We need inner corners!

[klawxx]

Hello All,

I would like to know if there's a reason for an "Inner Corner" shape not be available in game. I aways run into trouble when connecting two inclined walls, like this...

In this case I have only two options, leave as it is or make a third inclined wall, which in some cases is not desirable:

This also create some limitations when you want to create a tight rail docking, since there's no "Counterpart", if you know what I mean, to the "Corner" shape.

Also, since we are on the subject, we could use a new shape to fix this shown bellow... I believe it could be described as "A sloped 45 degrees corner"... One Example are my Akira Class Nacelles:

 

[JNC]

Yeah..... been waiting 5 years now.

 

[Captain Fortius]

A lot of simple things like that could be done very quickly and they'd improve the game considerably.

 

[klawxx]

A lot of simple things like that could be done very quickly and they'd improve the game considerably.

schema , please, listen to our prayers and give us some quickie goodies before an extensive update of the whole universe....
We, your faithful cat worshipers, would be very grateful

 

[NeonSturm]

I don't say completely no, but I think it's a compensation for other real-life challenges which SM takes away from us.

You will always have challenges or the game wouldn't be fun for some players. Why not accept this issue as one challenge?.

As for docking solutions, I refer to cans which you can stack on top of each other.
Build big enough (with many blocks) and such details are minor.
EDIT: For good artists, build big ships and you get while others get the simplicity/performance they want. Personally, I don't like that SM-block-computers are worse than 1970's for size/possibilities because they could add what SM doesn't have when someone desires it.

 

[Captain Fortius]

You will always have challenges or the game wouldn't be fun for some players. Why not accept this issue as one challenge?.

Build big enough (with many blocks) and such details are minor.

Just... Why?

Missing a shape is not a challenge. It's a hindrance. Yes, technically you could try to work around it. Try a different hull shape to avoid this problem. That's a limitation, though. Kind of like taking a specific color away from an artist. (Yes again, the results can be interesting, but you're still not painting what you wanted to paint.)
If you're not among the artsy crowd, you're unlikely to understand this problem. To put it in perspective, let's remove thruster blocks, and see what fun challenge it'll be to move the ship around.

Having more hull shapes means greater variety to build from and the ability to create smoother surfaces, and more accurate replicas.
Which is objectively better, and there's no honest reason for it to be contested.

 

[JinM]

You will always have challenges or the game wouldn't be fun for some players. Why not accept this issue as one challenge?.

I think you used the wrong words for the right idea: The limitation of ressources/blocks allows for better creativity. It's a well known concept from Minecraft and also in the real world. Examples: finger painting, mosaik, sculptures out of wooden matches.

On the other hand Starmade and Empyrion alike suffer from a sideeffect this concept brings with it: Certain ship shapes are encouraged to build, and other ship shapes look way worse just because the blocks cant be aligned cleanly. All round or non 45 degree ship shapes look worse than the 45 degree shapes. A good example are Schnellbiers ships. They look marvelous, but they all have the same general surface angles and textures.

 

[klawxx]

Just... Why?

Short answer: Because he can.

Possible answer A: Because he thinks that we should go back to StarMade before wedges existed. Hes enraged that we now have wedges and that ruined his life in some way. He loved the old GUI. "Why have improvements and bug fixes, who needs that!?"

Possible Answer B: Maybe he thinks that all improvement is unnecessary. He just want to go back to wired phones and DOS / Power PCs. Who knows, he may be a nihilist just wishing to die.

Most probable answers: He's attempting some type of trolling... who in their right mind would want a lesser, unpolished, game, if he could have something better. It would be like someone being angry that Microsoft moved from Windows XP stupid and cartoonish color scheme.

I would always welcome any kind of improvement that schema gives me.

 

[NeonSturm]

JinM is right
klawxx only partially.

I like wedges, but I don't like that you have to spend so much effort rotating shapes. Perhaps with auto-smoothing shaders it would look nice without need of wedges.

I like older GUIs in the Earth2150 over these in Earth2160 game. I hate transparence and curves if it hurts performance too much.
The best solutions in my oppinion are panels on the screen's side to "reduce resolution" by cutting some view angle of the main view away and add it via a lower-graphic-settings mini-screens within the pannel or as a transparency-underlayer.
Or simply expressed: Cut screen of 270° vision in 9 squares and render the center square with all settings and others with reduced settings

Spoiler: more ... @.klawxx

Also I like old computer/phone tech, because it's cheaper, powersaver / less trash, more accessible, etc.
Cut everything out which isn't core and make everything else optional.
But a smart-phone is good when you can use it as GPS or IO-controller or other tasks when someone adds a simple put-onto-and-it-gets-power-device into the car and on the desk.
(( IO-controller: something that uses a docking station to sit inbetween keyboard+PC and PC+screen to add touchscreen, work as controller or something else.
Not because it's save, but because it's stupid to make peoples 100% secure if they are not willing to spend effort into it. I hard-separate between a secure PC and insecure laptop/handy with only games for example and want as many things to work with cheapest tech as possible ))

Have wikipedia and most forums on a tab/bookmark-able console browser would be very good.
But w3m for Linux does not support youtube-videos.
Also, text is faster to download than 1000 stylesheet-files and attached images. You also need an only black/white e-paper /ebook-reader rather than expensive screen tech to use it.

I'd rather like to have everything that minimal and put the focus-content on the modern main-screen default-flat-screen because it's sufficient and keeps the download size+latency at minimum while keeping responsibility at maximum.
If everyone had it, it would be easier to compete with big concerns because it's easier to make a similarily good appearance.