This is something I have been wondering about.... This might be an Uber question, but maybe the modders know? Given the way a planet is modeled in the game engine.... 1. Latitude/Longitude I know the planets have a "north" and "south" pole, so I presume it can find the halfway point to define an equator? However, is there a "start" point for the planet in the code so it can handle longitude as well? Thanks @maxpowerz for making me the texture! I am wondering if having a latitude/longitude grid might be an possible in the current game state, assuming we can pull something from how the planets are coded. 2. Building Grids Currently, the buildings seem to have a free form placement. I am sure I am not the only one with a bit of OCD. This reaaaallly messes with my sanity. Mathematically speaking ,can the planet X, Y, Z surface be divided into some sort of grid? Is this even possible for a sphere? Surely, I am not the only one that finds joy in seeing this sort of arrangement? (or I could just be crazy). A square grid would be ideal.... But I would settle for a hexagon based grid? Side note: This "click, rotate click" interface somewhat interferes with what a lot of people are asking for, a "click+drag" system. Do I need to be committed to Arhkam Asylum?
I know making a grid on this planets that have height ranges is hard but even if the sructures are set far appart on that grid I'd take it because it would allow for templates. which a great number of the community has been calling for. we really need to start implementing macro tools.
Mathematically impossible for a grid (assuming a grid where everything is the same shape - the hexagon+pentagon pattern should work) on a sphere. Shits me to tears too (OCD as well). Planets are made as a weird, stretched cube. The faces on the cube would have to be indexed in some way. The indexing rule should be the same for all planets, so just pick an arbitrary face and say the edge/middle/etc of that is your start point.
Is the PA building placement completely free form then? Surely there is some sort of grid that we can't see that is being used to define interferences. Kind of like how mexes cannot be built on some spots due to encroaching geo objects.
Because of height variation, CSG terrain, the varying size of planets, it's unlikely that any regular grid could exist for PA, unless it's purely radial, like the orbital layer. The pathing grid is used for building placement, but building placement is free-form and the pathing grid is distorted. The result is frequently messy.
I'm tempted to say yes, but that's only because I suspect it's closely related to the pathing fields. Have a look at those (F11, I think) and you'll probably leave disappointed.
a halfway compromise for the building grid would be a relative grid-like placement, where you can align new buildings in certain distances and orientations to existing structures. That wouldn't mess with the global spherical attributes and would give local straight lines.
We can already snap buildings to eachother by setting them against eachother. I do want to keep the free form building though, it's neat.
