Planetary functionality

[Strahan]

It would be cool if the worlds could be as versatile as Minecraft worlds. Also it'd be nice to have some living planets.. grass, sunlight, water, etc. In Minecraft there was a Bukkit plugin called "Multiverse". It allowed you to have multiple maps (analagous to multiple planets). You link them via teleporter gates. I'd LOVE to have Minecraft style planets where the planet is like a MC map but instead of linking to other worlds via teleporters, you actually have to get the space ship you build and fly to other worlds.

To make huge maps like that feasible you could remove the actual space to surface transition you can do now and instead make it so you have to get near the planet, hit R or something to "activate" and it would shuttle you down to a spaceport on the surface. Like spawning in Minecraft. Then you just shuttle up and it returns you to the space environment. Maybe even have the ability to build multiple spaceports on the surface and when you initiate the planetary landing system you can choose which spaceport to shuttle to.

That way you could have nearly limitless maps like MC for the planets instead of just the little hunks of rock. I'd also reduce the amount of planets then of course, and only load the planetary maps when a person shuttles down to save power.

 

[Planr]

living planets.. grass, sunlight, water, etc.


All of these items here are already in the game they just haven\'t been flexed out fully yet.

• The grass is static- it doesn\'t grow, it can\'t be regrown, and it\'s a nonrenewable resource.
• The sunlight doesn\'t do anything except damage your ship when you\'re too close to the sun.
• The water- it\'s completely solid and isn\'t really useful for much of anything at the moment. Its block is also practically invisible and can easily be lost because it can barely be seen.

teleporter gates.


Schema has a teleportation feature planned, IIRC.


I\'d LOVE to have Minecraft style planets where the planet is like a MC map


Unfortunately, this is not possible in Starmade (of course, if by \"Minecraft-style\" you mean planets that seem endless). Schema has already addressed this issue in this news post.


instead of linking to other worlds via teleporters, you actually have to get the space ship you build and fly to other worlds.


So it sounds like you\'re suggesting the default spawn be moved to a planet. That /could/ work okay. However, planets do not have the necessary resources required to produce a spaceship, therefore you cannot \"get\" the spaceship from harvesting on the planet- especially not if it was the \"default spawn planet.\" It would already be harvested to oblivion by the countless players before you. If sector protection was turned on to prevent harvesting the planet, the entire idea of building your ship from scratch on the planet would be impossible and pointless anyways.



remove the actual space to surface transition you can do now and instead make it so you have to get near the planet, hit R or something to \"activate\" and it would shuttle you down to a spaceport on the surface. Like spawning in Minecraft.


Apologies, but I must disagree. To me that sounds like a bad and unfitting idea. Such an unnecessary \"new area\" loading transition does not fit very well with the idea of Starmade, in my opinion. Besides, what would it do about the ship? It would be left defenseless in orbit for anyone to mess around with.

I suppose you could say that \"it could be unloaded from the physical universe while the player is on the surface\" except that presents one major problem: What if the spawn zone in space is congested when the player \"returns\" to their ship? it would collide and smash with all the other ships and lag the server badly. Sure, I suppose the game could scan the sector and find an empty space to place you and your ship in once you return to space. But what if your ship is a capital ship- AKA, it\'s really big (300m - 1000m?). It would already take up an immense amount of space in the sector. There\'s simply no room to place that thing anywhere. In short, I don\'t believe there is any feasible easy solution to this problem.

Another major downside to this idea is the fact that this would completely negate the feature and \"fun\" of orbital bombardments. Planetary defenses no longer would serve a purpose because you can\'t attack what\'s not there. If the planet was \"loaded\" for the ship (required for orbital bombardments to even make any sense and be possible in the first place), then the idea of \"shuttling down to a spaceport\" is defeated as well.


nearly limitless maps


See the third point from the top, about Schema\'s post.

This would not work either. You\'ll notice that Minecraft relies heavily on blocks to produce its entire environment. Starmade does not as much. Its world is very big and does not use as many blocks. Ghosting in Minecraft takes so long because there are so many blocks needed to ghost. Starmade\'s ghosting takes less time because there\'s less stuff to have to ghost- it\'s outer \"space\".


I\'d also reduce the amount of planets then of course, and only load the planetary maps when a person shuttles down to save power.


This wouldn\'t have much change in impact on the amount of computing power used to run the game.



A final closing note


as versatile as Minecraft worlds.

In Minecraft

I\'d LOVE to have Minecraft style

like a MC map

Like spawning in Minecraft.

like MC


I do not mean to be rude, but Starmade is not supposed to \"be like\" Minecraft. If that\'s why Starmade is worth playing- \"because it\'s like Minecraft\"- then I suppose the game itself has lost all its purpose, and I would be very ashamed. Starmade is supposed to stand out as different and be fun from all the other games because of what IT has, not what Minecraft has in common. The game is fun in its unique sense because you can do things in it that you can\'t do in other games.

It sounds alot to me like you are a dedicated Minecraft player who has very recently stumbled upon this game. Naturally, as Humans we do not always adjust well to changes. Starmade functions, plays and handles very differently from Minecraft. I\'m going to take a guess here and say that the differences in gameplay elements and mechanics make you uncomfortable, because you\'re used to playing it as if you were playing Minecraft. As such, i\'m not surprised by the nature of your suggestions; They are actually quite common! But what matters is that you\'re investing time in giving your input and contributing to the community. Your suggestions are interesting points of discussion, regardless of their practical application to the game itself.

 

[Comr4de]

Once again, planr says it perfectly.

 

[shadyre]

+1 for planr, this game is starmade not minecraft ... yes it\'s look like but just that, hitting a planet like \"r\" for enter isn\'t a bad idea but the gamestyle isn\'t possible with that because planetary defense doesn\'t work, space mining doesn\'t work, orbital defense doesn\'t work, space to ground fighting doesn\'t work and more ...

i play the game in \"LOOOOWWWW\" options but isn\'t the game it\'s my truely bad computer for optimize the game you need ( before working on script ) delete some feature and this is not a good idea i like.

a game is made with some bases, idea and stuff all of that required some cpu performance yes so the real problem is the player computer and not the game, some of your suggestion is based on the cpu performance, try llike me to play in \"low mode\", it\'s really playable i havn\'t some heavy lag ( also in multiplayer ( in multi i have rather than lag because this is the server system who work and not my computer ))

but i like the idea of teleporter, a subject already exist about that ( like stargate ? ^^ ), and for hight speed for traveled a big distance the server admin can increase the maximum ship speed ( default 50 )

 

[Strahan]

All of these items here are already in the game they just haven\'t been flexed out fully yet.


I must not have explored enough, all I keep finding are barren rocks heh.



Schema has a teleportation feature planned, IIRC.


I wasn\'t talking about Star Made, I was referring to Multiverse.



Unfortunately, this is not possible in Starmade (of course, if by \"Minecraft-style\" you mean planets that seem endless). Schema has already addressed this issue in this news post.


Yes, that is what I meant. Unsure to what news post you refer.



So it sounds like you\'re suggesting the default spawn be moved to a planet. That /could/ work okay. However, planets do not have the necessary resources required to produce a spaceship, therefore you cannot \"get\" the spaceship from harvesting on the planet- especially not if it was the \"default spawn planet.\" It would already be harvested to oblivion by the countless players before you. If sector protection was turned on to prevent harvesting the planet, the entire idea of building your ship from scratch on the planet would be impossible and pointless anyways.


No, I don\'t mean moving spawn, I was just positing an alternative to the \"teleport gate\" type of transition Multiverse uses.



Apologies, but I must disagree. To me that sounds like a bad and unfitting idea. Such an unnecessary \"new area\" loading transition does not fit very well with the idea of Starmade, in my opinion. Besides, what would it do about the ship? It would be left defenseless in orbit for anyone to mess around with.


Well, if it was possible to implement a hugely expanding world in the Minecraft style, it wouldn\'t be feasible to keep the current landing system which is why you would need an alternate.



I suppose you could say that \"it could be unloaded from the physical universe while the player is on the surface\" except that presents one major problem: What if the spawn zone in space is congested when the player \"returns\" to their ship? it would collide and smash with all the other ships and lag the server badly. Sure, I suppose the game could scan the sector and find an empty space to place you and your ship in once you return to space. But what if your ship is a capital ship- AKA, it\'s really big (300m - 1000m?). It would already take up an immense amount of space in the sector. There\'s simply no room to place that thing anywhere. In short, I don\'t believe there is any feasible easy solution to this problem.


Good point, I hadn\'t considered the lag aspect of suddenly having ships appearing.



Another major downside to this idea is the fact that this would completely negate the feature and \"fun\" of orbital bombardments. Planetary defenses no longer would serve a purpose because you can\'t attack what\'s not there. If the planet was \"loaded\" for the ship (required for orbital bombardments to even make any sense and be possible in the first place), then the idea of \"shuttling down to a spaceport\" is defeated as well.


True, but I would personally consider that an acceptable tradeoff to the ability to have an advanced planetary experience.



This would not work either. You\'ll notice that Minecraft relies heavily on blocks to produce its entire environment. Starmade does not as much. Its world is very big and does not use as many blocks. Ghosting in Minecraft takes so long because there are so many blocks needed to ghost. Starmade\'s ghosting takes less time because there\'s less stuff to have to ghost- it\'s outer \"space\".


Planets wouldn\'t have to be loaded for people in space, they would just load for people on the actual planet so it\'s not like it would have to render all that stuff for every person passing by. If you mean the engine doesn\'t handle rendering that much period, than yes, that would be problematic.



I do not mean to be rude, but Starmade is not supposed to \"be like\" Minecraft. If that\'s why Starmade is worth playing- \"because it\'s like Minecraft\"- then I suppose the game itself has lost all its purpose, and I would be very ashamed. Starmade is supposed to stand out as different and be fun from all the other games because of what IT has, not what Minecraft has in common. The game is fun in its unique sense because you can do things in it that you can\'t do in other games.


It\'s not rudeness to dissent Of course Star Made isn\'t supposed to be Minecraft, but when your planetary landscapes are the same blocky format do you seriously think people aren\'t going to compare the two? Yes, I do love Minecraft. Your assumption is spot on, except for the uncomfortable part. It\'s not so much that I am uncomfortable, I just found that comparing the on-land experiences shows how... unsophisticated? the SM planets are. Not that it\'s an insult to SM, MC was pretty bare bones in alpha at the beginning too. However I also really like the space aspect of Star Made, building ships and exploring the galaxy is awesome. It was just the planetary parts that I thought were a bit lacking, which is what made me think how great it would be if you could have the fully fleshed out world experience you can get in MC mixed with space exploration.

I suppose, as you say, my thinking is still mired in MC land-based stuff. I guess in a space game, ultimately the planetary experience isn\'t that relevant *shrug*