Cube Planets

[Valiant70]

The idea of a cube-shaped planet seems promising and would solve at least one of the major complaints about the current dodecahedron planets. However, this possibility seems to be receiving very little attention. As such, I made an additional thread for it.

Please use this thread to discuss CUBE-SHAPED PLANETS (agree, disagree, and additional thoughts) and post other planet-related ideas here: http://starmadedock.net/threads/on-the-subject-of-planets.3154/

The advantages of cube shaped planets are as follows:
1. They are a natural, sensible shape in a voxel universe.
2. Cubes do not interrupt cuboid construction on their edges. You can build a road from one segment to another (or even a whole building if you're clever).
3. There are multiple very good options for implementing them.
4. They look good from orbit (unless you are unable to immerse yourself in a cuboid universe, which is your own problem anyway :p).
5. The options for smoothing when walking from face to face are good.

The problems:
1. Without decent smoothing, walking from face to face is weird, (which of course is no worse than the current planets).
2. Some people may not be able to immerse themselves enough in a universe of cuboids to accept cubic planets, and some players just won't like them.

First I will address the problems.
1. First, when a player changes gravity, don't just snap the character to the new orientation. Add a rotation effect. Just don't make it too fast or the player will still get disoriented and may get motion sick. Second, when a player steps off one side of the cube, it won't be fun to fall sideways for several meters before touching something. To prevent this, check for players ABOVE blocks of the planet instead of touching. If a player is close enough above a block, switch to the appropriate gravity.
2. Add a config option to switch between disc, two-sided disc, dodecahedron, and cube planets, and leave an easy way to mod in more planet shapes.
Two simple problems. Two simple solutions.

There are two main possibilities for cube shaped planets: Segmented and unsegmented.

Segmented
The planets could be segmented into six separate entities making gravity far less confusing and weird. When a player is above a block belonging to one segment or another, they enter that segment's gravity. It makes gravity a lot simpler and understandable!

However, if this is to be done, measures MUST be taken to prevent the adjacent segment from blocking stuff you're trying to build on the edge. If segments block one another, one of the biggest advantages of cube planets goes down the drain. Players must be able to build blocks so close to the other segment that they look like one segment.

Unsegmented
Planets could be one solid entity. This would be simpler in some ways, (particularly for occlusion culling) but gravity would be difficult. If you're on the edge and step down a block... Wait, hold on, am I supposed to be standing on the top or the top..side? of this block... I'm so confused. Maybe something could be done with bock orientation to determine the direction of gravity, or all blocks could be contorted into wedges a certain distance from each edge. I don't have any particularly good ideas for this.

Cores
Both segmented and unsegmented planets could be implemented with or without a core like the dodecahedron planets have.

• Segmented with core: Very similar to the dodecahedron planets, only you can build a road from one segment to another and you don't get ugly points sticking out of the edges and the core is a cube. Would probably require slightly less coding than the other options.
• Segmented without core: Pyramid shaped segments with the square base facing outward. The points would contain mostly or entirely lava, ice crystals, or weird stuff. There would be reduced or no gravity a certain distance inside for realism and to help avoid being trapped.
• Unsegmented with core: hollow inside with a cubic core.
• Unsegmented without core: The simplest option. A solid cube. The middle is made mostly or entirely of lava, ice crystals, or weird stuff. There would be reduced or no gravity a certain distance inside for realism and to help avoid being trapped.

Planets with cores would use less data, but ones without cores could potentially be more interesting. Note that while reducing gravity inside the coreless planets would make them less likely to trap you, it would still be possible to get trapped or burned up. Also, coreless planets would prevent incidents where ships get stuck inside a core's collider and have to be warped out by an admin.

 

[Criss]

Why would you want cube planets when we already have a solution. A solution that took about a year to get to. Do you think that schema didn't think about cube planets before or did not have this suggestion posted repeatedly? The current solution was very well thought out and pretty much every possible idea has been thought of. It is a good compromise between a cube planet and a round planet. This suggestion looks like a step backwards.

 

[ToyotaSupra]

Why would you want cube planets when we already have a solution. A solution that took about a year to get to. Do you think that schema didn't think about cube planets before or did not have this suggestion posted repeatedly? The current solution was very well thought out and pretty much every possible idea has been thought of. It is a good compromise between a cube planet and a round planet. This suggestion looks like a step backwards.

Lemmie tell you, the current planets are not a permanent solution. They have jagged, ugly edges with gaping gash-like gouges and a VERY wonky and broken gravity system. They are also too buggy to be used properly currently.

They need serious work and are in no way finished. They are quite good, and in my opinion the best solution so far, but have an awfully long way to go before being 'very well thought out'. The fact that planets are mentioned 70% of the time proves that.

Still, OP I think square planets will be functionally useful but aesthetically unappealing, it does seem to fit with the minecraft theme of the game but not so much with the rest of starmade. The gravity issue will also be more apparent as we go over the edge. Grab the vomit bags...

What I suggest is that we work on the current planets, they seem like a good compromise and just need a touch of polish to work better.

 

[incorruptable]

The current system of planets is fine. I've seen a few planets that actually have extremely smooth transitions instead of giant gouges when you walk over them (I know the planets you are viewing. They're from before .16 and therefore will have the giant gouges in the corners) that appear in .171. The planets are fine if they're at a certain size because the transitions have more area to work with. If they're below a certain size, you get a problem from it

 

[Valiant70]

Why would you want cube planets when we already have a solution. A solution that took about a year to get to. Do you think that schema didn't think about cube planets before or did not have this suggestion posted repeatedly? The current solution was very well thought out and pretty much every possible idea has been thought of. It is a good compromise between a cube planet and a round planet. This suggestion looks like a step backwards.

Cube planets have properties that dodecahedrons can never have. If done properly, it is possible to build a road over the edge and make it look good. I'm sure Schema thought of this before, but some of the issues with dodecahedrons were unanticipated.

Still, OP I think square planets will be functionally useful but aesthetically unappealing,

You are the reason I suggested making dodecahedrons and "cookie planets" available as a configurable option.

The gravity issue will also be more apparent as we go over the edge. Grab the vomit bags...

You did not read my post. I addressed this problem in a very effective way. Please read through a post in its entirety if you are going to leave a negative rating.

The current system of planets is fine. I've seen a few planets that actually have extremely smooth transitions instead of giant gouges when you walk over them (I know the planets you are viewing. They're from before .16 and therefore will have the giant gouges in the corners) that appear in .171. The planets are fine if they're at a certain size because the transitions have more area to work with. If they're below a certain size, you get a problem from it

I have seen the .171 planets. They still have seams. The seams have ugly little points sticking out of them. I cannot replace the naturally occurring blocks on the edges. I can only delete them, making a road over the edge impossible, let alone a building! I frequently fall for several meters before touching the side I stepped onto and entering its gravity. My suggestion addresses all of these problems and offers good solutions.

 

[Reilly Reese]

When ever I go to a planet all I can ever see is the molten core :/

 

[Criss]

Cube planets have properties that dodecahedrons can never have. If done properly, it is possible to build a road over the edge and make it look good. I'm sure Schema thought of this before, but some of the issues with dodecahedrons were unanticipated.



You are the reason I suggested making dodecahedrons and "cookie planets" available as a configurable option.



You did not read my post. I addressed this problem in a very effective way. Please read through a post in its entirety if you are going to leave a negative rating.



I have seen the .171 planets. They still have seams. The seams have ugly little points sticking out of them. I cannot replace the naturally occurring blocks on the edges. I can only delete them, making a road over the edge impossible, let alone a building! I frequently fall for several meters before touching the side I stepped onto and entering its gravity. My suggestion addresses all of these problems and offers good solutions.

Your suggestion addresses all the problems by replacing the system entirely. Not really doing much but trading one problem for potentially unwanted features. There again, was a reason cubes were avoided and it had everything to do with gravity. While we could technically put planet plates on cubes, it still was not what people wanted. The majority of players wanted a round planet. The dodecahedron was the compromise and I believe it was even player suggested. You cannot add more faces to the cube and have it be perfect. At that point you need to add in some awkward angles so that the surface area on each face is the same. I am not sure how you can say that roads are impossible to do. @Zanaten seems to be doing just fine with his raceway build. Honestly I cannot believe people have such a major problem with planets. It was a massive upgrade to what we had before. And while you may have reasons for a different planet design, Schema implimented this after weighing the options for a year. It's going to take a lot more than this to change it. I say this because schema is the one that had to think of the issues in terms of gameplay and coding to put this together. If it took a year to find a solution that worked, I think it's worth cleaning it up before dismissing it entirely as a non-functional feature of the game.

Lemmie tell you, the current planets are not a permanent solution. They have jagged, ugly edges with gaping gash-like gouges and a VERY wonky and broken gravity system. They are also too buggy to be used properly currently.

Planets haven't been optimized yet. I thought everyone knew that. And what do you mean broken gravity system? I can walk on them just fine. If you are going to complain about the orientation changes when travelling to a different plate then you will need a better arguement than that. That problem would happen on any multi plated planet design we come up with. It can be made better but its not some sort of feature breaking bug. Don't blow things out of proportion. It works a lot better than I would have anticipated.

 

[Saxopi]

I'm pretty satisfied with the current polygon of the planets. I mean, it'd obviously be better if it was spherical like an actual planet but given the constraints of the game I agree with incorruptible that the current planets just need work added to them.

 

[Valiant70]

There again, was a reason cubes were avoided and it had everything to do with gravity.

I addressed this problem and suggested a good solution for it.

While we could technically put planet plates on cubes, it still was not what people wanted. The majority of players wanted a round planet. The dodecahedron was the compromise and I believe it was even player suggested. You cannot add more faces to the cube and have it be perfect. At that point you need to add in some awkward angles so that the surface area on each face is the same.

Okay, here's a valid argument. The question is not whether cube planets are a good idea. They are, and some players will see them as a dream come true. I don't think they're ideal and would prefer large, unsegmented planets that create the illusion of being a sphere but aren't... (it's complicated)

The real question is whether there are enough players who want cube planets to make implementing them as an option worthwhile.[DOUBLEPOST=1411663737,1411663508][/DOUBLEPOST]

I am not sure how you can say that roads are impossible to do. @Zanaten seems to be doing just fine with his raceway build

Please elaborate and link an example. I'd like to see how he's doing it. Also, remember that I said "roads from one segment to another." It's easy to make a road clear across one segment.

 

[Criss]

Please elaborate and link an example. I'd like to see how he's doing it. Also, remember that I said "roads from one segment to another." It's easy to make a road clear across one segment.

I think he has only streamed it but he might be able to share some pictures if he sees that mention up there.

Also

The question is not whether cube planets are a good idea. They are,

I would like to point out that if they were a good idea, that they would have been used when there were hoards of threads talking about this on the old site. You THINK they are a good idea, but until we get some developer feedback, it's just speculation. We have no idea if some unknown problem will surface as you have made a point of in the OP. I would hate to think that schema would now have to redo planets a second time.

 

[Saber]

Okay, so partially because I was summoned here, and partially because I'm surprised you guys are still bashing your heads against the wall about this, I'm going to make a decision I'll likely regret and reply.

@Zanaten seems to be doing just fine with his raceway build.

The track is indeed going quite well, the primary track is broken into 12 mini-tracks (one per plate) which connect together to form a mega-track which traverses ever single plate of the planet.

I'm pretty satisfied with the current polygon of the planets. I mean, it'd obviously be better if it was spherical like an actual planet but given the constraints of the game I agree with incorruptible that the current planets just need work added to them.

You say that, and yes visually it would be quite impressive, but terrain would be considerably more limited as you couldn't have the severe hills/mountains and valleys/craters that the current plates have. Also building a structure on a sphere would be a nightmare, as you would either have to build up a flat foundation, or dig down into the ground to make one. For a blocky building game, this is about the most efficient compromise we can get in the direction of spheres.

Please elaborate and link an example. I'd like to see how he's doing it. Also, remember that I said "roads from one segment to another." It's easy to make a road clear across one segment.

I don't currently have a video out of a transition, but there will be an entire video series for track-building on planets out in the near future. It is true that the plate segments are jagged, which makes a "smooth" transition difficult, but it is possible. Currently the racers take it at high speed so it's more like a jump, but a slow speed transition would also be easy.

Here's the thing, and I apologize because this is going to be a bit long, and a bit blunt. I know you guys are excited about trying to make the game as great as it can be, and planets are indeed an area which can be improved upon. But that's just the thing, @schema didn't just throw them in and wish us luck, if there were a way to make perfect planets with perfect features that everyone found perfect, he'd have done it, but the fact is there isn't a way to do that. It's a block game, we have to understand that, and even further, this isn't minecraft. I've seen people suggesting enormous planets, or planet instances, because it seems like they want a planet the size of minecraft and that's just not going to happen.

This is StarMade, we have an infinite universe to explore, minecraft is one infinite planet. There will be improvements, and optimizations, and tweaks to planets in the future, that much should be obvious to everyone, but I find it EXTREMELY unlikely that schema will just tear out what he's got and throw in some new curveball to the systems. So please everyone, I know we're excited, but understand that this entire thing was already a compromise, and it will be improved. We want what's best for the game, schema wants what's best for the game, there's no reason to keep going on about how awful it is, and how we can't possibly handle how awful the planets are. Spend some time on a planet, get to know how they really work, you might just start to like it. As someone who's spent the majority of his StarMade time building on planets, that's all I've got to say.

TL;DR - Planets will be improved, not replaced, please be patient.

P.S. please stop screaming about 3D mapping, if it will work, it's already being considered, I can pretty much guarantee it.

 

[Valiant70]

You THINK they are a good idea, but until we get some developer feedback, it's just speculation. We have no idea if some unknown problem will surface as you have made a point of in the OP.

Please state a possible problem. Your objection is far more speculative than my idea. I have anticipated and addressed a wide variety of problems. You have provided no examples to back up your point. I don't mind you disagreeing with me, but please do so with something concrete.

Okay, so partially because I was summoned here, and partially because I'm surprised you guys are still bashing your heads against the wall about this, I'm going to make a decision I'll likely regret and reply.


The track is indeed going quite well, the primary track is broken into 12 mini-tracks (one per plate) which connect together to form a mega-track which traverses ever single plate of the planet.


You say that, and yes visually it would be quite impressive, but terrain would be considerably more limited as you couldn't have the severe hills/mountains and valleys/craters that the current plates have. Also building a structure on a sphere would be a nightmare, as you would either have to build up a flat foundation, or dig down into the ground to make one. For a blocky building game, this is about the most efficient compromise we can get in the direction of spheres.


I don't currently have a video out of a transition, but there will be an entire video series for track-building on planets out in the near future. It is true that the plate segments are jagged, which makes a "smooth" transition difficult, but it is possible. Currently the racers take it at high speed so it's more like a jump, but a slow speed transition would also be easy.

Here's the thing, and I apologize because this is going to be a bit long, and a bit blunt. I know you guys are excited about trying to make the game as great as it can be, and planets are indeed an area which can be improved upon. But that's just the thing, @schema didn't just throw them in and wish us luck, if there were a way to make perfect planets with perfect features that everyone found perfect, he'd have done it, but the fact is there isn't a way to do that. It's a block game, we have to understand that, and even further, this isn't minecraft. I've seen people suggesting enormous planets, or planet instances, because it seems like they want a planet the size of minecraft and that's just not going to happen.

This is StarMade, we have an infinite universe to explore, minecraft is one infinite planet. There will be improvements, and optimizations, and tweaks to planets in the future, that much should be obvious to everyone, but I find it EXTREMELY unlikely that schema will just tear out what he's got and throw in some new curveball to the systems. So please everyone, I know we're excited, but understand that this entire thing was already a compromise, and it will be improved. We want what's best for the game, schema wants what's best for the game, there's no reason to keep going on about how awful it is, and how we can't possibly handle how awful the planets are. Spend some time on a planet, get to know how they really work, you might just start to like it. As someone who's spent the majority of his StarMade time building on planets, that's all I've got to say.

TL;DR - Planets will be improved, not replaced, please be patient.

P.S. please stop screaming about 3D mapping, if it will work, it's already being considered, I can pretty much guarantee it.

Good thoughts. If nothing else, though, I hope someone makes a cube planet mod in the future simply because cubes have some unique advantages that dodecahedrons can never have, no matter what you do to them.

 

[Criss]

Please state a possible problem. Your objection is far more speculative than my idea. I have anticipated and addressed a wide variety of problems. You have provided no examples to back up your point. I don't mind you disagreeing with me, but please do so with something concrete.



Good thoughts. If nothing else, though, I hope someone makes a cube planet mod in the future simply because cubes have some unique advantages that dodecahedrons can never have, no matter what you do to them.

While it is not a valid point in terms of gameplay lets say hypothetically cube planets replaced what we currently have. Well somewhere down the line someone will post a thread about how its all gone wrong and that dodecahedrons were the right way to go. Its a viscous cycle that will not end until we can all just settle with what schema decides. Also, read what you quoted to me to begin with.

"We have no idea if some unknown problem will surface as you have made a point of in the OP."

Now this, this right here should have been made more clearer.

2. Add a config option to switch between disc, two-sided disc, dodecahedron, and cube planets, and leave an easy way to mod in more planet shapes.

That would be really great. It solves anyones problems really. Honestly thats probably the only thing that would need to be done to satisfy you. But please for the love of god, understand that schema already went through the problems associated with all the shapes imaginable. My point was that while I may not know the advantages, disadvantages, problems, or solutions that would arise with coding this into the game, schema does, and he spent a year on it or more. I have no idea whats possible because frankly dodecahedrons was never a real option back then. Nobody expected it and it was one of the things that got me back into starmade. What I tried to say in that part you quoted was don't be surprised if there is a problem schema has with this or others do,be it coding or otherwise. I am sure it's possible. But in the past few months I have heard few complaints about these planets and they are still quite fun to play on. The problems you mentioned I simply do not find warrant an overhaul of the entire system. Fixes, yes. But not a replacement.

 

[Reilly Reese]

You can make a cube planet rather easily. Get the blueprint type converter and SMEdit next go ingame and copy planet pieces and then build a planet. Then using BTC and SMEdit turn it into a planet blueprint. You could also export the sector. Play around with your new planet. You may find yourself reconsidering your beliefs.

 

[Criss]

Right so after talking about this with someone else they found a problem. Currently we can get a pretty good view of another planet plate when we go to the edges. On a cube you cannot see what lies on another edge unless you are off the planet to some degree or parts of that face are protruding. So I jump off one edge, fall, gravity reorients me and I fall in lava or land on the wrong plate because I could not see what was there. Planets can already be confusing when getting our bearings. Unanticipated problem on your part, and yet this is why I stated that we cannot know for certain if there are problems we will not see until this type of thing is in front of us. Speculation is speculation, whether it be in my rebuttal or your initial suggestion.

 

[Lecic]

http://oldsite.star-made.org/content/starmade-dev-update-why-spherical-planets-dont-fit-block-world

I suggest you look at this news post that @schema made way back in August 2013, over a year ago. He attempted both Spherical and Cube planets, with varying degrees of issues. Eventually, we ended with a toss up between double sided disks and the current dodecahedrons, which obviously won.

I think the issues with dodecahedron planets could be fixed if we they had

1. Overlap on edges. Relaxing the restrictions on placing a block inside another one would fix many of the issues with dodecahedrons.
2. Make the edges have rock wedges in them to smooth them out more.

 

[Criss]

http://oldsite.star-made.org/content/starmade-dev-update-why-spherical-planets-dont-fit-block-world

I suggest you look at this news post that @schema made way back in August 2013, over a year ago. He attempted both Spherical and Cube planets, with varying degrees of issues. Eventually, we ended with a toss up between double sided disks and the current dodecahedrons, which obviously won.

I think the issues with dodecahedron planets could be fixed if we they had

1. Overlap on edges. Relaxing the restrictions on placing a block inside another one would fix many of the issues with dodecahedrons.
2. Make the edges have rock wedges in them to smooth them out more.

Oh god I found a response by me on that. Wow thats old.

 

[Valiant70]

I never suggested removing dodecahedrons. I would, however, like the option of a cube.

Right so after talking about this with someone else they found a problem. Currently we can get a pretty good view of another planet plate when we go to the edges. On a cube you cannot see what lies on another edge unless you are off the planet to some degree or parts of that face are protruding. So I jump off one edge, fall, gravity reorients me and I fall in lava or land on the wrong plate because I could not see what was there. Planets can already be confusing when getting our bearings. Unanticipated problem on your part, and yet this is why I stated that we cannot know for certain if there are problems we will not see until this type of thing is in front of us. Speculation is speculation, whether it be in my rebuttal or your initial suggestion.

Okay, that is a legitimate concern, and I do agree. I don't think it's unsolvable, though. If gravity as I envision it works properly, you would step off of one block, rotate, and be standing on that same block. The only unsolvable issue would be people RUNNING over the edge. They would step onto the other side of the same block, and then immediately OFF of that block into your lava pit. Still, I can see the current planets having similar issues as well. I seem to recall falling into a hole on a dodecahedron planet for the same reason. It's an issue which needs to be solved anyway.

 

[kupu]

Thanks @Lecic , beat me to it

 

[Valiant70]

http://oldsite.star-made.org/content/starmade-dev-update-why-spherical-planets-dont-fit-block-world

I suggest you look at this news post that @schema made way back in August 2013, over a year ago. He attempted both Spherical and Cube planets, with varying degrees of issues. Eventually, we ended with a toss up between double sided disks and the current dodecahedrons, which obviously won.

Schema's issue with cube planets was gravity. With the segmented planets, it wouldn't seem to be that much trouble to change generation from 12 to 6 segments.I personally would be very happy with cube planets and probably just stop wishing for spheres and start building cool stuff that wraps all over the cubes. The question, again, is whether enough players will support it. So far that sadly looks like a no, making it not worthwhile even though it is highly desirable as a configurable feature.

I would like to see my improved gravity change idea added into the current planets, though. The way gravity works on planets now just feels wrong. It only detects you if you touch the planet. I've literally jumped out of a ship and floated upside down 1m from the surface, which shouldn't happen. I was not in any way tied to the ship while I was floating, and was in face upside-down relative to the ship as well.