Snap points allow for better use of real-estate and can help a lot when pressed for space/efficiency. To me, it's not as much about look as it is efficiency. Coming from a programmer, I can easily say that snap points aren't much more than some simple math. It wouldn't take much longer than an hour or two, especially if you made the snap points scale linearly. Also, take note of the bolded. It's not a grid system. A grid system is a pain in the butt on a sphere. A snapping system is not. Of course these features are supplemental, and it really isn't a necessity. Especially at this stage of development. EDIT: Their spheres have a much higher vertex count than that. The vertex count is high enough that distortion begins to take place within just a couple of meters from a point (probably less than that)
I actually would love to have a grid of some sort as well, especially since there will be epic battles and huge planets/systems. I would love to have the build patterns back from FA...
I like the idea too. those colors and zoning reminded me of SimCity 4 zoning and I was wondering it would be a great idea to zone my base of where I would like to place my buildings with different colors. and be able to toggle the zones colors on and off. just a fancy idea, forget it, hehe
That's very doable, depending on how extensive the modding SDK is. In fact, it may already be possible. I don't know how much access the javascript UI has to entities though. Assuming you can draw shapes with javascript (divs and background color, so yes you can), and assuming you can get mouse positions and planet rotations, you can really roughly... and inefficiently... do that.
another good use of this is in team plays where players can draw to each other to be in sync how and where they want to grow and build their base. one guy could draw/zone areas for energy/metal/factories/defenses and they rest can follow/delete/modify ahead before spending the resources. you could number them to set priorities.
I understood exactly what you are requesting. My terse response was simply to point out an issue with your visualization of the solution. The first time I used the current system I was annoyed by the fact things didn't auto align to some kind of grid or at least center / edge align. The problem is strict grid-like alignment breaks down very quickly. In your curved example you have two energy plant sized buildings aligned along a corner with a turret corner to corner with the factory. The problem with this is when dealing with a sphere once you've put the two energy factories in place there's not actually enough space at that corner to fit a turret connected to the corner!
True, but it can be avoided if you force the system to add a bit a of space between the buildings. It would still be an issue if you wanted to... say... surround a pgen with 4 advanced factories, but it would probably do the job for a pgen farm. Also... I wonder, do building "stick" to wrecks when you attemp to rebuild something ? That would be an interesting feature to implement in the same category (maybe also when building mexs on top of mass deposits ?).
i was never asking for it to be exactly like my examples, it seems that all i get in forums is i give up attitude! (your idea is bogus NO! not going to work end of post!!) What ever happened to, OK lets find an alternative!! ideas i came up with: Grid <AROUND PLACEMENTS> as an overlay when in build mode - apparently no good Nodes <AROUND PLACEMENTS> the can Snap together - apparently also no good ^ <Notices I didn't say around Sphere/planet> What i'am saying, there must be some thing here that is close to and can work for those of us that have got so used to having nice neat bases from the countless RTS before i really thought it was part of the style!! guess i was wrong!!
Grid like alignment around nearby buildings is already the plan, the snap to edge being just the first attempt at any kind of alignment. Clamping to corners is high on my list of personal wants, but quickly becomes a complicated issue to solve for. That's not a we won't, it's a we haven't yet because just implementing a naive corner / center / grid snap approach can lead to a worse experience than the current (also naive) edge snap implementation which can already be problematic.
Dude, they've introduced structure snapping to the alpha already. And just like all units move over most terrain and through water, it is a step in the right direction. While your ideas are sound in their own way, the devs can only use so much since this is all custom made for this game specifically. So for them to say: This doesn't work, that doesn't work- To what you're offering is actually easier than them stating "well, we could do this as well" because that's what they're doing internally. We're here to offer them other ideas that maybe they haven't thought of or solutions to issues. Because that is easier for us. If they took the time to post everything they've gone over during their work days, they'd not progress the game system. Beyond that, everyone understands and takes from a single post, something a little different than the next person or even the intended purpose behind the statements. Perspective is a tricky thing, after all. So don't take it as we're beating you down and rejecting your offer as much as someone saying, it might not work because of coding, or the like. Admittedly, I loved structure snapping in SupCom. But this isn't SupCom. And while it is fairly similar to that and TA, it is still a whole new beast because of the mapping of terrain. So while you could technically map the base of a structure to the curvature of a sphere, you then distort anything moving vertically because each point is slightly skewed from the next. This also causes overlapping issues as everyone has probably seen with playing the game as it currently is and with small planet sizes. This will clear up to some degree on larger planets most likely. All in all, they're taking measures in order to do what you're asking for. It won't be exact, I'm sure, considering they still want to be able to let people rotate buildings as well in a seamless 360 degrees rather than a pre-determined set of degrees, like 45's and 90's.
sorry bgolus i went a bit overboard there, but i think the reason you got that idea about my example Is because i used a sketchup plugin which expands out if i add height which compensates for the sphere shape and it made the turret and energy plants look a bit off but yea if there was a enough space like Target6 said i sure its possible!! i think the space depends on the placement though but even still bgolus the Curved example i did is flawed cause you said all placements are placed flat!! but my earlier examples at the begining of this post where Flat
Aye, a bit of slop is likely going to have to be part of the solution, but slop only "fixes" it for so long. Eventually you run out of slop and we have to decide what the behavior is in that case. Here's an example: Code: [][][] [] [] [] [] If we continue those two "parallel" lines of buildings on a sphere very quickly there's not enough room between the two to place another building. Hint: it's the first hole! If we add some slop then maybe you can add a building for the first hole, maybe first few holes, but eventually you'll run out of slop and it can no longer fit. One solution might be to try to be aware of that parallel group and when building push themselves apart by some amount, but how much? And if you do that buildings to the side of the parallel buildings are going to quickly lose space and alignment. Really we don't know what the solution is to the issue as there isn't really a solution to packing squares on a sphere that looks nice. One option is to make most buildings just have a circular base instead of square which doesn't actually solve the problem, but at least removes a little of impetus for OCD.
i see where you getting at, not sure if your the same or if others are, but i dont want to be over the top and do my hole base using the snap tool but sections of my base it to groups like vehicle factory with all the defense and resources its needs, then i will start a new group in another location etc. i think the reason i like snapping/alignment so much was when they had that placement bonus system in FA i think! i played that game so much its hard burnt it to my brain !!!<its become my OCD> :lol:
