jpmschweitzerandClaude Opus 4.6
2175349c56
Server (6 tickets): template role/spatial/ownership schemas, triangle definition, generation, and escalation. Client (4 tickets): code quality refactors from review pass. Planning (1 ticket): #153 station district layout design discussion with purpose-assembled agent panel. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
83 lines
4.8 KiB
Markdown
83 lines
4.8 KiB
Markdown
# Sprint 20: Shape — Planning Tasks
|
||
|
||
**Goal:** Resolve the station district layout design through structured discussion, producing a confirmed D-record that unblocks Sprint 21 location authoring and triangle instantiation.
|
||
|
||
**Branch:** `planning`
|
||
**Agents:** Gestalt (systems design), Miri (worldbuilding), Araminta (visual/spatial), Tyre (technical feasibility), Paula (narrative), Ozzie (player experience), Qatux (documenter), SI (project manager)
|
||
|
||
## Tickets
|
||
|
||
| # | Title | Type | Blocks |
|
||
|---|-------|------|--------|
|
||
| #153 | Station district layout design | design discussion | #155, #188 |
|
||
|
||
## Discussion Format
|
||
|
||
Ticket #153 is a **design discussion** — workshop-style, run on the planning branch. The output is a confirmed decision record (D-record) in `decisions/content.md` or `decisions/architecture.md`.
|
||
|
||
### Context: What Already Exists
|
||
|
||
Three spatial layouts have been authored (all by Araminta, Sprint 17):
|
||
- **The Terminal** (logistics hub): `docs/design/spatial-layout-terminal-v01.md` — 44×28 tiles, cool grey-navy
|
||
- **The Last Shift** (bar): `docs/design/spatial-layout-bar-v01.md` — 28×22 tiles, warm dark amber
|
||
- **Smuggling corridors**: `docs/design/spatial-layout-smuggling-corridors-v01.md` — overlay on terminal + bar + maintenance corridors
|
||
|
||
Station profile: `docs/design/sova-station-profile.md` — defines 6 districts, only Transit District is playable in v0.1.
|
||
|
||
Key decisions already confirmed:
|
||
- D-025: Social site / functional cluster as atomic template unit
|
||
- D-036: Sova Transit District / Krenn System as v0.1 setting
|
||
- D-050: Velen naming and climate
|
||
|
||
Open question: Q-036 (district skeleton as generator output) — relevant but not blocking; the v0.1 district is hand-authored.
|
||
|
||
### What #153 Must Decide
|
||
|
||
The individual locations exist as standalone layouts. What's missing is **how they connect** — the district as a whole:
|
||
|
||
1. **District topology**: How do the terminal, bar, gate corridor cluster, and smuggling hideout spaces relate spatially? What corridors connect them? What's the walking distance/time between key locations?
|
||
|
||
2. **Gate corridor cluster** (#157): The span gate area — customs, cargo staging, commuter flow. This is the district's entry point and a social chokepoint. Needs spatial spec at the same fidelity as the terminal and bar.
|
||
|
||
3. **Access topology**: Public → semi-restricted → restricted zones. How does the access gradient map across the whole district? Where are the boundaries the player must navigate?
|
||
|
||
4. **Sightline constraints**: Which locations have line-of-sight to which? This is gameplay-critical — the player's observation opportunities depend on where they can see from where.
|
||
|
||
5. **NPC traffic patterns**: How do NPCs flow through the district? Shift changes, commuter routes, social gathering patterns. The spatial layout determines what the player can observe by being in the right place at the right time.
|
||
|
||
6. **Total district dimensions**: What's the bounding box? How does tile count affect performance (server spatial queries, client rendering)?
|
||
|
||
### Discussion Rounds
|
||
|
||
**Round 1 — Inventory and constraints**
|
||
Each agent reviews the existing layouts and states what their domain requires from the district layout. Gestalt: gameplay loops that need spatial support. Miri: setting consistency, what the station profile implies. Araminta: visual continuity across zones, tilemap feasibility. Tyre: performance constraints, tilemap size limits. Paula: narrative beats that need specific spatial staging. Ozzie: navigation feel, does the district feel explorable and readable.
|
||
|
||
**Round 2 — Topology proposals**
|
||
Propose concrete district maps (ASCII or description). How do the existing layouts connect? Where does the gate corridor go? What fills the space between authored locations?
|
||
|
||
**Round 3 — Convergence**
|
||
Resolve conflicts, pick a topology, specify dimensions. Draft the D-record.
|
||
|
||
### Output
|
||
|
||
- A confirmed D-record specifying:
|
||
- District topology diagram (which locations connect to which, via what corridors)
|
||
- Approximate tile dimensions per zone and total district
|
||
- Access topology (public/semi-restricted/restricted gradient)
|
||
- Key sightline relationships
|
||
- Gate corridor cluster spatial spec (or a separate ticket if too large)
|
||
- Updated `decisions/` domain file
|
||
- Gate corridor layout doc at `docs/design/spatial-layout-gate-v01.md` if produced
|
||
|
||
### Reference Files
|
||
|
||
Read before starting:
|
||
- `docs/design/spatial-layout-terminal-v01.md`
|
||
- `docs/design/spatial-layout-bar-v01.md`
|
||
- `docs/design/spatial-layout-smuggling-corridors-v01.md`
|
||
- `docs/design/sova-station-profile.md`
|
||
- `decisions/content.md` — D-025 (social sites), D-036 (Sova setting)
|
||
- `decisions/architecture.md` — D-014 (tile-based movement)
|
||
- `decisions/perception.md` — D-059 (fog layers, zone temperature)
|
||
- `decisions/questions.md` — Q-036 (district skeleton as generator output)
|