It's a simple thought. Rather than just the size of a cluster determining output, the shape of the cluster could play it's own role.
Essentially, the shape of the weapon could determine the form of the output.
So by using the right general formations of blocks, you could get lasers to work in Beam, Pulse or Scatter forms or configure missile clusters to output as Barrage, Torpedo or Multi-missile (missile that launches more missiles).
Some example output formations could be:
Torpedo: Long, straight circular/square formations. Same for beam.
Very long thin shapes would be barrage and pulse.
Multi-missile would be tapered towards the front, while scatter, tapered towards the back.
The general idea is to allow for additional functionality and customisation, without adding any new blocks or increasing the learning curve for new users.
I'm sure that using shapes and propotions to modify functionality could be applied to other areas, but I'd like to keep this simple. So how about it?
Essentially, the shape of the weapon could determine the form of the output.
So by using the right general formations of blocks, you could get lasers to work in Beam, Pulse or Scatter forms or configure missile clusters to output as Barrage, Torpedo or Multi-missile (missile that launches more missiles).
Some example output formations could be:
Torpedo: Long, straight circular/square formations. Same for beam.
Very long thin shapes would be barrage and pulse.
Multi-missile would be tapered towards the front, while scatter, tapered towards the back.
The general idea is to allow for additional functionality and customisation, without adding any new blocks or increasing the learning curve for new users.
I'm sure that using shapes and propotions to modify functionality could be applied to other areas, but I'd like to keep this simple. So how about it?