Dodecahedron edge smoothing

[Valiant70]

I recently saw someone suggest adding some new block shapes to allow dodecahedron edges to line up more cleanly without the jagged corners. That got me thinking, and now I have an idea for making those ugly edges much prettier. I'll do my best to describe it here, and add a drawing/diagram later if needed.

For clarity, here it is in three stages:

1. Let the game draw a virtual (invisible, non-physical) plane up from each edge of the dodecahedron core. We'll call these the edge planes.
2. Modify the collision code between plates. Ignore blocks, and allow blocks to clip 1 meter (block) or less into the edge planes.
3. "Slice" off the clipped parts of the blocks. The dev team will have to fiddle around with texture rendering on the sliced parts to make it look presentable.
4. Make any necessary modifications to collision code at the edges to prevent weird bumping/spazzing/falling/clipping/sticking/mayhem when people try to walk across.

This will create a crisp, visually-appealing edge between plates rather than the jagged edges we have today. The best part is that if blocks are properly aligned, you could even build "across" the plate boundaries to some extent.

When cross-entity rail movement is added, Schema & team could also try to tackle cross-plate rails for use in things like trams. Two rails in the same orientation and clipped into one another could be considered joined.

 

[aljo]

Err... I can't comment on all this without sounding like a fool, but "two rails in the same orientation"? By nature of the plates, the rails will never be in the same orientation. Just sayin. I'm not opposed to this, not entirely, but they are entities that aren't docked to a single "mothership". They aren't aligned to each other.

 

[Planr]

Your idea is interesting, but it sounds kinda hacky, a little like how the whole spherical planets suggestions have been. I dont have very high hopes about this, but then again I don't have a problem with the edges on planets being "jagged" or whatever.

 

[Valck]

the rails will never be in the same orientation

I think "same direction" could be defined in this context as "not more than an angle of {n} degrees apart in any of the {ABC} planes" to solve that problem...

 

[RavenWT]

that's an idea but i don't think they will huhu

i posted an idea for better planet play without dodecahedron's edges... i'm not sure it's possible, but that's an idea. http://starmadedock.net/threads/planets.19934/page-3

 

[Valiant70]

"two rails in the same orientation"?

This means that they are aligned as closely as possible and have a similar plane-relative orientation (e.g. upright relative to the surface).

that's an idea but i don't think they will huhu

i posted an idea for better planet play without dodecahedron's edges... i'm not sure it's possible, but that's an idea. http://starmadedock.net/threads/planets.19934/page-3

It's feasible, but more complicated than what I'm suggesting. The main problem is that there needs to be a way to deal with abrupt angle transitions when walking between plates.

 

[RavenWT]

It's feasible, but more complicated than what I'm suggesting. The main problem is that there needs to be a way to deal with abrupt angle transitions when walking between plates.

Agree, transitions between plates are a really immersive problem.... I'm still looking for a solution on Planets! post... we will find something !

 

[Valiant70]

Your idea is interesting, but it sounds kinda hacky, a little like how the whole spherical planets suggestions have been.

This is actually a lot simpler than any of the round planet ideas. All it really amounts to is taking the parts of blocks that clip into another plates space and making them invisible and intangible, then putting a texture on the side to make it look right. It's just a bit of rendering and physics magic that I'm sure Schema could do. Adding the texture to make it look right is the hard part.

 

[Planr]

This is actually a lot simpler than any of the round planet ideas. All it really amounts to is taking the parts of blocks that clip into another plates space and making them invisible and intangible, then putting a texture on the side to make it look right. It's just a bit of rendering and physics magic that I'm sure Schema could do. Adding the texture to make it look right is the hard part.

And how exactly would that imaginary bridge be affected by weapons fire?

 

[XyNox]

I am not too familiar with java but that sounds highly impractical. As I understand it, every single "sliced" block intersecting these "edge plains" would need to be their own blocks with their block ID's and their own specific blockdimensions which each require a seperate game asset ( multiplied by the amount of different terrain types in the game ) being loaded into the gameworld, which vastly speaks against the general principle of starmade, being as economical as possible when it comes performance and resource management.

Having nicer looking planets would of course be appreciated but personally I am completely ok with the way planets appear right now.

 

[Valiant70]

imaginary bridge

What? If you mean the edge plane, it's invisible and intangible (for all intents and purposes, it doesn't exist in-game, only in the engine) so weapons fire would pass through.
[DOUBLEPOST=1441221709,1441221355][/DOUBLEPOST]

I am not too familiar with java but that sounds highly impractical. As I understand it, every single "sliced" block intersecting these "edge plains" would need to be their own blocks with their block ID's and their own specific blockdimensions which each require a seperate game asset ( multiplied by the amount of different terrain types in the game ) being loaded into the gameworld, which vastly speaks against the general principle of starmade, being as economical as possible when it comes performance and resource management.

What I'm suggesting would absolutely not require the addition of more blocks or IDs. It would only require some overriding of normal block rendering and physics. I expect it might require some reworks for parts of the rendering and physics engines, but how difficult that is depends on how Schema has it structured. It might be relatively simple due to Java being an object-oriented language. (If you don't know what that means, it essentially lets a skillful programmer work on a little part of a program called a "class" while leaving the rest alone as long as the programmer doesn't change how it "talks to" the rest of the program.)