Round Planets

[Lone_Puppy]

Wow! That was an interesting debate/borderline argument.

One overarching theme I have seen with this game is balance. I think weighing up all the requests, suggestions, ideas and wish lists against the limitations of the dev team, the engine and computers in general.... umm I lost my train of thought.

Oh yeah, the Schine team has come up with the best compromise they can for now in order to continue the development of the game.

I'm sure the Schine team would love to provide us with planetary bodies like the one in the video I found today. And I wish I hadn't stumbled onto it actually.

I see much potential in games like Starmade, and at times I feel frustrated that I can't have things I would really like right now. In the meantime, I'm willing to wait and see and continue to explore other facets of the game I have yet to experience and offer any suggestions no matter how silly or implausible they may seem. And these guys actually pay attention, even if it's not really something they can commit time to right now. I'm ok with that.

My brain is fried from work today, so I might not be making a lot of sense.

That's my two cents. Well, for now anyway.

 

[therimmer96]

Spoiler

...No. Highly disagree.

Because nothing saves my shattered immersion like the ability to relocate to the far side of a planet in 10 seconds.

It's StarMade. It's possible to relocate to the other side of the solar system in 10 seconds

 

[SomethingSlimy]

It's StarMade. It's possible to relocate to the other side of the solar system in 10 seconds

Look up "Suspension of disbelief." Planets provide nothing that makes them too good for fixing.

 

[Lecic]

...No. Highly disagree.

Only issue I see here is the plate-wide plateaus.

Because nothing saves my shattered immersion like the ability to relocate to the far side of a planet in 10 seconds.

In a ship? Yes. It's not like it was any different with disc planets, though. On foot? No. You do not cross a planet with high speed on foot.

 

[Master_Artificer]

Spoiler: I used the planet picture from the wiki after messing with his to get the circle to better prove my point, but forgot to link it I guess.

 

[kiraen]

On foot? No. You do not cross a planet with high speed on foot.

Don't forget about the transporters.

 

[Ithirahad]

In a ship? Yes. It's not like it was any different with disc planets, though. On foot? No. You do not cross a planet with high speed on foot.

Well, at least disc planets didn't routinely kill servers and were large enough to build decent-looking cities/towns on. Doesn't mean I like them, and I'd rather keep D12s until we can come up with something better - disc planets were unacceptably ugly, and allowed for silly things like hangars in the side of planets - but they certainly had their advantages.

 

[MacThule]

I wish people could just be OK with planets being cubic since the entire game is cubic.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

Don't forget about the transporters.

Transporters are my favourite thing these days!

 

[Lecic]

Don't forget about the transporters.

Transporters are not by foot :P

 

[Lone_Puppy]

Transporters are not by foot :p

Sometimes I forget I have installed transporters and jump out of my ship and start walking. It's at the point where I'm moving so slowly that I remember. Doh!

 

[Colt556]

With space engineers releasing planets it really does make you wish for large, round planets. I never do anything on planets currently so it's hardly a game changer, but it'd be wonderful to see big round planets at some point in starmade's future. It's always a bit of a shame when your ship is longer than the planet's surface.

 

[Byamarro]

And this odd gravitational jumping between plates :/...

 

[LessThanLethal]

You can't build across the plates. In a game about building that's important!

I think any of the problems that spherical planets have are much better in comparison with just this one.

 

[Lecic]

You can't build across the plates. In a game about building that's important!

I think any of the problems that spherical planets have are much better in comparison with just this one.

I'd say not being able to build across multiple plates is better than the massive amounts of distortion from building or even just having a large object near the planet.

Plus, you CAN build across plates. There's just a bit of a jagged edge.

 

[Byamarro]

What about mapping to sphere our current planets instead of whole cube? They're nearly spheres.

 

[Ithirahad]

What about mapping to sphere our current planets instead of whole cube? They're nearly spheres.

Cubes interlock properly; these, as far as I can tell, really don't. Besides you still run into the issue of blocks getting larger as you tower them upwards. Unless your planets are like 6 kilometers in radius, in which case you don't have to worry much about it because the distance you'd have to pillar up for it to become noticeable would just become really high.

 

[SkylordLuke]

what about "Truncated Icosahedron" or whatever they are called
like old soccer ball.. once we get LOD we can make them 100x bigger no problem.

 

[Ithirahad]

This was brought up before; football planets wouldn't really work since they require more than one shape, and even if they did that's a lot of entities. A regular icosahedron could work, but again it's a lot of entities, and the way it splits up building can be a pain in the arse for large-scale projects. But then again, yes, with LOD and huge planets it could be alright.