- Joined
- Jun 30, 2013
- Messages
- 72
- Reaction score
- 0
gravity shenanigan detected: you can get stuck if you get to the gravity plane and you could only get out of it with a ship or floating out of gravities range.
StarMade dev update: why spherical planets don't fit in a block world
- Thread starter schema
- Start date
3 Things that may or may not work
1. What if the planets wernt in the games cordnates planes, but enities that have their own planes. (with this there would have to be a limit to how high you can build on planets)
2. If a player is not facing a planet, it is not loaded in the game, but atmosphere of game is still loaded.
3. Going along with the first one, blocks would not be complete squares, but would make it so they are slightly pointed on the inner side of the planet. The cordnate lines of the planet all point inwards.
Thankyou for reading my post if you have, just remember that im NOT a developer but do have experience with computer logic and dont know if these ideas would work or not.
-Cgaruti
1. What if the planets wernt in the games cordnates planes, but enities that have their own planes. (with this there would have to be a limit to how high you can build on planets)
2. If a player is not facing a planet, it is not loaded in the game, but atmosphere of game is still loaded.
3. Going along with the first one, blocks would not be complete squares, but would make it so they are slightly pointed on the inner side of the planet. The cordnate lines of the planet all point inwards.
Thankyou for reading my post if you have, just remember that im NOT a developer but do have experience with computer logic and dont know if these ideas would work or not.
-Cgaruti
you cross any of these lines and gravity pushes to the face. And have a 10x10-30x30 indestructable core.
forgot to say: have hills and things on the faces, like the current. even on the flat ice lands, maybe a rising glacier
You could simply use a combinaison of the sector code and the image swapping trick you already use on planets. Let me explain:
You make planets very large amount of chunks, not real sized, but decently sized and show them as spherical from the distance with the image trick you already have implemented. Those planets would span over several sectors.
That way you keep generation simple, as planets remain a flat generated surfaces that loop on the sides. You could even reduce the amounts of chunk towards the north and south and have a longer strip of chunks at the equator to emulate spheres better and actually have a north and south pole.
Once an object reaches the \"image switching\" point, you use a piece of calculation similar to how you make ship change sectors and reorient. Depending of the location they cross the barrier, you calculate a X-Y coordinate and an orientation from which they come in above the flat surface. Same for exit.
That way, the planet appears spherical from far away and behaves like a sphere when traveling on and around it. And at teh same time, you keep all the advantages of flat terrain generation.
Later on, as a bonus, you can make the image generation process take into account what is built on the planet.
You make planets very large amount of chunks, not real sized, but decently sized and show them as spherical from the distance with the image trick you already have implemented. Those planets would span over several sectors.
That way you keep generation simple, as planets remain a flat generated surfaces that loop on the sides. You could even reduce the amounts of chunk towards the north and south and have a longer strip of chunks at the equator to emulate spheres better and actually have a north and south pole.
Once an object reaches the \"image switching\" point, you use a piece of calculation similar to how you make ship change sectors and reorient. Depending of the location they cross the barrier, you calculate a X-Y coordinate and an orientation from which they come in above the flat surface. Same for exit.
That way, the planet appears spherical from far away and behaves like a sphere when traveling on and around it. And at teh same time, you keep all the advantages of flat terrain generation.
Later on, as a bonus, you can make the image generation process take into account what is built on the planet.
I had the same idea.
I love this idea because it would give a good incentive for mining - the closer you get to the lava core the rarer and higher level ores are found and as it gets smaller, you would find less making some extremely rare.
In regards to the gravity, I don\'t see it being the problem having a single center of gravity in the middle and no matter where you are on the planet the gravity point is directly beneath you.
The reason I don\'t see this as a problem is that at most the angle you would be walking on is 45 degrees which we do anyway with sloped blocks, and in regards to vegetation, you could write into the algorithm that more vegetation grows closer to the axes, or you could just put vegetation on which ever side of a cube is closest to the point of gravity (please excuse my lack of terminology).
I love this idea because it would give a good incentive for mining - the closer you get to the lava core the rarer and higher level ores are found and as it gets smaller, you would find less making some extremely rare.
In regards to the gravity, I don\'t see it being the problem having a single center of gravity in the middle and no matter where you are on the planet the gravity point is directly beneath you.
The reason I don\'t see this as a problem is that at most the angle you would be walking on is 45 degrees which we do anyway with sloped blocks, and in regards to vegetation, you could write into the algorithm that more vegetation grows closer to the axes, or you could just put vegetation on which ever side of a cube is closest to the point of gravity (please excuse my lack of terminology).
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2013
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
Our idea works perfectly for ship mining, but I believe everybody is having trouble with how to work with planet based houses, which is completely understandable, but then again, has anybody here ever tried to build a minecraft house at a 45 degree tilt? It\'s nearly impossible :P So for mining, yeah, we\'re fine, and I like your idea of rarer materials further down, but for living there, ehhh... it gets dicey. and the algorithm for vegitation doesn\'t sound half bad, as for the hills and whatnot, it would be interesting to see how they add them if this is used. I just like this because it\'s simple and not too restrictive (for ships)
I don\'t see a loading screen being a problem any more than the initial load-in is when you start the game. I hate to say it, but the load screen works in minecraft with world transitions, why not here?
I\'m not sure what you mean about no idea about what a planet is like - currently you have to get close enough for a planet to load to know what it\'s like - why should it be any different with this idea?
Planetary defenses would only be engaged when within a planets atmosphere - no planetary assaults or defenses would be possibly without entering into a planet\'s atmosphere (here, a planet\'s atmosphere would be the sector-sized planet surface, rather than the currently tiny planet atmosphere in-game)
Ships within an atmosphere could be imperceptible to the outside universe, but could be detected from within atmosphere. You could hand wave away this mechanic to the idea being that a planet\'s magnetic field/mass/whatever screws with detection.
I\'m not sure what you mean about no idea about what a planet is like - currently you have to get close enough for a planet to load to know what it\'s like - why should it be any different with this idea?
Planetary defenses would only be engaged when within a planets atmosphere - no planetary assaults or defenses would be possibly without entering into a planet\'s atmosphere (here, a planet\'s atmosphere would be the sector-sized planet surface, rather than the currently tiny planet atmosphere in-game)
Ships within an atmosphere could be imperceptible to the outside universe, but could be detected from within atmosphere. You could hand wave away this mechanic to the idea being that a planet\'s magnetic field/mass/whatever screws with detection.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 293
- Reaction score
- 48
The proper way to do this would be to treat the planet as a Mesh and what you render as a texture.
Take the \"texture\" and wrap it around the \"Mesh\". Explenation:
First, lets talk about how the would is treated from a player-on-planet perspective.
This is done by creating a map the has a proper paging landscape system (currently not implemented in starmade). When on the planet, given the players LOD, display a portion of the map to the user. If the user walks to the edge of the map, render the given portion from the other end of the map.
Image to explain:
this is very simple to implement and would add major improvements to the server. If you where in a chunk, you would be able to see based on an LOD, not limiting you to a one chunk view (the way the current system works).
The next hard bit is how would the sky work? Its very simple. Think of the planet as a view port rendering what ever is in the feild of view (in this case the FOV is sky). To do this do your mapping to find how the world will warp onto the planet. After you do that find where the player is, call that LOC. Then, using the direct opposit direction of the grownd, UP (hehehe). Then you can find everything the player can see!
It would work like this:
Take the \"texture\" and wrap it around the \"Mesh\". Explenation:
First, lets talk about how the would is treated from a player-on-planet perspective.
This is done by creating a map the has a proper paging landscape system (currently not implemented in starmade). When on the planet, given the players LOD, display a portion of the map to the user. If the user walks to the edge of the map, render the given portion from the other end of the map.
Image to explain:
this is very simple to implement and would add major improvements to the server. If you where in a chunk, you would be able to see based on an LOD, not limiting you to a one chunk view (the way the current system works).
The next hard bit is how would the sky work? Its very simple. Think of the planet as a view port rendering what ever is in the feild of view (in this case the FOV is sky). To do this do your mapping to find how the world will warp onto the planet. After you do that find where the player is, call that LOC. Then, using the direct opposit direction of the grownd, UP (hehehe). Then you can find everything the player can see!
It would work like this:
i think to make the worlds round you should pull alittle visual trick. have them show up at a distance as round like in the first pic and treat it simalure to how you have the atmosphiers set up as the planet gets closer have the image unwrap as the chunks of the planet load in. just have the upwraped side render twords the direction of the player. that way you can avoid having to change gravity it would work about the same just put a bottom layer on the planet that cant be broken like bedrock in minecraft. mostly its just visual render trickery. doing it this way would also alow for diffrent sized worlds as what you would be seeing in space is just a visual representation of what the planet acualy is. also makes space based planet defences more practical again
I realise I could have explained it in a clearer way:
- Keep planets flat but make them much much much larger.
- Have a spherical texture for a planet\'s atmosphere that serve as boundaries for a \"sector\".
- Once crossing that sector limit, just calculate where it would be on the flat surface mapped on the sphere\'s surface.
- To have a cool effect, wrap the terrain chunks in a diamond like shape to simulate the width at various latitudes.
- Keep planets flat but make them much much much larger.
- Have a spherical texture for a planet\'s atmosphere that serve as boundaries for a \"sector\".
- Once crossing that sector limit, just calculate where it would be on the flat surface mapped on the sphere\'s surface.
- To have a cool effect, wrap the terrain chunks in a diamond like shape to simulate the width at various latitudes.
I love reading all these ideas and brainstorming things myself. Seeing the issues and future plans as they develop gives me a much greater understanding and appreciation for a game. This game is awesome even in its earlier stages and has much potential for the future.
I personally like the \"Hemisphere\" idea from page one. It\'s a simple solution that also maintains consistancy. If a planet is going to look spherical from a distance, then it should also look spherical close up. Seeing the planet as a sphere and then entering the atmosphere to load a cube doesn\'t really make much sense.
If the \'planet being a separate world (Minecrafty)\' idea was possible, then that would probably be the best solution in my opinion. But there would probably be as many cons as pros and might not be worth it.
No matter what the final outcome will be, I fully support any decision and I\'m sure it will keep the game just as awesome if not more awesome than it is right now.
I personally like the \"Hemisphere\" idea from page one. It\'s a simple solution that also maintains consistancy. If a planet is going to look spherical from a distance, then it should also look spherical close up. Seeing the planet as a sphere and then entering the atmosphere to load a cube doesn\'t really make much sense.
If the \'planet being a separate world (Minecrafty)\' idea was possible, then that would probably be the best solution in my opinion. But there would probably be as many cons as pros and might not be worth it.
No matter what the final outcome will be, I fully support any decision and I\'m sure it will keep the game just as awesome if not more awesome than it is right now.
Oh, but this is not minecraft - we have 45 degree slope blocks, which are super-powerful if you know what you\'re doing. If schema added a concave sloped corner block and 45-degree-tilt orientations of the generic slope block, you could essentially build all your buildings with flat floors and flat walls as 45 degree angles.
Of course this then brings up another problem: what if wanted to build at 20 degree angles? so having some slope blocks doesn\'t alleviate the ultimate problem
Of course this then brings up another problem: what if wanted to build at 20 degree angles? so having some slope blocks doesn\'t alleviate the ultimate problem
You can have a \"flattish\" building plane with a sphere. Make the radius large enough and the curvature of the outermost surface will approach 0 (though not actually reach 0). The sphere doesn\'t really even need to be that large at all to give the illusion of flatness, but at realistic planet scales, this flat building plane will undoubtably, definitely be present
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2013
- Messages
- 72
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey Schema, fisrt of all, thanks for having time to deal with this. It\'s not an issue, but If you wanna make it more spherical, maybe I have a good solution for it - The Icosahedron!
How it works? Well, the icosahedron have a total of 20 Faces. All 20 faces will be connected to O to form 20 pyramids.So you\'ll have 20 gravity directions, all towards the center. You just need to give each Pyramid sector its on Gravity field, and there\'ll be no problem when changing gravity, because the angle is not that different from the previous face.
More info:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icosahedron
- http://www.kjmaclean.com/Geometry/Icosahedron.html
How it works? Well, the icosahedron have a total of 20 Faces. All 20 faces will be connected to O to form 20 pyramids.So you\'ll have 20 gravity directions, all towards the center. You just need to give each Pyramid sector its on Gravity field, and there\'ll be no problem when changing gravity, because the angle is not that different from the previous face.
More info:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icosahedron
- http://www.kjmaclean.com/Geometry/Icosahedron.html