	=== No-Terraforming ===		=== No-Terraforming ===
	This is not possible, is it?		This is not possible, is it?
		+	We have to try it on Sandbox. ;)