[MOD] Travel Options

[Hazelnut]

Is it possible to set a custom waypoint to travel to?

You select it on the world map and can still use travel options to get there?

This would go well with the hidden locations mod so you can search an area for locations.

also it would be cool to pull up the map while still travelling, maybe just the zoomed in version as a visual of where you are along the journey.

I'll consider the first idea, will need to see how easy it is to do.

Having the junction map up while travelling I will also look into, that's an interesting idea. Will depend on how much of a performance decrease it gives.

Not sure of when though, as I am back to work tomorrow and it's gonna be a whirlwind of crap I suspect.

[andromacus]

Hi All,

as usual, I apologize in case this has been called out before, however there is a question that I would need to kindly ask.

It is only me, or actually over the map there is an extremely reduced number of ports?

Daggerfall for example has 5 ports on the main land
Shalgora has no ports, except for the capital itself which is marked as port thus being in the inland (by the way, it seems to me that all the capitals are always marked as ports, regardless of their position)
Anticlere has three ports on the coast, which seems to be villages or hovels: Catwhold Heat, the Old Kingwin Place, and Hawking Palace. Major cities like Aldwall Rock or Charenvale, thus are near the coast are not indicated as ports. While are indicated as ports Whytewych Commons and Wailing Tree of Mara thus being inland (due to the fact that they are close to a lake)

This to me looks a bit strange, as in a land like the Iliac Bay it would be logical to find ports all along the coasts in all the regions, plus it makes really difficult in my opinion to travel by ship if you decide to use the option "from port" and "to port" only.

Does anyone think what I'm writing makes sense? In case there could be the possibility to revise a little bit how the ports are determined (I assume there is an algorithm that determines their distances by water)?

Thanks!

[BadLuckBurt]

Hi All,

as usual, I apologize in case this has been called out before, however there is a question that I would need to kindly ask.

It is only me, or actually over the map there is an extremely reduced number of ports?

Daggerfall for example has 5 ports on the main land
Shalgora has no ports, except for the capital itself which is marked as port thus being in the inland (by the way, it seems to me that all the capitals are always marked as ports, regardless of their position)
Anticlere has three ports on the coast, which seems to be villages or hovels: Catwhold Heat, the Old Kingwin Place, and Hawking Palace. Major cities like Aldwall Rock or Charenvale, thus are near the coast are not indicated as ports. While are indicated as ports Whytewych Commons and Wailing Tree of Mara thus being inland (due to the fact that they are close to a lake)

This to me looks a bit strange, as in a land like the Iliac Bay it would be logical to find ports all along the coasts in all the regions, plus it makes really difficult in my opinion to travel by ship if you decide to use the option "from port" and "to port" only.

Does anyone think what I'm writing makes sense? In case there could be the possibility to revise a little bit how the ports are determined (I assume there is an algorithm that determines their distances by water)?

Thanks!

There is no distance algorithm. If I remember correctly it's just a flag set in the game's data files that determine wether a city is a port or not.

[Hazelnut]

Yes Burt is correct, it's literally just a flag on the location in data. The inland cities with ports I assume are on major tributaries or something. Anyway TO uses the vanilla data but also adds 6 ports to regions that don't have any.

[Hazelnut]

Is there a way to force the Travel Options GUI to be at the top border of the window? In 1280x960 resolution, it is displayed like this for me:

I've not been able to find a way to do this. I'm using the DFU UI code for this UI element and I cannot place it out of the virtual 320x200 UI window into any stretched space DFU uses for non 4:3 aspect ratio displays. If anyone has any ideas, please let me know and I will take another look.

[Hazelnut]

Hi, Ive made the graphics, but cant inject it in the game as a loose-files to test it out.
Ive made all the buttons (rivers, streams, roads, ports, tracks - On/Off vatiants)
And the main ToControlUi - the Up/Down arrows there already take up the HD DREAM graphics, thats good, saved some time and I did not have to include it in the main image. Ive changed the dungeon style map to a world style, as that is where that icon takes you
tracksOn.png
tracksOff.png
TOcontrolUI.png

Id like to make it a part of a Dream Hud, so Dream would be basically "Travel options" & "Basic roads" ready, if its possible and ok with you?

Also, would it be possible for you to make the map dot resize a option? I still cant get used to it and Id personally prefer to have the old big dots. On my monitor, the small dots are basically pixel sized, and thats a no go for my eyes.

Firstly, thanks for being patient with me (not that you had any choice, but still) - honestly I am embarrassed that it's taken me over a year to sort this out!

Anyway, not sure how I didn't come to this conclusion when I originally looked at this but these images have no XML loaded by the asset replacement system so when my code got the size from the loaded images and used that for UI sizing things got rather big.

While I prefer to make my code flexible I'm really not likely to be resizing stuff and it's very easy to fix this issue by simply hardcoding the sizes into my mod. Now it looks like this:

TOdream.JPG (305.97 KiB) Viewed 1815 times

So if you include images for UI banner, and all the buttons (roads, tracks, rivers, streams, ports - off and on) in the next release of Dream then it should work with the next release of TO. If you would like a test .dfmod to check with before I make the next release let me know. I would understand if you wanna waiut for the release before doing anything though!

Apologies again for making you wait for so long.

[Hazelnut]

Awesome, thanks Hazelnut

This is such a cool, unique mod. Not sure ive seen it in another game.

Are there plans to change or add penalties/drawbacks and advantages to each option?

In the same way travelling cautiously by road provides an advantage, there would be an incentive to do tedious travel more often than fast travel. Tedious could be faster in days taken. I suppose cause stopping at inns all the time takes you off the trail.

Thanks, glad you're enjoying the mod.

There is already an advantage in elapsed time when using manual time accelerated travel rather than fast travel. A manually controlled journey takes roughly half the elapsed time than fast travelling takes, depending on character speed and stamina of course. Since in game time doesn't matter much except for quest timers and recall is very commonly used, I guess this advantage is quite low impact but it's there.

[andromacus]

Hello,

just another question which came to my mind; maybe this already exists (in case just ignore the message ), but if it doesn't, maybe this could be a suggestion for a further improvement?

The point is: it seems to me that when you are travelling and have an hostile encounter in the wilderness, the game always spawns one single enemy. Is that true or it is just my experience so far? What about if some kind of enemy could appear either alone or in a pack of a random number (e.g. from 2 to 5)?

I think this could increase a little bit the difficulty and the excitement for a random encounter, and could makes sense as some creature/monsters could wander around in group (e.g. a band of thieves, a pack of centaurs etc)

In case, here a personal proposal of monsters which should appear always alone versus those which could appear also in group

Always alone:
- Bear
- Tiger
- Scorpion
- Spriggan
- Imp
- Dragon
- Werefolf/Wereboar
- Vampire
- Lich
- Daedra
- Atronach
- Mummy

Alone or in pack (up to 5)
- Rats
- Bats
- Spiders
- Orcs (they could also appear in a mix: e.g. 3 orcs + 1 shaman + 1 sergeant)
- Centaurs
- Nymphs
- Giants
- Humans (e.g. thieves, rogues, barbarians)
- Skeletons
- Zombies
- Ghosts/Wraiths

Hope this could makes some sense!

Thanks as always

[Ralzar]

just another question which came to my mind; maybe this already exists (in case just ignore the message ), but if it doesn't, maybe this could be a suggestion for a further improvement?

These are not things done by this mod. Daggerfall always had random monsters spawn in the wilderness and DFU emulates this mechanic. THere is no mechanic in wilderness or dungeons for random monster spawns to be more than one enemy.
All Travel Options supplies here is for you to stop traveling when the game spawn an enemy.

That said, there are several mods that do stuff with enemy spawns. Like Warm Ashes for example where thematic groups of enemies sometimes show up with a text popup describing the situation.

[Hazelnut]

Ralzar is correct that this mod doesn't do anything about enemy spawns in wilderness - it just means that players using it will be spending enough time in said wilderness for DFU mob spawning to occur. The only aspect this mod has connected to spawning, is that there's a check based on a chance to avoid a spawned enemy that uses character luck and stealth skill. If you succeed you simply fly on by them.

I'm not actually sure where the wilderness mob spawning is handled in DFU but I might take a look and see how easy it can be modded without needing quest based mods like warm ashes. Also many mods do much more, and TBH I am not sure if TO actually stops travel for quest spawned enemies as there's a comment from the old tedious travel code that I never quite comprehended. Ralzar, do you know the answer from experience by chance?

Not sure whether these changes should be in TO or a different mod, I think I lean towards the latter. TO already has too many settings.