For one individual, it would probably take years. You'd have to rewrite the AI, make flat maps, reprogram the physics system... Basically, you'd have to strip the game down to the engine itself, and rebuild it.
So Uber invents some rather revolutionary (even if they're not the first to do spherical maps) stuff and people want nothing more but flat maps? I'd rather have a 3D setons.
3D seton's with a wrap around, and therefore two land paths and infinite air paths, would be extremely cool.
Ugh, this is what I get for trusting someones word, if the physics need to be rewritten then the engine does not support it as the physics it not something that modders will usually have access to due to the extremely performance sensitive nature of it. Where exactly did Uber say the engine supports flat maps?
How to make a flat nap: Open Blender/3DS/XSI, add a plane, export it to PA. Remove normal center of gravity with a script/planet editor. Replace gravity with... I dunno, a generic force volume? Restrict camera angle with a script. Texture plane. There ya go! A literally flat map. No mod magic, no decompiling binaries, no hacking into Uber's private offices to acquire their source code and in-house tools. It's comp00ter science people. If the mod tools Uber I'd advertising are a tenth as extensive as they should be, then we will be able to do this within a week of getting our grubby hands on the mod tools. Not that any modmaker I know would WANT to do it. We innovate, as opposed to replicate.
If I remember correctly the comment on non-sphere planets in one of the live-streams has been roughly, that the engine could be used with arbitrary shapes, but they are currently making some assumptions for the rest of the engine, which only hold for sphere-like planets. This states nothing on the question, if those surrounding conditions can be changed/accessed by a modder, which makes the moddability questionable (with the given amount of information). That's the reason, why such general conclusions are not universally true, at least for closed source software. Just because something is in the principal range of possibility for the devs of that software, the required bits of information aren't necessarily accessible for a third party modder.
Yeah that's what I'd originally thought, I knew you could model a flat map for PA and get it in game but also that it almost certainly wouldn't work as a flat map. I guess theseeker2 just didn't understand what was being said and I was too lazy to actually do any fact checking .
Playing Seton's Clutch on SupCom2. Exclusions: Artillery Air Units Nukes Super Units Naval Units Research WHY
How is a different game? The fact that there is more limit moment in flat map than planet map makes it a different game? The reason I'm asking this is, because I planing to mod in the future that requires flat maps.
The premise of game is the annihilation of planets, not planes, the 't' is important. But don't loose heart re: your mod idea: viewtopic.php?f=61&t=45856&p=715979#p715979
For starters with a flat map you can't have orbital or any interplanetary units, you would only have a few vulnerable directions you can be attacked from, and a lot of the more interesting ideas that make PA PA simply wouldn't be in the game anymore (like fighting from planet to planet, being able to crash asteroids into planets, taking over the deathstar type planets ect). And then all the changes needed to make the remaining units balanced again would drastically alter them, there would also be several roles that are no longer being filled and will require new units to fill them. Once you've fixed up everything the only things left from PA would be some of the art and the rendering engine, it would be as different as Counter-Strike: Source is to Half-Life 2: Deathmatch.
I'm not planning to simply copy paste the unites from pa to my mod. My mod is going to have it's own theme based units.