Is distance from capital an absolute as crows fly sort of measure or does it take into account the different speeds that infrastructure allows, so connected by class 3 infrastructure would be "closer" than without it???
Does Distance to Capital take into account infrastructure level?
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.


Distance to capital is purely a distance measurement. It is a straight line distance that is simply expressed as a number of days to give a good frame of reference.
There is no method of adjusting the transit time. Infrastructure, naval bases, unit speed research, or right of way to take shortcuts, None of that matters to the calculation.War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can.  Winston Churchill
VorlonFCW
Main Administrator
EN Support Team  Bytro Labs Gmbh
>>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<< 
VorlonFCW wrote:
Distance to capital is purely a distance measurement. It is a straight line distance that is simply expressed as a number of days to give a good frame of reference.

It isn't circular. For example, when you study the "circle" for aeroplane range closely, you'll notice it isn't really a circle but an oval._{}When the enemy is driven back, we have failed. When he is cut off, encircled and dispersed, we have succeeded.  Aleksandr Suvorov.

The "camera angle" at which you look at the map is tilted a bit, making vertical distances look shorter than they are in reality. You can see this when you look at all the country shapes. Therefore range circles are also ovals and it takes longer to travel vertical distances than horizontal distances.

Requesting a bit of clarification regarding:
freezy wrote:
The "camera angle" at which you look at the map is tilted a bit, making vertical distances look shorter than they are in reality. You can see this when you look at all the country shapes. Therefore range circles are also ovals and it takes longer to travel vertical distances than horizontal distances.
1. Re: "vertical distances look shorter than they are"  are you saying that the stated flight range of a plane (regardless of level or type) is equal in all directions (meaning same length from center point of take off (the AB / province /city regardless of direction traveled) even though the designated range is shown as an oval due to the "camera angle" / graphics?
2. Re: "it takes longer to travel vertical distances than horizontal distances"  if this is the case, then the vertical distance must be longer than the horizontal distance and therefore the answer to question #1 above must be "no". Am I understanding / interpreting your statements above correctly?
3. If the specified "flight distance" (the specified range) is not equal in all directions (i.e., not circular) as visually depicted by the oval, then wouldn't the flight time in the vertical direction be shorter rather than longer when compared with travelling in the horizontal direction?
4. And conversely, if the "flight distance" (the specified range) is equal in all directions (vertically, diagonally and horizontally), but graphically depicted as an oval rather than a circle due to the "camera angle", then wouldn't the flight times be equal in all directions?
If #4 is a "yes", then perhaps making the trip in the vertical direction seems to "visually appear longer to take" since the "camera angle affect" makes the distance to be traveled appear "shorter", although the distance that will be traversed is actually equal to the graphically depicted "longer" horizontal distance (of the oval)?
I've never checked whether there is a "time to arrival" difference between the vertical, diagonal and horizontal flight paths to the edge of the oval perimeter and am not actively playing in a game at the moment, so cannot check this out for myself.
Thx.wbThe post was edited 3 times, last by white bird ().

The plane range is an ellipse, wider horizontally than vertical. Flight times are the same in all directions, I've tested this myself. The perimeter of the ellipse represents all points that are equidistant (same distances) from the origin (center of the plane range).
So a distance in the vertical direction is a longer than it appears, and times are hence also longer than than that of a horizontal movement.
Given a constant speed v, distance d is directly proportional, and time t is inversely proportional. All units travel at a constant speed (no acceleration), and thus over a fixed distance d, the time needed to traverse distance d is the same.
v = d/t (km/hr) 
white bird wrote:
Requesting a bit of clarification regarding:
freezy wrote:
The "camera angle" at which you look at the map is tilted a bit, making vertical distances look shorter than they are in reality. You can see this when you look at all the country shapes. Therefore range circles are also ovals and it takes longer to travel vertical distances than horizontal distances.
1. Re: "vertical distances look shorter than they are"  are you saying that the stated flight range of a plane (regardless of level or type) is equal in all directions (meaning same length from center point of take off (the AB / province /city regardless of direction traveled) even though the designated range is shown as an oval due to the "camera angle" / graphics?
2. Re: "it takes longer to travel vertical distances than horizontal distances"  if this is the case, then the vertical distance must be longer than the horizontal distance and therefore the answer to question #1 above must be "no". Am I understanding / interpreting your statements above correctly?
3. If the specified "flight distance" (the specified range) is not equal in all directions (i.e., not circular) as visually depicted by the oval, then wouldn't the flight time in the vertical direction be shorter rather than longer when compared with travelling in the horizontal direction?
4. And conversely, if the "flight distance" (the specified range) is equal in all directions (vertically, diagonally and horizontally), but graphically depicted as an oval rather than a circle due to the "camera angle", then wouldn't the flight times be equal in all directions?
If #4 is a "yes", then perhaps making the trip in the vertical direction seems to "visually appear longer to take" since the "camera angle affect" makes the distance to be traveled appear "shorter", although the distance that will be traversed is actually equal to the graphically depicted "longer" horizontal distance (of the oval)?
I've never checked whether there is a "time to arrival" difference between the vertical, diagonal and horizontal flight paths to the edge of the oval perimeter and am not actively playing in a game at the moment, so cannot check this out for myself.
Thx.
It takes longer to travel the same screen space distance (the pixels on your monitor) vertically because visually the vertical distance is shortened, thus it appears as if units move slower when moving vertically.
In the game logic the distances and travel speeds in all directions are the same though, I am only talking about the visual layer and how it appears to the player.

Share
 Facebook 0
 Twitter 0
 Google Plus 0
 Reddit 0

Tags