Rejected Cubic Planets

[Sgtwisky]

I've been seeing threads lately, with ideas on planets. Most of them deal with how we might be able to have "Round" or "More Round" planets then we currently have. I get that round planets feel normal to all of us, as that's what is in our universe. But, what about something other then round?

I propose cubic planets ! I know this could sounds like regression, and I may have already lost some readers, but bare with me if you would.

So, why do I think square planets would be a good thing?

First and foremost, it would (as I understand it) massively reduce lag. Having only a single entity that doesn't collide at all on any side.

Second, to me a cubic planets fit in more with the starmade world then round planets do. Everything in the starmade universe is made with square blocks. Even round planets, would be made of square blocks. The natural state of the starmade universe is a six sided block. Why would planets be any different?

Another advantage of square planets would be reintroducing something people could do with the "Disk" planets we used to have. Namely, digging bases/hangers inside the planet. You would just have to worry about running into the planet core. Which would also be square.

You could still blow up a planet, and it could cause sections to separate off of it. Though the sections may have to be of different sizes and shapes then we currently have. Maybe separation by chunk?

Another point would be that you could set NPC's to travel from one face of a cube planet to another. As its all part of the same entity, it would likely be pretty easy to do.

I think gravity could work pretty easy as well. For example imagine that 1 block away from the edge of each side, was an invisible "gravity activation area". When you hit it you would align with the side its for, and be pulled by that gravity. SO, to get onto another side you would "Drop" one block until you were "C ought" in the gravity of that side.

Other then planets not being shaped the same way they are in real life, I don't see many down sides. It would be an improvement over disks, provide less lag then current planets, and (IMO) fit in and be more immersive in starmade then a spherical planet would.

What do you guys think?

 

[Wolverines527]

I dont agree with this the transition would be much rougher and awkward then the current planets i personally think smaller plates would transition much better

 

[jgames666]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. There are some up sides to your suggestion, but I tend to lean on the side of we need to find a way to make multiple shapes possible, including the cube, D-10, D-12, D-14, D16, D18, D-20, Pyramidal, D-100 (round like a golf ball), and Discs. I'd love for all of these to be possible and selectable by the configs. That is just my opinion :D

 

[starhaiden]

I don't want everything in starmade to be cubes.

 

[Ithirahad]

I don't find the transitions on a 90-degree angle any worse or more disorienting than what we have now with our strange dodecahedron edge angles. However, I really don't like the silly things that people can pull with cubes, like digging hangars into the side of a planet... wat? Ship hangars on a planet should always have to be VTOL, sooooo...

 

[thereaverofdarkness]

I don't want everything in starmade to be cubes.

I also think it would be great if spherical planets worked, but they don't. Everything we see tells us that cubical planets are better in every way but one:
1.) I WANT spheres

I want the game to run well. I want planets to lag less. I want my computer to be able to visit a planet without sounding like a jet preparing for takeoff. I want to be able to go over a planet's edge without getting stuck in a giant crevice. I want planets to be huge and procedural. I want planets to be easy to develop, so that we can begin to see more development resources put into adding content onto already existing planets. Everything here is better with cubes.

 

[ObiShawnKenobi]