Medieval Engineers

Medieval Engineers

Saathiya Mar 4, 2015 @ 9:34am
Building Underground: Unwise?
TL;DR: Is it an unwise risk to build underground?

Next time you lay a foundation, take a look at it in structural integrity mode. The bits on the ground are white because they're immune to the structural physics. It's clear what's happening here, and it is by no means at all a flaw: the physics system requires some kind of anchor point so that everything else it does can happen relative to something.

But then, there are always issues that can arise from absolutes. Dig a tunnel and build within it, and you don't have to worry about collapse. Go ahead and tunnel a bit horizontally, surround the tunnel with stone blocks, and look at it in structural integrity mode. Everything is a foundation impervious to Physics. The ground is a heck of an anchor!

A construction game begs us to be creative. So, you want your medieval rollercoaster to swoop underground and scare the pee out of the peasants on board? You want to craft a dungeon? You want to tunnel through a mountain? Hold it right there.

Mining is coming to the game in the future, which means that physics related to mining *might* be coming. Tunnel collapse and all that jazz. So, what happens to your dungeon or roller coaster when dirt has mass in the future?

I want to continue construction on a map. Actually, I'm pretty damn tempted to make a custom heightmap and engage in some epic scale construction. But my vision requires knowing some things about the future that I can't know.

TL;DR: Is it an unwise risk to build underground?
< >
Showing 1-5 of 5 comments
4onen Mar 4, 2015 @ 9:37am 
Probably not.
Consider the number of voxels in the entirety of an ME map. Then think about the calculations required to decide how much support each section of voxel has versus mass.
It's possible (if aligned to the grid like the current SI system) but it would be insanely difficult, so I highly doubt that it will be implemented.
I'd love to see the devs prove me wrong though.
Saathiya Mar 4, 2015 @ 9:40am 
If only the exposed, below-ground-level voxels have physics, then the rest can follow. If those exposed underground blocks are treated like any other structure, then the consequences of a collapse may even be achievable with static calculations. The weight they hold isthen just a function of the distance to the next void above them. In collapse, a cone over each collapse point gets lowered by a center height equal to the height of the void beneath the collapse.

I don't think it would take any more technical wizardry than whatever magics have made this game possible to begin with. But it could have the potential to demolish existing maps. So, knowing that part of the plans would be good.
Last edited by Saathiya; Mar 4, 2015 @ 9:41am
RayvenQ  [developer] Mar 4, 2015 @ 9:42am 
Well, the game is alpha so you do have to expect that your creations can and will become obsolete/cease to function thanks to patches down the line, I mean hell, they possibly will change the Structural integrity, or at leats tweak it at some point, which could have disastrous results on peoples creations, but it's alpha so those changes have to be made. You pretty much have to have the mindset that your items will probably break everytime a patch is released and then have to re-create or re-work your creation to take changes into consideration, to avoid frustration. So my advice would be to build whatever you feel like, just don't expect it to survive the next patch.
Saathiya Mar 4, 2015 @ 9:48am 
Damn good answer, RayvenQ, and it answers another question too.

Minecraft patches were always created such that they wouldn't break existing stuff. That really limited the possibilities for features down the line. I've played Space Engineers, but started so late with it that I never saw Keen's take on this. If you're right, then they're doing it the right way.

Also, VRage looks like it's decent GUI boilerplate away from being worth paid licensing and it's still open source. If I weren't already up to my neck in another project, I'd be studying the hell out of that code :D
RayvenQ  [developer] Mar 4, 2015 @ 9:59am 
It's the same with any alpha really, enjoy the things you make while you can and if a patch comes up that breaks it, either make something else or try and figure things out around the new game constraints (aka do some engineering and problem solving!). Think of patch breaking things as a puzzle to enjoy, you got it to work one way, now you gotta figure out how to get it working again. If you are playing an alpha game and expect your monolithic creation to be completely fine and working and unchanged during the alpha phase, you're only setting yourself up for frustration and dissapointment.
< >
Showing 1-5 of 5 comments
Per page: 1530 50

Date Posted: Mar 4, 2015 @ 9:34am
Posts: 5