Idea occurred to me (in the shower, of course) which I don't have enough time to expound at length right now ... but basic gist of it is ...
We keep thinking of the Alignment axes for City of Titans as being arranged like this ... with "Neutral" being the origin point in the center ...
[img]http://www2.bakersfieldcollege.edu/mesa/Graph%20Paper/3D%20Gra3.gif[/img]
What if that's the wrong arrangement? What if, instead, the arrangement was more 2D done in a hex arrangement like this?
[img]http://i.imgur.com/GeL5w.jpg[/img]
Color the different axes as RGB (Red, Gold, Blue) and arrange them in 120 degree increments around the hex.
Red (Peace/Violence)
Gold (Honor/Dishonor)
Blue (Law/Unlawful)
Then you can "draw triangle shapes" between the different points of the alignment axes for each character. THEN you can write an algorithm which makes certain Options available within a particular mission if the "Alignment Triangle" for a character overlaps a specific point in the "drawn shape" so as to give yourself an incredibly wide range of variability for Who Can Do What inside the content.
Anyway, that's the quick and dirty version of the idea. More in depth explanation will have to wait. Gotta run NOW.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
This sort of graph is called a spiderweb plot and is used, often, in football and other sports in describing an athlete's various physical skills and attributes, like height, vertical leap, sprint time, etc. There are usually more than 3 "axes" in that case, but the principle is the same. I think it works best when the individual things being measured are quantifiable within a defined range and (mostly) independent of each other. The independence is easy, the quantifiablility is perhaps a little less so, but probably still doable. The one big advantage this has over the "Cartesian coordinate system" is that is can be drawn in 2D, as Redlynne stated.
R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising
Simpler and yet potentially more complex at the same time, especially for story and mission arcs. Me likey.
If it's not too late in the development process.
FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)
TBH, I never really automatically assumed our 3-axis alignment system was going to follow the "mathematical" 3-D Cartesian coordinate layout. I guess I always assumed (unconsciously perhaps) it was going to be visually displayed in some kind of hybrid 2-D form so that it could easily "fit" on some kind of in-game GUI.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
The plot and the premise appear to contradict.
In a spiderweb plot, each of the six axes is its own independant measure, from 0 to a positive maximum. However, what you propose is an intersection of three, each with a value of negative maximum to positive maximum. So you will ever only be using three out of the six points.
It can certainly be done, but the math behind the spider plot would need to be re-invented so that a negative law value, for example, is represented as 0 on the law axis and its absolute value along the unlawful axis.
Maybe the game's math already does this. If so, then you've just made a most excellent graphic representation proposal. If not, I still think it is excellent, but will require some tweaking to make it work. Doable? Yes. Difficult? Probably not. Worth it? probably.
Best of all, in my selfish opinion, your proposal works very well with the idea I had in another thread about what missions we will be eligible for. Your alignment along each axis becomes a prerequisite for missions. http://cityoftitans.com/forum/nice-have-ui-elements
Maybe the mission giver only cares about your alignment on one axis, maybe the mission giver cares about the 'triangle' of all three.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
I'll take your word that spiderweb plots usually only use non-negative values but I guess I'm missing why negative numbers couldn't used unless you do something "tricky" with it. The main limitation to something like this would be if the values involved were being used in actual mathematical calculations. On the other hand if the numbers are just being used as abstract demarcation "place holders" for the scales then you ought to be able use letters from the Greek alphabet for all it mattered.
Basically the question to ask will be "Are the alignment scales values going to be significant in terms of being used for deriving other values?" If not then there shouldn't be any problem with negatives being used (i.e. -10 to 10).
If I'm missing something here then let me know. *shrugs*
P.S. As a hypothetical let's say your alignment consisted of the following: 3 on the Lawful/Unlawful axis, -2 on the Peace/Violence axis and -1 on the Honor/Dishonor axis. Your spiderweb plot might look like this (with its associated "triangle" of coverage):
[IMG]http://i65.tinypic.com/14jyyps.jpg[/IMG]
Seems straightforward enough to me.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Well, then there's the question if alignment scales are linear, or curved.
Also, 'negative' on one scale can just be transferred to 'positive' on another. We have 3 axes of alignment, which can be translated as 6 scales on a web-diagram. Having a positive rank on one axis just means zero on the opposed axis. No confusion necessary.
Be Well!
Fireheart
What advantage do you get with curved scales for this? Let's Keep It Simple Silly. ;)
Why do you need "six" scales for this? Three axes means you only have/need three scalar values to describe alignment. Each of these three values are the points to describe the "triangle" your alignment covers. See my example in my last post.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
While I don't think any of us had any problem visualizing what Redlynne meant, Lothic's graphic representation is what I was picturing in my head.
This is exactly what I was talking about. I used the term "absolute value", which is a mathematical expression saying the conversion of a negative number into a positive number of the same magnitude. So if I confused anyone I apologize.
Its just that the math a polar plot (a.k.a. spider web plot) uses would get confused by negative numbers. If we want 0 in the middle, and I think we do, we will need to plot each axis as two different axes in order to deal with the negative numbers. Just like what Fireheart said.
But that would be six points, not just 3, because a zero in the opposite direction still counts as a value... So we wouldn't end up with a triangle. This is a case where the understanding and the visualization is far less complicated than the math to make it happen. But with some coding and a few 'if' statements, it should not be a problem for the programmers to make it look just like what Lothic made.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Ultimately I'm assuming the under-the-hood "math" to make this work would not be terribly hard regardless if they used only absolute values (for some reason) or a mix of positives/negatives. Frankly as a software engineer with 20+ years of professional experience I doubt this would be that hard to figure out either way. I'm just not convinced you "have" to only use absolutes unless it would somehow (non-intuitively) make things easier to implement.
Either way I think ranging the scales in terms of positives and negatives makes "more sense" from a player/GUI point of view because it just seems weird to me to have the "most negative" state of an alignment axis be "0" instead of a relatively huge negative number (i.e. -100). Ideally I still think ranging the scales from -100 to 100 (via integers) would provide enough granularity for all sorts of interesting alignment effects/consequences.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Yeah, it appears as if you still missed what I was trying to say. But I really don't think it matters and I don't want to make more of an issue out of it than we already have. Try plotting a radar plot with three values and make one of them negative and see what your plot looks like, and see what value your origin point becomes.
We agree that it's doable and that's really all that matters.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Ironically radar operations/analysis is specifically what I do for a living. But like you said it's probably not worth arguing about. ;)
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
maybe if we used just 3 words... people might not confuse the + or - on the axis alignments?
[b]Lawful:[/b] 1 to 10. . . . and without having to outright state it.. [b]UnLawful:[/b] -1 to -10.
[b]Honorable:[/b] 1 to 10. . . . and without having to outright state it.. [b]DisHonorable:[/b] -1 to -10.
[b]Harmony:[/b] 1 to 10. . . . and without having to outright state it.. [b]DisHarmony:[/b] -1 to -10.
[img]http://i65.tinypic.com/14jyyps.jpg[/img]
This is the basic notion (very basic) of what I was thinking of (thanks Lothic, didn't have time this morning to go find one of these). And yes, a Spiderweb plot is exactly the idea.
This pic shows all of the positive values being "up" on the plot, and the negative values being "down" on the plot. I was actually thinking of doing an alternating sequence of +/-/+/-/+/- as you go around the edge, instead of the +/+/+/-/-/- like you see here in this graphic. By alternating the +/- sides of the three Alignment axes like that on the plot, you wind up with configuration in which +10/+10/+10 yields a "maximal area coverage" triangle, but which still doesn't cover absolutely EVERYTHING simultaneously. Same deal for the -10/-10/-10 counterpart ... you get another maximal area coverage triangle, but this time it's inverted compared to the "positive" one, and that's something you can quickly and easily SEE with the spiderplot. Sadly, I don't have time to make a pair of examples of this right now to make this as clear as possible, but that's the notion.
You then "plot" all kinds of stuff in relation to what the spiderplot triangles "cover" so as to determine if characters are "eligible for that particular choice. This could potentially include anything from Optional Mission Objectives to what sorts of NPC Contacts will deal with you. Pretty much anything and everything where your Reputation/Alignment might have bearing on the question could be "answered" by what amounts to simple spiderplot "area coverage" math. You could even rig things such that "questions" concerning eligibility are only interested in 2 out of 3 of the Alignment axes at any particular time, meaning that the "question" then becomes whether or not the triangle of area coverage "reaches" to include a particular point on the graph (if yes then yes, if no then no) and you can include point markers on the plot to show What Would Be Required for that option to be available to the PC.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
Ultimately it won't matter if they use (0 to X) scales or not (either on the GUIs and/or "under-the-hood"). I'm just saying it would make more sense (to me at least) if the numbers they used for the axes on the GUIs span ranges from (-X to X). I can accept if other people would want something else because it's all up in the air at this point anyway.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Thanks - I just whipped this one up in a few minutes using silly old MS Paint. I figured it'd be enough to carry the discussion along...
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Great. Then you already understand that there's no such thing as a negative value on an actual radar display. Distance(range) is always positive.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Ahhh... so i wasted my time making this?
[img]http://image.prntscr.com/image/156279faba4f44ecaed31856fab76482.png[/img]
So, bringing DisHarmony also drags down (The Green Area) Lawfulness (or Honor), pick one or the other? not both?
Okay, let's see if I can explain this better with time and (decidedly primitive drawing) tools.
Start with a hexagon.
[img]http://www.kidsmathgamesonline.com/images/pictures/shapes/hexagon.jpg[/img]
Draw RGB (Red, Gold, Blue) axis lines on it.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/BDmtfUi.jpg[/img]
Annotate the Alignment axes to make the rest of the explanation clearer.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/YEvBHpF.jpg[/img]
Shade the spiderplot for a "max area" triangle of an "heroic" Max Lawful, Max Honorable, Max Non-Violent set of alignments.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/pqFfvAA.jpg[/img]
Shade the spiderplot for a "max area" triangle of a "villainous" Max Lawless, Max Honorless, Max Violent set of alignments.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/3567L7c.jpg[/img]
Note that in both cases, there are "large" swaths of available space NOT covered by these options! Even if you overlay the two possible combinations on top of each other (2 man Team of completely opposed alignments) you STILL do not cover the entire available area of the spiderplot.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/edUQ1ra.jpg[/img]
What this means is that simply doing a "Max Up" and a "Max Down" on the three Alignment axes [i]is not enough in and of itself to encompass the FULL capabilities of the City of Titans Alignment system[/i][b]!![/b] If you want to cover EVERY possibility, you're going to need more than [i]just 2 people[/i] to get the full scope of EVERYTHING that could be done. Why?
This means that in order to cover ALL possibilities of the entire Alignment system (using the "shaping" method provided in this posting), you'll need no less than [b][i]SIX[/i][/b] Character Types in order to cover the entire spectrum of available possibilities[b](!!)[/b].
Now, go back to the Alignment annotated view I showed earlier.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/YEvBHpF.jpg[/img]
Now add a "marker" point on it for something ... in this case something a little bit Honorable and a little bit Lawless ... and the Violent/Non-violent axis is essentially "neutral" for this.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/OQJV7n6.jpg[/img]
All you have to do is check to see if the triangle drawn by the spiderplot OVERLAYS this specific point (Y/N?) to make it an option available for that interaction. In this specific case, if someone was TOO Violent and TOO Lawless and TOO Honorable, thus skewing their Alignment axes "too far" to the left of this example, there would be no overlay with the specified option point that is being considered, making them a Bad Match™ for that particular possibility.
All the Devs would need to do is assign various options "places" on the Alignment spiderplot, using marker pins, and then compare the "area" described by a character's Alignment axes (whether PC or NPC!) to determine if that particular option should be a possibility when determining branching paths for almost anything in the game ... from Reactions (favorable or hostile) to whether or not a Contact will even consent to talk to you (let alone do your bidding or do business with you). Now at its heart I'm talking about a strictly boolean determinant factor [i]for use as a starting point[/i] for a branching paths kind of system, which could then be further influenced by all kinds of other things so as to yield a very complex set of interweaving factors which are all driven by very simple things that ought to be under the Player's control (or at least influence). Note also that this kind of thing means that you can have ALL character types living in the same world together, but if this is taken far enough it will mean that various Alignment types will naturally tend to congregate in different areas of Titan City, since those will be "Safe Zones" (friendly territory) for them and "Hostile Zones" (enemy territory) to the opposing alignment types. Taken to a truly large scale, a PC transiting through Titan City would be able to see the shift in attitude of the NPCs towards their presence as they travel through different neighborhoods, and the changes over distance will be enough to "inform" the PC which places are safe for them and which aren't.
Anyway, in case it wasn't obvious enough already, I'm thinking that this kind of "visual approach" to both how to handle and how to present the Alignment axes in the game UI makes for a very powerful concept that has enormous potential, not only for customization of the playing experience but also for the clarity it would bring to a 3 Alignment axis system like City of Titans is going to be using. You can change the ordering of the vertices on the hex for the spiderplot and spin it around however you need to in order to make it work (or make it look pretty), but that's the basic underlying idea I had this morning (while taking a shower no less) and then had to post before Real Life™ claimed me for the day.
Questions?
Comments?
[url=http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/26568388/images/1376362273112.png]Maka chop[/url]?
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
It looks to me like we're not as confused as we might think, graphing 3 dimensions into 2, by showing 6 opposed vectors, which form 3 axes of value.
In 3D, a set of values can resolve as a straight, or curved line, but that's not practical to graph in 2D. The purpose of a 'curved' set of values, is to show how it's harder to reach and maintain extreme values/perceptions. For the sake of example, consider a 'square-root' value-curve, in which it is very easy to reach '1' - just do one action. However, to reach '2' one needs to accomplish four actions and '3' requires nine... etc. Until one must accomplish a hundred appropriate things to reach a '10', at which point, one false move plummets you back to, well, probably only 9, but you're gonna have to do another hundred to get back to the top.
The math could be written such that a 'fall from grace' is much more extreme than just losing one point of value/scale. It's quite probable that such a fall might wipe out Positive values, but do absolutely no good towards gaining Negative values (or 'positive in the opposite direction' as the case may be). One might lose all positive alignment, but still have to 'work off' the positive points before gaining positive faction in the negative direction (if that makes sense?)
Anyway, a 'curved' scale of values accounts for a diminishing returns environment.
Be Well!
Fireheart
I think a "good" (Lawful, Peaceful, Honourable) on top and "bad" (Unlawful, Violent, Dishonourable) on bottom is a bit easier to gather a moral alignment at a glance and program bottom and top coverage. On the math side, your eligibility for alignment based missions and such can be calculated by calculating the "good" area and/or "bad" area. If you're blocked from some stuff for being too good or bad that is.
But I see an issue with a hexagonal spider plot: it usually shows 6 distinct traits (e.g., strength, dexterity, constitution, charisma, intelligence, luck), but our morality traits are diametric: they are either violent or peaceful. Do we have a system where you add both violent and peaceful points, or do we have a system where violence cancels peaceful points?
I think cancelling makes more sense. Otherwise, you can max out both peaceful and violent, then how does that work in determining alignment?
[hr]
[color=red]PR, Forum Moderator[/color]
[url=http://cityoftitans.com/forum/desvipers-creative-impulsivity]My Non-Canon Backstories[/url]
Avatar by MikeNovember
hmmm... so doing something DisHonorable, doesnt also affect your Lawful or Peaceful standing at all?
Boooo...
if that's the case, might as well just make 3 Bars that can show Darker tint for the current color when in the negatives! :[
@redlynne, Looks awesome but... Let's take your example graph and plot a point that is a bit Honorable and a bit lawful in equal measures. What do you get? Something that is 100% violent. I'm not sure that is what you want. Using the three arrows as coordinate axes gets messy because you are trying to represent three dimensional space in two dimensions. Because, literally, having a value on three axes is by definition three dimensional.
Where do you put a point that is 1/2 lawful, 1/2 honorable and 1/2 non-violent? That point is at the origin (intersection) point, and that would not be clear at all, would it? Would a point at the zero mark really give the impression you needed someone with honor and lawfulness and non-violence? Or would it represent someone with full measures of dishonor, unlawfulness and violence? Or would it represent someone with a score of zero in each? The answer is all three would fit that point, and that is surely not what we want.
I thought your original idea was great with just three individual axes upon which you have a singe score for each that can span from maximum positive to maximum negative. And while a character's 'alignment triangle' is a clean graphical representation of their reputation with the three (or six) factions, I did not interpret it as an attempt at a three axis coordinate system.
I prefer the original concept of a spider plot with an actual triangle, because that's the only way to represent three dimensions in two dimensions.
In other words, using the spiderweb plot, an alignment is an ink splatter. Trying to represent an ink splatter as a point begets misunderstanding. Keep it as an inksplatter with three points and the use stays clear.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Again I'm not going to "argue" with you over this but negative values are used in a variety of contexts during radar ops and data analysis, including actual radar displays. The idea of "radar range" (generically speaking) is only one aspect related to RCS (radar cross section) and the [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Track_algorithm]track algorithms[/url] you're using. As with most things like this it can be defined differently given the context, even (perhaps unintuitively) with "negative" ranges which denote other aspects of the data (not the literal physical distances involved). If you want to try to say that these "spiderweb plots" could only be associated with a concept of range as it might apply to radars then in a tortured fit of logic I might agree with you, sort of.
But let me clarify all this by pointing out that I'll gladly defer to your implied superior knowledge about "spiderweb plots" and whatever stipulations they may have about only being related to non-negative vectors because in my multi-decade career with radars I have NEVER seen anything like spiderweb plots used in any way, shape or form. At least the guys I work with at [url=http://www.nasic.af.mil/]NASIC[/url] and [url=http://www.ll.mit.edu/]MIT/LL[/url] don't use plots like that that I'm aware of at any rate.
In the spirit of friendly conversation I'll go so far as to grant you that if somebody out there actually tried to shoehorn the use of "spiderweb plots" into actual radar ops for the propose of trying display "range" graphically on a screen for multiple objects(?) then I suppose it might be possible. I'm just telling you in practice that never happens.
Anyway... back to the discussion at hand.
You forgot to plot the third point along the violent/non-violent axis. Remember we are not using three "arrows" (vectors) here - we are overlaying 3 DIRECTIONLESS axes to generate three points. Once you drop the vector-based spiderweb plot notion from your thinking on this I think you'll see things a bit more clearly.
This is assuming the game is actually going to use the "triangle" that's generated between three points as something significant. Remember the whole idea of getting the triangle is simply a side-effect or arranging the three axes in a "hexagon" shape.
To put in simple terms why would having a "1/2 lawful, 1/2 honorable and 1/2 non-violent" alignment, which would mean all three of your plot points would be at the origin of the proposed hexagon representation, necessarily be a "bad" thing? Yes we would not get a pretty triangle from that, but like I implied we haven't necessarily determined that every character always NEEDS a triangle from this for everything to work correctly.
You may be completely right about this. The whole attempt to use the crossed-axes hexagon representation to generate a useful side-effect pseudo-3D triangle out of this is just basically a "suggestion" that may or may not ultimately be useful for this game. As per Redlynne's original post I think there still may be some "value added" from this despite some of the implementation problems we're discussing here. Or maybe it'll just be more trouble than it's worth. I guess we'll see what MWM comes up with.
Well, no it isn't... there are many other ways to represent 3D concepts in 2D other than spiderweb plots. For instance we use what we call "threat tubes" in radar that allow you to see in real time on computer screens an object complex (multiple related objects generally traveling together) in a visual representation that lets you determine the physical orientations (distance, range, etc.) between the objects in the given 3D space.
Again back to the game the more fundamental question we need to ask is not whether a 3D representation of this alignment data on 2D GUIs is possible but whether a 3D representation even serves any useful purpose for us. The "triangle" idea might be useful for determining whether various missions are accessible to the given character, but again it might also end up being more trouble than it's worth.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I think the real problem here is that we all started using the specific term "spiderweb plot" without realizing that we aren't really talking about spiderweb plots in the strictest sense.
As you and others have implied spiderweb plots work by using multiple positive vectors ("arrows") that radiate outward from an origin. What we're actually talking about here are three directionless axes that are being laid on top of each other to create a pseudo-3D coordinate scheme. This is why "negative" values can be used for this because the "plot" (or in our case the "triangle" everyone's talking about) being generated with this layout does not rely on the relative distances that "radiate" from the center. The only thing producing the triangle shape in our scenario are the three alignment points that can be anywhere along the three axes. Interestingly this means that the triangle in question doesn't even need to necessarily "cover" the origin point of the three axes as it would have to if this was a strict spiderweb plot.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I seem to recall someone [url=http://cityoftitans.com/comment/109185#comment-109185]already suggested precisely that[/url] in response to Huckleberry elsewhere in the forums ...
You'll note that the quick and dirty pictures I made have no mention on them of gradients of scaling (mainly because the tools I was using weren't sophisticated enough to draw them in for me), but that's mainly because I consider that to be a kind of "second order" problem to be decided after the basic "shape" of how the Alignment axes are to be arranged and graphically presented (basically layout as opposed to scaling).
The downside to doing things that way is that you wind up with a situation where "going max" on the Good Guy/Bad Guy THREE results in a very small area coverage triangle between those three points on one side of the hexagon ... rather than a very large area coverage triangle between those three points encompassing the center of the hexagon (as shown above). This is why I wanted to point out the differences between the +/-/+/-/+/- arrangement I showed and the +/+/+/-/-/- arrangement that Lothic first showed. That's because how you arrange the axes has very long reaching implications for the "Area Rule" of the triangle formed by a character's Alignment settings in the spiderplot. Change the arrangement and you change the shape of the spiderplot.
You'll note that I'm assuming the Alignments cover a spectrum of opposition, such that you can't be both Lawful AND Unlawful at the same time.
This is basically asking the wrong question.
The three Alignment axes are not "cross-linked" to each other FOR A REASON. Doing something Dishonorable doesn't HAVE TO affect your Law and/or Peace Alignments at all. That doesn't prevent the Devs from creating situations in which doing something Dishonorable ALSO includes movement on these other axes, but it is NOT REQUIRED.
Remember, you want the system to be flexible so as to cover every possible permutation available.
You're right, but you're also overlooking the potential for a "Tyranny Of GOOD" type result. The way to think of it is that the more dedicated you are to a particular Alignment axis (whether red, gold or blue) the less ... pure ... you become when measured on the OTHER axes thanks to the Area Rule of the spiderplot triangle.
Take a look again at this "heroic" spiderplot for Max Honor, Max Law, Max Non-Violent.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/pqFfvAA.jpg[/img]
What I see from this is someone who may have a REPUTATION for being extremely Honorable, extremely Law abiding and extremely Non-violent ... but at the same time, they are --> [i]still capable of[/i] <-- doing things (or better yet, working with people) that are "halfway dishonorable" and "halfway lawless" and "halfway violent" in service to those aforementioned extremes. This is where an "Ends Justify The Means" sort of potential can settle in, although it will be up to the PLAYER(!) to resist such temptations (i.e. "quicker, easier, more seductive ... the dark side are they").
Easiest example of this that I can offer would be a "straight and narrow Good Cop" who has cultivated numerous sources and informants in the underworld, who has a reputation and is respected by people who (ostensibly) ought to be diametrically opposed to the "straight and narrow Good Cop" but will otherwise work with them (or at least be more willing to cooperate) because they know that the "straight and narrow Good Cop" can be TRUSTED in what they do. Same deal for the "crooked on the take Bad Cop" ... but in a different way. In other words, the "shape" of their spiderplot triangles represents the sorts of people they can talk to and deal with. The way I've presented things allows there to be some overlap between the two while at the same time maintaining the DIFFERENCES between the two, such that each has their own "angle" on the content in the game.
Actually, what you'd do is pick a "point" like this ...
[img]http://i.imgur.com/5kP6tSD.jpg[/img]
Yes, I know, that's a *triangle* and not a *point* in that it is showing an area instead of a zero dimensional "point" ... and that's MY point. Using the system that I'm proposing, what you've asked (1/2 Law, Honor and Non-violent simultaneously) is something that ENCOMPASSES MORE than just merely a single "point space" on the graph, because (as has been pointed out) we're working in 2D rather than in 3D. If we were working in a 3D plot, your 1/2 Law, Honor and Non-violent would be represented by a single point somewhere in a quadrant midway between all those values more akin to this ...
[img]http://i.stack.imgur.com/O2FFp.png[/img]
Not to belabor the ... uh ... point ... but it really comes down to "what are you [b]expecting[/b] to see?" A single "dot" point or an "area" that can be overlapped?
Now ask yourself ... "which would be the more flexible thing to work with [i]as a Developer[/i]?" ... individual points or "areas" that can be as large/small as needed? It basically comes down to the difference between Arithmetic and Algebra. Both can give you the "right answer" to your problems ... but one is more powerful (Algebra) than the other (Arithmetic) because it can give you more than just single point answers.
Ultimately what I was going after was a "System Of Overlaps" that could be represented very simply in a GUI. Basically you have a system that shows you the "area" that your PC can work WITHIN as opposed to defining "points" that you must absolutely adhere TO and then make possible a system of "checking for overlaps" between PCs and NPCs to manage their social reactions. Long story short, if the "areas" overlap then stuff can happen one way ... and if they don't, well ... stuff happens a different way (usually hostile). You then take that and build out from there.
To take things even further, look at the "overlaps" between the maximal "hero" and the maximal "villain" I previewed up thread.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/pqFfvAA.jpg[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/3567L7c.jpg[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/edUQ1ra.jpg[/img]
Notice what I didn't mention but which is apparent when taking what I've been talking about to the logical extreme.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/PDxZ0te.jpg[/img]
Everything inside the green hexagon is what could be considered "cross-over potential" even between maximally opposed adversaries. In City of Heroes, the area inside that green hex would be where [url=https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Vanguard]Vanguard[/url] would have operated ... as both Lawful and Lawless ... as both Honorable and Dishonorable ... as both Violent and Non-violent ... accepting of All and judging None. THAT is where the Heroes and Villains "Co-op Zone" lies. In other words, being "True Neutral" isn't something represented by a single POINT on a graph at the very center and excluding everything else, but rather by the "size" of its ... tolerance ... of others to work towards a common purpose (in the case of Vanguard, defending the planet against Rikti invaders).
The larger the area ... the greater the tolerance of differing points of view, motives and attitudes towards How To Get Stuff Done.
I prefer the triangle because that then lets you do "area rule" comparisons to check for overlaps (Y/N?) which then get expressed as a RANGE of possible combinations, rather than a "you must be this high to ride this ride" sort of linear check.
Correct. I was using a "point" (actually a small circle) as my first ... uh ... point of reference ... simply because it was the easiest thing to use to get the basic concept and notion across. However, there's no reason why you can't be checking "triangle against triangle" instead of "triangle against point" if you want to broaden things out so as to be less restrictive about the range of potential overlapping. And although I'd argue that for simplicity (and sanity purposes!) it would be best to limit PC's to a spiderplot of triangular shaping, there's no limitation saying that an ORGANIZATION couldn't have a much more polygonal shaping to it ... such as the aforementioned Vanguard example staking out a "Neutral Hex" sort of area rule for intentionally co-operative play between Natural Enemies.
And this is where the Numbers Hit The Math ... because as soon as you start talking about "matching areas" to each other like I am, you're not doing Arithmetic anymore ... you're doing Algebra. You're not checking against single thresholds, but rather against a RANGE of potential possibilities and combinations. And you're not just doing it against "one thing" at a time, but against "all the things" at the same time. More complex, yes ... but also MUCH more powerful and enabling of broader potentials.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
@Redlynne, I'm trying to combine what you just wrote to what you wrote before and now I think I'm more confused.
What was your intention with the "marker point" in your previous post?
Where would the marker point be if the prerequisites for a mission were equal parts lawful and honorable? If you had a 1/2 lawful and 1/2 honorable prerequisites, then your marker point would be located on the violent line at 1/4 violent. Is it your intention to say that anyone with a triangle that covers 1/4 violent is eligible for that mission? That doesn't make sense to me, since the mission prerequisites are Honorable and Lawful and have no mention of a violent prerequisite. So someone with negative honor and negative lawfulness but plenty of violence can do the same mission? Not making sense to me.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
It's clear that pegging the various alignment labels to different points along the hexagon will result in differently sized triangles once you plot the actual values. I'm just not completely certain whether any one particular arrangement (as you've expressed them in terms of variations like "+/-/+/-/+/-" or "+/+/+/-/-/-") is automatically superior to any other. Yes by alternating them (+/-/+/-/+/-) we might end up with "larger" triangles at the extreme cases ("max good" and/or "max bad") but we're also left with a configuration that's not quite as instantly "identifiable" because you've (untraditionally?) mixed the good and bad endpoints around where you can't easily make out what's good or bad. For what it's worth most alignment diagrams in other games usually have the positive and negative leaning categories stacked on the same side/direction of the diagram so that it's more intuitive to see what's going on. I guess what I'm asking is whether the "larger" triangles are worth the arguable loss of overall usefulness of the diagram? Couldn't the game be designed to account for the extreme alignment cases regardless of the total area encompassed by the resulting triangles?
This was ultimately what I figured the end result of all this was going to be. As a hypothetical let say there was a mission that was designed to be gated by alignment. The Devs would devise an "alignment" for the mission and assign it values that would allow it to have its own alignment triangle. Then the game could compare your character's alignment triangle to the mission's and see if there was -any- amount of overlap, even if it's just a tiny sliver. If there's any overlap then you get to go. This would account for a "range" of alignments that wouldn't have to be defined by discrete arbitrary points.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
OK it's clear we all kinda-sorta agree with each other on this topic but it's also clear that we're all kinda-sorta talking past one another at the same time.
I think one thing we really need to nail down is whether we're actually talking about strict spiderweb plots (that use multiple single-direction vectors to create 2D blob plots) or a collection of overlapping non-directional axes (to simulate a pseduo-3D coordinate system). There's a huge difference between these two things in terms of the "usefulness" of the derived plots (at least in terms of how that would apply to CoT) and what limitations you have on the scalar demarcations of the system. Remember we're not dealing with six data points here, only three. There's no (logical) need to account for both a "positive value" of Honor and a "positive value" of Dishonor. You only need one data point pegged on the single Honor/Dishonor axis.
Also we need to be more clear exactly what these derived "triangles of alignment" are actually going to provide for us. I think some of us (including myself) are jumping to conclusions before we really determine if having these things are going to be worth their trouble creating in the first place.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Yes, I didn't mean to imply that it was an original idea. I asked the question earlier in this thread, got no response to that, so I thought to do a brief, simple description of the idea.
Be Well!
Fireheart
There are various way to achieve the effects of a "diminishing returns environment" while keeping the actual scales of the alignment axes simple and linear. It would make sense that someone at any alignment extreme should be affected far more drastically by a "negative shift" toward the neutral point but such a shift could be handled by an appropriately large alignment value shift determined on a case-by-case basis.
For example let's assume the alignment scales worked over a range of (-100 to 100). If someone is extremely Honorable (let's say their Honor value is 98) and they do something "dishonorable" that one act might shift them down negatively say 15 or 20 points. Conversely the effort to go up from say a value of 80 to 95 should be relatively harder to accomplish than swinging back and forth through say -10 to 10. On the other hand if you had a character who wasn't particularly honorable to begin with (let's say he only had a value of 18) that same "dishonorable" act might only shift them down a few standard points whereas an "honorable" shift might give them 5 or 10 points upward.
Basically the game would take your current alignment values into account when calculating how large any new alignment shift would be. The "tricky math" (or probably just look-up tables) to determine the magnitudes of the shifts could be handled "behind the scenes" and just leave players with the simple linear scale of values to refer to on their GUIs.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Probably because I'm starting with the (let's call it) Hex-Tri(angle) Plot and then using that to describe "ranges" of acceptability. I've arranged things in the fashion that I did (intermixing rather than segregating) so as to produce Hex-Tri Plots that covered the greatest possible area for the most common "max" Alignment packages. Why? Teaming. The system I'm building here has a socializing bias towards wanting to have the largest possible triangles plotted so as to give Players the widest range of possible options to choose from. Bigger triangle area means more choices (basically). Shoving everything to "one side" of the Hex-Tri Plot, whether that be the "top" for Heros and "bottom" for Villains works against that intended goal/feature.
Also, by intermixing the directions of the axes like that, you aren't making a Pre-emptive Value Judgement as to "which is better than what" in terms of segregating the playerbase (into Tops and Bottoms? o.O;). By interleaving them the way I have, you produce Hex-Tri Plots that each have unique shaping to them, but for which there is no "Right Answer" for any particular faction or side as to which way the triangles "ought to be turned" or facing. Why? [b][i]DIVERSITY[/i][/b]. You want to make it possible for Players to express their creations in a wild profusion of forms that don't lead directly into "you're doing it wrong" judgements from the knee-jerk opinion mongers.
There are different WAYS to play Heroes and Villains ... and the arrangement I proposed not only makes that possible but also VERY LIKELY.
Depends on how ... restrictive ... you want things to be. The "area" for the Mission could be expressed as a zero dimensional point, as a one dimensional line (or a curve if you wanted to get fancy), or as a two dimensional area ... such as a triangle (or a crescent with width if you wanted to get really fancy). A single point is extremely limiting, since that results in IF AND ONLY IF type value judgements that you have to nail exactly, whereas a line or even an area gives you a lot more range for potential overlap (and thus more available options, possibly).
Just take this image ...
[img]http://i.imgur.com/YEvBHpF.jpg[/img]
And start "drawing" stuff on it. For characters (PCs mainly), the only restriction is that you can put 1 vertex on each of the RGB axes [b][i]somewhere[/i][/b] and then draw the triangle connecting them. Note that these triangle shapes [i]need not cover the convergence point of the 3 axes in the center[/i].
Then as a Developer, all you have to do is draw in a "shape" on the Hex-Tri that describes which "areas" of character alignments are permitted access to that particular branch of content. "Simple" cross-check for overlap to answer the boolean (Y/N?) question(s) and off you go.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
So all I got from that was you'd rather have what you're calling "diversity" as opposed to what would be a more likely interesting game of Tops and Bottoms...
Whatever floats your boat. ;)
P.S. On a serious note at least you provided a reasonable explanation for this choice but I will admit it would take some getting used to as far as "interpreting" what I'd be looking at with all the "good" and "bad" values intermixed like that. Just saying what you're purposing here would be a trade-off between favoring one kind of detail (diversity) over another (clarity).
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
As long as in the NPC's mission log (or mission info details) shows:
* Lawful: [color=red]-2[/color]
* Violent: [color=red]-4[/color]
* Honor: [color=red]-6[/color]
;)
I like that Redlynne has them intermixed, and I subscribe to her reasons. There's another reason that it appeals to me which she didn't mention, and that is the plots will be more interesting and actually easier to see with the points alternating the way she has them.
But to me, the idea of using the three dimensions as an actual coordinate system is far too misleading and downright confusing to be useful in two dimensions. If we just stick with a spiderweb, a.k.a. radar plot, and don't use it to calculate, but only to represent, then I think it is clear.
With a spider plot used only to represent three numbers, you can have a mission with only a single dimensional requirement and not worry about the others. For example, let's say there's a Rikti invasion and we need front-line battlers to destroy the first wave. I couldn't care less whether the heroes I recruit for the mission are honorable or lawful, but I want them to be extremely violent. Therefore, the only prerequisite for my high-level mission is that the characters are at least 50 on the violent scale. Then the players will look at their handy dandy spider plots representing the three scales and will see that if have a 50 or greater in violence, they can apply to the team. It also means that if I need a character who is maxed out on lawful, honorable and non-violent, I can have that too; without accidentally getting someone who is 1/2 violent, 1/2 unlawful and 1/2 dishonorable, which is what the coordinate system would deliver to me and which is purely and diametrically opposed to what I actually wanted.
Sure we don't really need a spiderweb plot when only the three independent numbers are all we need to concern ourselves with. We could do this with just three numbers in a list; but like most of you, I think the spiderweb is far more visually appealing, for the same reason the original example by the OP of an RPG game character represents its six attributes on a spiderweb plot. It would also be cool to look up another character's reputation and see their spiderweb plot. That to me would be far more engaging than just seeing three numbers. I'm a visual thinker, so I like visual representations of data. Some people would rather see the numbers, so we'll need to make sure the actual scores are displayed at the points of the triangles as well.
I also seem to recall seeing somewhere that alignment will be less like Dungeons and Dragons alignment and more like a reputation with each of three pairs of opposed factions. Can anyone find that reference better than I can? So while we have used terms like lawful, violent and honorable in this thread, it may be more likely we have a Law and Order faction on one side and their opposite faction witch are Nietzsche Anarchists, for example. In this way, farming reputation with a faction corresponds directly with your score on that 'alignment' axis.
This also means that the three alignments don't have to be equal distant from each other along the metaphysical spectrum. There may be a 'Ends Justifies the Means for Justice' faction and a 'Always be Kind and Try to Forgive' faction as its opposite. There may be a villian group that is as evil and vicious as possible but is very highly structured an abides by a very strict code of ethics. They would be very honorable, very lawful, but also very dispassionate and unsympathetic. Their opposite could be a dishonorable, unlawful but empathetic faction that is really just a motley assortment of orphan children who try to take care of each other as best they can. The interplay between these six factions would be interesting to say the least. When the law and order faction sends your hero on a mission to uncover and bring in some of the leadership of the street urchins faction, what does your hero do when he or she realizes that doing so would cause orphans to go hungry?
Would your very heroic hero take a mission for the Rigidly Lawful, Honorable, but supremely Evil mob boss to take out an anarchist clown posse that is interfering with mob business?
I suppose all of these situations could be penned regardless of whether we use an alignment system or a faction reputation system. It's all about what measures we use. Kind of like whether you specify a color using Cyan Magenta and Yellow (CMYK) or Red Green and Blue (RGB), the color is still the color by any name or coordinate system. And a rose by any other name would still smell as sweet.
EDIT: I have no idea where I got that hairbrained idea of faction alignment. The actual alignment system is described here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/missingworldsmedia/the-phoenix-project-city-of-titans/posts/629385
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
You're probably thinking of Faction Reputation. Character Alignment and Faction Rep are independant from one another.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
A substantial reason for that (in my case) is, as you've been at pains to point out elsewhere, that City of Titans is going to be less about absolutes (Hero vs Villain, for example) and instead be more about all the different shades along the spectrum of possibilities and potentials. Less black vs white and more in the nuances and shades of grey (and other colors your imagination might conjure forth). This is part of why I prefer a "mixed" Hex-Tri Plot visual to a "side vs side" sort of visual ... both because of what that does to the "math" (i.e. the shapes and regions the triangles cover) and because it keeps the game more "centered" than factionalized, lending the game more of a Team Spirit that we want to inherit/recreate from our shared experiences in Paragon City.
That is EXACTLY the kind of representation I'd be expecting to see for informing Players what the effects of selecting a branching path would DO. Give me the numbers. You might not see values that large (meaning that a movement of "2" might be considered hefty, while "1" would be average), but that's a different topic of discussion.
There's pros and cons either way. I'm looking for something that is more INclusive by design than something that is EXclusive by design. Doing the mix'n'match around the hex the way I showed it accomplishes that, with the added benefit of making the emergence of "Faction Intolerance" as a social phenomenon less likely to occur. It won't prevent it outright in and of itself, but it ought to make it more difficult to sustain as an emergent behavior, simply because the axes do "swap around" the way that I've illustrated them.
I kept looking at the notion of using a 3D plot like this ...
[img]http://www2.bakersfieldcollege.edu/mesa/Graph%20Paper/3D%20Gra3.gif[/img]
... and thinking, "that's gonna be hella confusing to look at and understand" ... because it's got depth and rotation and viewing angle issues and ... it's just too complicated to grasp at a glance. The 3D approach would be [i]very precise[/i] but it would also be hard to present in a visual format other than doing something like this ...
[img]http://images.freeimages.com/images/previews/60e/bar-graph-1165986.jpg[/img]
... and if you're resorting to what amount to "bar graph" representations then the whole system devolves into "You Must Be This Tall To Ride" checks, which means ... THIS ...
[img]http://www.clker.com/cliparts/O/Y/q/1/3/n/you-must-be-this-tall.svg[/img]
Why? Because if you're just doing the "linear" axis method, all you're checking is basically:
Honor 3+? (Y/N)
Law 2-? (Y/N)
... and so on and so forth. It's just a threshold system. Are you on "this side" of the axis, and by how much? It incorporates a kind of "segregation" into the content that the Hex-Tri Plot manages to work around by virtue of being "algebra vs arithmetic" as I mentioned before.
I want the Hex-Tri Plot to be the easy "go to" for not only explaining the Alignment system, since it's something you can *SEE* and get a feel for relatively quickly and being something that doesn't require memorizing lists of numbers to be able to make use of. Graphically, as a UI element, it basically comes down to being a "does this shape overlap that shape" exercise, which even kids in elementary schools can accomplish with relative ease. And no, it doesn't have to be a "completely cover" kind of overlapping. Lothic was correct in asserting that I was looking at an ANY overlapping at all sort of standard (what gaming calls "collision"). Why? Because that makes the multiplayer opportunities wider and more inclusive, rather than being exclusive.
Also note that this means that characters with differing Alignment Hex-Tri Plots will see [i]different sides of the Titan City[/i] even though we're all playing in the same game world together. It means that we can all stand in the same spot and "see" different stuff around us ... even if those differences are mainly Friend vs Foe as opposed to different terrain and building geometries (which would require either Instances or Phasing tech).
Indeed. The [b]REQUIREMENTS[/b] to be met can be "shaped" however they need to be, whether that be circles, lines(!), donuts(!), triangles, hexagons, crescent moons (although that one would be tricky to program), rhomboids or whatever basic geometry the Devs feel like making available to use on the Hex-Tri Plots for these kinds of checks. The areas that these shapes cover can either be extremely broad or could be tailored very narrowly so as to provide either an "everyman" or an "exclusive" type of opportunity/experience.
The PCs would all be limited to triangle shapes for their Alignments, and I'd expect most (individual) NPCs to follow suit. Still, it would be interesting to be able to pull up someone's Bio and be able to see the Hex-Tri Plot for their Alignment as part of the info as a standard feature.
As you can probably tell already, I agree. I like being able to [i]derive additional info[/i] from the basic values assigned to the 3 Alignments ... hence the "triangle area" shape afforded by doing the Hex-Tri Plot being something inherently useful in and of itself, above and beyond simply being a visual representation. As for the actual numbers, I figure that a Mouse Over Vertex of the Alignment Triangle would provide a pop-up window showing the actual integer value that is producing the visual representation. That way you can get the "quick and dirty" visual representation AND get the "detailed math" representation from the same UI presentation.
This really is a big Game Design decision ... and I'm kind of surprised that no one at MWM has intimated how they plan to PRESENT this aspect of the game in a way that intuitively makes sense just by looking at it. Me, I just like to figure out the ... "shape" ... of things (regardless of the number of dimensions) so as to be able to better manipulate the underlying concepts that go into those ideas. This is the reason why I've (historically) been interested in the "Gearing Ratios" that the game is going to be using (3:1 vs 4:1) and what sort of "curve" is going to be used for Diminishing Returns (I favor the square root over the "cliff dropoff") and a bunch of other things that define the mental space we need to be working in when even conceptualizing all kinds of things.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
Oh, by the way, just in case this ever becomes important (mainly because [b][i]I DON'T WANT IT TO HAVE TO BECOME IMPORTANT[/i][/b]) ...
I, Redlynne, also known as Redlynne, release my contributions on these boards under the Plan Z:The Phoenix Project/Missing Worlds Media/City of Titans Contributor License except where I expressly state otherwise on this date of 31 Aug 2016.
Yes, I've posted the release clause verbiage before, but just in case it becomes a sticking point, I'm going to nip that one in the bud right now.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
As long as this info is easy to read at a glance. I mean all this could be easily represented by 3 simple positive/negative bars - or hell, 3 pos/neg numbers. No need for complex graphs or grids - 3D or 2D. I think people are overthinking this a bit, but hey - whatever fits with the UI/design aesthetic and efficiently/cleanly presents the info - I'm game.
Honestly, three vertical bars is good for me :p but a bit BaSiC
[hr]
[color=red]PR, Forum Moderator[/color]
[url=http://cityoftitans.com/forum/desvipers-creative-impulsivity]My Non-Canon Backstories[/url]
Avatar by MikeNovember
"This means that in order to cover ALL possibilities of the entire Alignment system (using the "shaping" method provided in this posting), you'll need no less than SIX Character Types in order to cover the entire spectrum of available possibilities(!!)."
Four.
One character who is either Max Good or Max Evil, and three others who fill in the surrounding triangles with Exact Data Point Overlap on the borders.
For example: a Max Good character would only need three other characters to cover the entire board; one character with Maximum Honor, Maximum Law, but Maximum Violent; one character with Maximum Honor, Maximum Non-Violent, but Maximum Lawless; and one character with Maximum Non-Violent, Maximum Law, but Honorless.
Four character types, not six.
The original Lady of Ysgard. -Virtue
[img]http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2010/203/c/5/Updated_Homage_by_Voldine.jpg[/img]
You know what ... you're right.
Note however that those four characters would all have the barest sliver of overlap between them (line, point or none!).
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]
I think three bars might work better because the triangle/hexagon things look a little confusing.
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/18.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
[URL=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-knhgv6lgbrs/UA_riCKAHNI/AAAAAAAATxE/u-sgh23bZhc/s640/wonder_women_by_penichet-d47up0l.jpg [/IMG][/URL]
I'll again point out we could still ask the fundamental question: Does representing CoT alignment in ANY kind of pseudo-3D representation give us enough "value added" to make it worthwhile? When you consider there's at least 3 or 4 different variations of this scheme suggested on this thread alone do any of them offer anything that's vastly superior to a simple "three independent bar" representation? I would always favor K.I.S.S. over anything that that might add more convolution just for the sake of being "novel" or "clever".
I still hold out hope that a way to "graphically" compare alignments via "areas of triangles" or some-such might be doable/feasible but even if it happens it'll need to be implemented in as simple and straightforward a way as possible. Complication for its own sake won't help us in the long run.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
While I do really like this idea, I wonder how it will relate to a series of qualities that, as currently described, have the potential to shift after every single mission (or even during a mission).
The spiderweb plot is a simple, intuitive interface, and updating the numbers in the background is already planned. How would it be displayed? As part of a "paper doll"? As a separate dialog box? Would the character creation version and the character progress version require completely separate display functions?
It does solve many interface problems, but does it create more problems than it solves?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My author page at Amazon: https://amzn.to/2MPvkRX
My novelty shirts: https://amzn.to/31Sld32
Only way to know is to build it and find out.
[center][img=44x100]https://i.imgur.com/sMUQ928.gif[/img]
[i]Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.[/i][/center]