Investigate variable map sizes about openloco

[AaronVanGeffen]

The mini map doesn't, indeed. Instead, it just uses 2x1 pixels per tile.

[AaronVanGeffen]

More evidence that map sizes used to be 512x512: the map window allocates space for two maps of 0x90000 pixels each, or 768x768 pixels. This makes sense given the 45º map projection, i.e. 512*1.5=768. This constant (and 769) shows up a bunch in my implementation #2443

[LeftofZen]

That's really interesting! For reference, the diagonal length of a square is √2 * sideLength from Pythagoras, so the diagonal length (and hence the height of the pixel grid/bitmap you would have to paint it on) would need to be 725 pixels minimum, not 768, though I realise 768 is a nice half-power-of-2 and that's why it was chosen.

√2 * 384 = 543.058...
√2 * 512 = 724.077...

Since the 384 one is greater than 512 pixels, that also makes sense why it was left at 768 and not reduced to 512 with the map size to 384, because that wouldn't have fit.

[AaronVanGeffen]

I was thinking it would have to do with the way tiles use an isometric projection, using 1.5 times the height for their width. However, I realise now that that was making it overly complicated: the reason the mini maps use two times the height to the width, is because every tile gets two pixels horizontally on the mini map! False alarm, heh.

[LeftofZen]

The map doesn't use isometric projection though, so both of those reasons don't apply?