Відео

Sometime in the next month or so... it depends on how long some of the new features take to write.

I actually like this icon set colors a lot 😅

I am increasing the contrast on the basalt pillars.. But yeah, it is tough to differentiate the various burnt forests (heavy, light, hills, mountains).

Well, I'm going to add true squares as another new feature option folks will be able to vote on after the initial Worldographer 2025 release. I also think doing staggered squares would be interesting.

I second this, I have been using obsidian as well for my campaign. Some type of integration would be sweet

Yes... while we're giving further discounts to folks who bought earlier this year (all the way to Jan 1 2024)... the Crowdfunding price is discounted from the regular price. There is a little more info on the crowdfunding FAQ page (first question under Project FAQs): www.backerkit.com/c/projects/inkwell-ideas/worldographer-2/faqs

Yeah, at first I thought the changes were going to be much more intensive or much longer (20 changes instead of 3). But once you listed just 3 (and 1 was something we were trying to do but just had a bug) I felt much better. I'd even be curious to know what are the next 3 things to get it 10% better (for example). Although one thing I'd like to do is play a bit more with the wind patterns.

​@@inkwellideas6624 I'd say another easy change would be adding %northern forest at 60N and 60S (same code you already used for %jungle and %desert, I think). These are the coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest in America and Siberia in Eurasia. Did you see my post about trimming the edges of flat maps to approximate various map projections? I'm not sure how hard that would be to implement. I also sent a PDF with my original suggestion on discord. I'm not sure if you've read it but that source has incredible detail on realistic biome and world generation Great work!

Well, you can make a new custom layer and draw those on to remind yourself. Are you looking for the program to do that for you? Would you want the program to let you change them and then update how it generates the vegetation based on that?

@inkwellideas6624 i didn't even think about doing one myself. I really need to spend more time learning what I can do with the program, like layering

@inkwellideas6624 I was just tossing and idea out.

I'll have to weigh that idea... letting the user control the ordering by matching how they place them seems like it has its uses too.

@@inkwellideas6624 true, but again maybe it should be a checkbox in the feature tool menu then?

In short, it is a major rewrite/lots of new functionality (like Civilization 4->5->6, etc.) But folks who bought since Jan 1. 2024 & folks who have supported our Patreon since then get it free/discounted. Full details are the first "Project FAQ" answer here: www.backerkit.com/c/projects/inkwell-ideas/worldographer-2/faqs#top

If you purchased the license in or after January 2024, you will have received a discount voucher for use in the Worldographer 2025 crowdfunding campaign (if by some mischance you didn't, you should contact the creator). If you purchased the license before January 2024, you will have to purchase Worldographer 2025 at the full price on the crowdfunder. It is NOT an update under the old license, but a completely revised and reworked version of the software. There are more details on what the main changes are to this new version on the Backerkit page for the campaign, and other information. The older version will continue to be supported in a limited, occasional way once Worldographer 2025 releases, and of course you can continue to use it after then as well, but the current regular updates for this previous software will no longer happen after then.

So I think I may need some better naming. I think the issue is that you need to have "Add Randomness..." checked on (the Options menu). "Similar Terrain" on the Terrain tab (just above all the terrain buttons will have it pick Grassland A or Grassland B or Grassland C (for example) if you have that toggled on and are placing any of those. I likely need to change the column name on the Configure Terrain Dialog to match "Add Randomness" somehow.

@@inkwellideas6624 yep "Add Randomness" sounds much better than the whole specific button, that has to be active. And is there a way to adjust what is in the Similar Terrain box when Configure Terrain dialog box is open? Or it can be done somewhere else?

Those are separate, but you do need to define name data in order to use that name/language for the city/village generation.

The icons are quite large--we scale them so you can the map as 1" hexes... and even then, that is 300 dpi 1" hexes... so if you wanted to increase a building size by 20-30% or maybe even 50% it won't look pixelated yet. If you go to 200%+ it likely will.

Right, that is a country border. Which is just a shape, so you can edit it via the Shapes drawer/tab.

Sorry I keep saying Kingdom to Continent. I mean World to Continent. Basically zooming in..

Or it could show at least only the biggest city if too many icons look bad. Option to choose the presentation would be most welcomed. Another thing I have noticed, that labels (those yellow boxes) dont follow in every level of zoom. Would be great to have it, so I can reach them no matter at what level I am (of course if the icon is visible).

I think we've found each other in our discord, which is better/more interactive that youtube comments. But again, my ability to answer detailed questions is limited at the moment.

Sadly I don't know enough about linux... we do have a debian build. What is the largest linux distribution? or which build can I publish that's easiest for the most people to install?

@@inkwellideas6624 Ubuntu is the most common distro. But, SteamDeck, which is growing in popularity, runs on Arch.

We gave importing icons some more love here: ua-cam.com/video/olp4wRP4rMs/v-deo.html in a new release (1.07) of the preview yesterday. Also note that once set up, you can "Save Configuration" on the Configure menu and re-load it.

@@inkwellideas6624 oh yes! That offset option in X and Y axis is what I really needed! Tool is getting better and better!

Exporting is something we're working on improving (in fact UVTT support is currently in the lead of the voting for new features) - but right now the File menu has an "Export Notes to HTML" option.

Yeah... I tend to move away from the mic as I record... :( I increased the volume on the next video by 25%.

@@inkwellideas6624 Thank you!

I've added it to the list for backers to vote on. Butt honestly this was seems really important that we'll get to it sooner than later one way or another.

Also, those 3 miles distance to the horizon in perfectly flat terrain; that's not relevant very often. How often are you in perfectly _Kansas-flat_ terrain, with no obstructions all the way to the horizon? If you want to quote a fact about how far humans can see, then that should start with us defining *in which way* viewing distance would define a cell. The above implies that a cell is how far you can see _the terrain._ How far you can see the terrain would in a hexcrawl simply define how many hexes around you get revealed as you go. Setting that rule to "3 miles" would then make most sense. I think a better type of vision distance might be the distance at which you can _reliably_ spot one person or a handful of people. That seems like a good definition for what being "in the same hex" would imply. (Although I don't have any argument if you think that being in the same hex and not seeing each other should be possible.) And it would apply to all relatively open terrain, even hills and with other occasional obstructions. If at a certain distance you can spot someone only by luck and not reliably, then that should be reflected in that distance putting the two parties in separate hexes. And a perception check would be required to notice someone in an adjacent hex. A bit of googling suggests that seeing a person _as a dot_ is possible from 2km (low contrast) to 3km=2miles (fair contrast) and another source claims up to 8km=5miles (which I think would then be full black-to-white contrast). But that's only _seeing_ them, which probably assumes you know where to look. _Noticing_ someone would more often than not happen at much shorter distances. From that point of view (and the "fraction of 2 miles" requirement), we could make *hexes on the order of half a mile across.* Noticing someone from a quarter mile (400m) shouldn't be too difficult to assume it's a given (unless you're distracted or it's dark). And it would take a check to notice someone between the distances of "on a neighboring hex" and "2 miles"(=4 hexes), terrain permitting. (Which means you'd walk 40 hexes in a day, 6 hexes around you revealed, and noticing someone is possible 4 hexes away.) On the other hand, it might make for a better scale if a *hex was 1 mile* (1.6km) across, with 20 hexes per day traversed (30 in an exhausting forced march, and 40 being the absolute daily limit), 3 hexes of terrain around you revealed, noticing a person or animal up to 2 hexes away being possible with a check. Or hexes - as implied at the top - could be *2 miles* (3km) across, with 10 hexes per day traversed, noticing someone being possible only in a neighboring hex, and 2 hexes of terrain around you revealed.

Obviously, this is the *smallest scale* which governs interactions between groups. (Which makes it seem sensible to call it the *'A'* scale.) A map of this scale could only really cover the area for a single day of travel. That fact and the scale might be useful for when you're trying to locate or meet a person or creature. Let's for the sake of argument assume you want with the 1-mile hexes. (reminder: 20/30/40 traveled per day, 2 hexes spotting, 3 hexes terrain reveal). For the next scale up (call that *'B'* scale), it would make then sense to have hexes that are a multiple of 5 larger; so that you can track travel distances in 0.4 (or 0.2 on an exhausting march) of those 'B' scale hexes. (That's your 5-mile=8km hexes; 4/6/8 'B' hexes traveled per day, terrain of 1 'B' scale hex revealed around you.) That last point makes this scale useful for exploring of an area that you have no map (or no detailed map) for. The *'C'* scale could then be 4 'B' hexes, as that gives a nice round 20 mile=32km hex size. You'd travel about 1/1½/2 'C' hexes on a good day and keep track of distances in multiples of 0.10 hexes (or 0.05 on an exhausting march). The former fact seems to make this a good map for travel along known routes. This could be a map of a Kingdom (of the size of a larger European nation or a larger US state). The *'D'* scale could then again be 5 'C' hexes for another nice round 100 mile=160km size. This could be an "Empire" map, where that Empire is of the size of an Australian state (700x700 miles, mathematically), Canadian province/territory (540x540 miles, mathematically) or if it encompasses a few US states (250x250 miles, mathematically) or modern European nations (240x240 miles, mathematically, though in reality varying wildly in size). And each of the 160km cells would be about the size of a medieval (central) European princedom. At this point the maps kind of loose their purpose for travel. And then the *'E'* scale - if you went with each being 5 'D' hexes - would be a continent scale map with it's 500mi=800km hexes. 12.5 hexes from pole to equator for an earth-sized planet. And finally the *'F'* scale - assuming each being 4 'E' hexes - I don't think would make sense for this to be a hex map. But if it was, then it would be a planet scale map with (for earth) 3 hexes from pole to equator, 6 hexes pole to pole and 12(.5) hexes equatorial circumference. But if you made this a hex map, then the planetary curvature would probably require inclusion of pentagons; or in other words, earth would pretty exactly be a soccer ball (60 faces). In the other direction, you'd be dividing by /4/4/4/4/4 (5 divisions by 4) or by /6/6/6/5 (4-ish divisions by 6) to arrive at the DnD-typical 5-foot hex. If you started labeling those scales from 'Z' backwards, it would put a hex battle map at the 'V' or 'W' scale.

Yes, although battlemats are square based in the data model (helps with keeping things lined up) you can look for the configure button next to "grid" on the bottom of the window. The dialog that opens lets you turn off the square grid and use a hex grid (the right column on that configure dialog).

Linux user complains about UI, lol.

@@nightowl9519 Yeah, but you know what's worse than a freetart? Someone who is team proprietary and still messes up programming for a completely open source system that anyone can read into, no need to eat the rear end of Ballmer or Jobs to learn the secrets of the machine for more performance or whatever. Looking at you here, Nvidia and many other hardware vendors. >hurr sorry we cannot provide drivers for you cause uhh I dunno how to do it for linux lol Awful. Anyway. This is an actual bug, not an UI design grievance.

@@dorklymorkly3290 Cool, well, no one cares, this is a great product and if you had a genuine concern you would have voiced it politely. I hope your life is as joyous as your comments.

@@nightowl9519 If you can't stand heat, don't go into kitchens. You could have kept your virtual text mouth shut and walked away but you had to be antagonistic via mockery. People who dish out but can't take it are the worst, and I bet you're gay irl.

(and you're probably an ashkenazi too)