Arcane Legend : Legend of the Giant

[Milan Lame Man]

How do you find a definite point and measure precise angles that correlate to those on a unit circle from a computer generated image? Unless we know some additional information we can never know.

Well the ellipse on the ground and knowing it is a circle with 6m radius should give enough information.
New values, taking perspective into account:
ellipse half width: 147 pixels
ellipse half height from center up: 118 pixels
ellipse half height from center down: 152 pixels
toon projected height: 59 pixels
real ellipse radius: 6 m

After some math this gives camera angle 25.3 degrees, pixel size 1/500, toon's feet distance 20.3m, and toon height 4.5m.

Now is there a dev who could tell us the real values? Eyeballing it, the toon sure is higher than 2m, more like the 4+.
Or a real geek to verify my findings or explaining why they are wrong?

[borix]

Please continue this is a fun exercise.

[DocDoBig]

[Milan Lame Man]

I thought it was funny how so many people said they are good at math, even love it, so I wanted to put their skills to a test.
Fail, me and them both.

[SayCreed]

Meme queen takin that aswell crai

[Crowsfoot]

Honestly, I won't even try to explain the math at hand. Look up the terminology yourself.

FYI: you can't use 3D trig to solve for a computer generated image.

[Milan Lame Man]

FYI: you can't use 3D trig to solve for a computer generated image.

Well I did assume that the projection plane is flat. And pixel aspect ratio 1:1. Obviously most phone's screens are curved, and pixels are rectangles or even worse. And the engine takes that into account. My fault.
I would love to be enlightened though. Too bad it's not gonna happen :-(

[H2N]

Hmm so many people here claiming they love math, so lets do this.
I measured the ellipse as radius width 147 pixels, radius height 118 pixels, player projected height 59 pixels.

Computation 1: If we put a stick 6m tall at the center, it should be seen as sqrt(147^2-118^2)=88 pixels, so the player is in fact 59/88*6=4.04m tall.

Computation 2: Define camera angle, if looking from top, as 0. Then the angle is arccos(height/width)=36.6 deg. Player's projected height is real_height*sin(angle), so we have 59/arcsin(36.6)=99 pixels real player height, which funny enough gives 99/147*6=4.04m again.

Did I fail big time?

Woa 4 meter... giant -_-

Maybe devs know the answer...

Math don't lie.

Honestly I don't know the answer, but Mily's explanation, right or wrong, is good enough for me, until something better comes along.

I just stand next to those canoes, and eyeball it.

[Milan Lame Man]

Honestly I don't know the answer

ROFL
Maybe the artists/designers know?

[H2N]

ROFL
Maybe the artists/designers know?

Got this reply from the lead artist:

"the warrior is 2.5 meters tall"

[DocDoBig]

But then it means the Nott's are barely 90 centimeters tall!




Literally .... smurfs.

[Anarchist]

Got this reply from the lead artist:

"the warrior is 2.5 meters tall"

*SDANG* see you were wrong Milan?
The missing X factor you can't calculate is the camera angle(Z).

[H2N]

*SDANG* see you were wrong Milan?
The missing X factor you can't calculate is the camera angle(Z).

So now you should be able to calculate the camera angle, right?

[DocDoBig]

67.3801°

[Anarchist]

So now you should be able to calculate the camera angle, right?

Since we have the correct height yes. You can calculate Z by following the inverse procedures you should have done calculating the height!

But i have D- in maths and my errors makes the maths teacher cry everyday except saturdays and sundays when i don't have maths lessons!

[Hoardseeker]

*SDANG* see you were wrong Milan?
The missing X factor you can't calculate is the camera angle(Z).

So now you should be able to calculate the camera angle, right?

H2N,Make Warrior HoR to Heal Players in Whole Map=8meter and Players=Correct height! LOL

[Painting]

I think u did an oopsie on the little thing called 'calculating'

[Agirlnamedbob]

I think u did an oopsie on the little thing called 'calculating'

I think you did an oopsie on replying almost 5 years later.