• Edited

xRegnarokx No, I just used a single floor gridmap with hardcoded elevation.
Make the simplest version first. Then upgrade and add finesse and complexity.

In general, your code looks too complicated. It's also too deeply nested.

Take a look at the demo to see how simple this actually can be. I just updated it with even simpler version, so download it again if you already did so previously. It's 15 lines of gridmap code and 35 lines of character code. That's all.

  • Edited

xRegnarokx Oh, and if you want to get all top cells, it can also be done in a much simpler way. Simply iterate through all used cells and maintain a dictionary whose key is xz cell coordinate. Whenever you encounter the same xz coordinate, compare its y with the y in the dictionary and overwrite the value if the y is larger than what's already stored. At the end of iteration your dictionary values will be top cells:

func _get_top_cells() -> Array:
	var top_cells: Dictionary
	for c in get_used_cells():
		var c_xz = Vector2i(c.x, c.z)
		if not top_cells.has(c_xz) or c.y > top_cells[c_xz].y:
			top_cells[c_xz] = c
	return top_cells.values() 

This can also be easily extended to find whole stacks. Just store all cells with same xz in an array under the xz key and in the end sort each of those arrays by y:

func _get_stacks() -> Dictionary:
	var stacks: Dictionary
	for c in get_used_cells():
		var c_xz = Vector2i(c.x, c.z)
		if not stacks.has(c_xz):
			stacks[c_xz] = []
		stacks[c_xz].push_back(c)
	for s in stacks.values():
		s.sort_custom(func(a, b): return a.y < b.y)
	return stacks

    xyz Okay, I'll redownload the demo. Also, I'll work on implementing a more basic system, and as I develop and run into needs will tweak it.

    xyz So, I messed around with what you suggested with your most recent code. I got it working very simply, where it would return a dictionary of all the top most cells, so then I sought to tweak it and make it return the top most cells as long as they didn't have a block directly on top of them.

    Example a tower of 4 blocks, that was every other cell would return a dictionary of 4 coords at the same xz. However, it would be accessed by the xz coords and then they would be sorted by another dictionary holding their elevations.

    Here is the code, it is quite rough, and I am sure not up to snuff.

    extends GridMap
    
    var map_cells: Dictionary
    
    func _ready() -> void:
    	map_cells = _get_top_cells()
    
    func _get_top_cells() -> Dictionary:
    	var top_cells: Dictionary
    	for cells in get_used_cells():
    		var cell_coords: = Vector2i(cells.x,cells.z)
    		if not top_cells.has(cell_coords):
    			top_cells[cell_coords] = []
    		top_cells[cell_coords].push_back(cells)
    	for x in top_cells.values():
    		x.sort_custom(func(a,b): return a.y > b.y)
    	return _get_moveable_cells(top_cells.values())
    
    func _get_moveable_cells(stack: Array) -> Dictionary:
    	var new_stack: Dictionary
    	for grp in stack:
    		var c: Vector3i = grp[0]
    		if grp.size() == 1:
    			new_stack[Vector2i(c.x,c.z)] = {c.y:c}
    			continue
    		if grp.size() == 2:
    			if abs(c.y - grp[1].y) >= 2:
    				new_stack[Vector2i(c.x,c.z)] = {c.y:c,grp[1].y:grp[1]}
    				continue
    			new_stack[Vector2i(c.x,c.z)] = {c.y:c}
    			continue
    		if grp.size() > 2:
    			new_stack[Vector2i(c.x,c.z)] = _sort_elevation(grp)
    	return new_stack
    
    func _sort_elevation(grp: Array) -> Dictionary:
    	var sorted: Dictionary
    	var under: bool
    	for c in grp:
    		if grp.find(c) + 1 == grp.size():
    			return sorted
    		if abs(c.y - grp[grp.find(c) + 1].y) > 1:
    			if under:
    				under = false
    				sorted[grp[grp.find(c) + 1].y] = grp[grp.find(c) + 1]
    				continue
    			sorted.merge({c.y:c,grp[grp.find(c) + 1].y:grp[grp.find(c) + 1]})
    			print(sorted)
    			continue
    		if sorted.get(c.y + 1):
    			continue
    		sorted[c.y] = c
    		under = true
    	return sorted

    I am also going to do some research on how to better search/compare elements in an array, maybe I should more of pop elements out of a stack or something of the sort to search elements.

    Edit: I wonder if I could do something like this with slice as well? It isn't finished but I need to go to bed.

    func _sort_elevation(grp: Array) -> Dictionary:
    	var sorted_dict: Dictionary
    	var sorted: Array
    	var first:bool = true
    	for x in grp.size() - 1:
    		var slice = grp.slice(0,2)
    		if first:
    			if abs(slice.front().y - slice.back().y) > 1:
    				sorted.append(slice.back())
    			sorted.append(grp.pop_front())
    			first = false
    			continue
    		if abs(slice.front().y - slice.back().y) > 1:
    			sorted.append(slice.back())
    		grp.pop_front()
    	return {}
    • xyz replied to this.
      • Edited

      xRegnarokx Again, way too much code. You could have just used my function that gets stacks. Since stacks are sorted by y, simply check if two last y coords in a stack are not adjacent or there's only one cell in a stack. If either is the case, you have a top cell with nothing underneath it:

      func _get_floating_top_cells() -> Array:
      	var stacks = _get_stacks().values()
      	stacks = stacks.filter( func(s): return s.size() == 1 or abs(s[-1].y - s[-2].y) > 1 )
      	return stacks.map( func(s): return s[-1] )
      • Edited

      xRegnarokx Oh, just realized you wanted all occupied cells that have space above them. Well that's even simpler. Iterate through all used cells and just check if the cell above is occupied:

      func _get_platform_cells() -> Array:
      	var platform_cells = []
      	for c in get_used_cells():
      		if get_cell_item(Vector3i(c.x, c.y + 1, c.z)) == -1:
      			platform_cells.push_back(c)
      	return platform_cells

      Those could also easily be grouped in a dictionary with xz as a key. It's 2 additional lines of code.

      EDIT: Why do all of this though? In a 2.5D game like this there should be no holes in stacks. So simply throw an exception if a hole is found. And display a message that the map is not designed according to rules 🙂

        xyz Ahh that is right, you could just check if the cell above returns -1 and this is empty... duh...

        Well as far as why to do this, in my game eventually I want to have bridges and such or platforms that are above that you can walk under (like there are in Tibia). In 2D there are no actual gaps it's just rendering order.

        However, for 3D in 2.5D I assumed this was the best way to do that.

        • xyz replied to this.
          • Edited

          xRegnarokx You're again trying to make a complex system before you made a simple system.

          • Edited

          xRegnarokx Here's a version of demo that can have holes. All tiles are now same sized cubes. It can handle any number of "bridges" one on top of another.
          This is 15 additional lines of code compared to previous version. 60 lines in total in the whole project.

          grid-movement2.zip
          8kB

            xyz Cool, thanks, I'll try and implement just that movement. Then I'll slowly add things to it such as other units moving, and detecting/setting occupation of tiles, ect... Thank you so much!

            Edit: So, using your code I created a simple movement, and am working with it to understand it better. I did tweak it, and am planning on implementing obstacles to test it out, here is my occupied changing that I added.

            func update_occupied(from: Vector2i,to: Vector2i,from_elevation: int, to_elevation: int) -> void:
            	for cf in map_data[from]:
            		if not cf.elevation == from_elevation:
            			continue
            		cf.occupied = false
            	for ct in map_data[to]:
            		if not ct.elevation == to_elevation:
            			continue
            		ct.occupied = true
            • xyz replied to this.
              • Edited

              xRegnarokx Remember that the most important thing is figuring out the best fitting data structure(s) for the problem you want to solve. Doing so can simplify/shorten your code by the order of magnitude. Conversely, choosing inappropriate structure(s) can turn your code into a mess.

              Time to yet again inject that timeless Fred Brooks piece of wisdom:

              xRegnarokx Cool, thanks, I'll try and implement just that movement. Then I'll slowly add things to it such as other units moving, and detecting/setting occupation of tiles, ect... Thank you so much!

              Note that adding other moving units to a system like this is trivial because movement only happens in respect to map data, and is instant. Only the visual representation shows (fake) gradual transition. So when you need to move the unit to some cell, just check if no other unit has its map position at that cell. If that's true, you can safely move it there.

              xRegnarokx For completeness, here's the version with the player and arbitrary number of npcs, all moving and respecting cell occupancy of each other. As I already mentioned, this is trivial to add if you store your map/cell data in a proper structure.

              We're now at 90 lines of code in total.
              gridmap - 20 LOC
              character base class - 50 LOC
              player - 10 LOC
              npc - 10 LOC

              grid-movement3.zip
              9kB

                xyz You definitely make it look easy haha, I have a long way to go to learn how to think through implementation and such.

                • xyz replied to this.
                  7 days later

                  xyz Thanks for giving me a launching pad, I have been expanding what you suggested to implement things like stairs/slopes that you can mount and normal blocks that you can't. So, rather than any block at a certain elevation, I've made it that there are certain mountable blocks, that you can mount, or descend from (following same 1 elevation difference principle) however, if you aren't on a mountable block, or moving to a mountable block you can't move to a higher or lower elevation.

                  I think I'll close this question for the moment since I think you sufficiently answered my original question.

                  I'll work on pushing objects and other movement types now, such as dashing to fleshout my movement system.

                  • xyz replied to this.
                    • Edited

                    xRegnarokx Pushable objects should be treated in the similar way NPCs are. So again, they'd be relatively easy to implement.