Blocks inside blocks (Volume based building)

[Tactical Nuclear Coffee]

Hey, So whats the likelyhood of having blocks take up volume of a given square rather than the whole square?

Allow blocks to be placed inside eachother and give them a volume, for instance the full square would be 100% meaning theres 0% space left in that grid where as a slope would take up 50% leaving 50% free. It would then be possible to add a window triangle for instance but that would maybe only take it to 60% leaving 40%. Add a screen and then another glass triangle or something.

Blocks being able to fit inside other blocks wouldnt really break the game. Keep in mind it would only be building blocks and not modeled assiets like constructors and so on. Maybe doors and lights and other non hacky type stuff could be allowed to follow a volume based placement but fuel tanks, engines, O2, constructors should obviously be 100% volume to stop someone having a 1x1x1 room with over 200 small fuel tanks inside it haha.

Lastly whats the likelyhood of making CV blocks smaller? Base blocks are massive and could do with being smaller in scale but when it comes to a CV it gets rather annoying having huge blocks that take up a lot of space but then having to deal with a non volume based placement system leaving the player to have less detail or a larger craft.

{EDIT} Also setting signal logic by group isnt a thing?

[Sinsling]

Originally posted by Tactical Nuclear Coffee:

Hey, So whats the likelyhood of having blocks take up volume of a given square rather than the whole square?

Allow blocks to be placed inside eachother and give them a volume, for instance the full square would be 100% meaning theres 0% space left in that grid where as a slope would take up 50% leaving 50% free. It would then be possible to add a window triangle for instance but that would maybe only take it to 60% leaving 40%. Add a screen and then another glass triangle or something.

Blocks being able to fit inside other blocks wouldnt really break the game. Keep in mind it would only be building blocks and not modeled assiets like constructors and so on. Maybe doors and lights and other non hacky type stuff could be allowed to follow a volume based placement but fuel tanks, engines, O2, constructors should obviously be 100% volume to stop someone having a 1x1x1 room with over 200 small fuel tanks inside it haha.

Lastly whats the likelyhood of making CV blocks smaller? Base blocks are massive and could do with being smaller in scale but when it comes to a CV it gets rather annoying having huge blocks that take up a lot of space but then having to deal with a non volume based placement system leaving the player to have less detail or a larger craft.

{EDIT} Also setting signal logic by group isnt a thing?

If they did try to do this, it would involve a complete rebalance of HP stats.

As to changing block size... That wouldn't change anything. The building limit is block based so you'd still be stuck with the same number of block spots to work with.

[Tactical Nuclear Coffee]

Originally posted by Sinsling:

If they did try to do this, it would involve a complete rebalance of HP stats.

As to changing block size... That wouldn't change anything. The building limit is block based so you'd still be stuck with the same number of block spots to work with.

HP Stats are all over the place as it is, a slope and block have the same HP even tho one would be 100% volume the other being 50%

Never reached the block limit. If there is one im sure it can be incresed after optimizations? If not a different tab in the block list for 1/2 blocks and 1/4 blocks? same blocks just smaller size :)

Originally posted by MyProfile:

I think the best you can hope for is the block you want, being added to the game as a combination block but not really, its still just one block taking up one blocks space.

Example, a two sided corner window with a concrete floor and a plant sitting on it being all one block and placeable. This is doable but not at all what you are looking for.

When you look at what some of the talented builders, one comes to mind immediately for me, Pyston, you see the challenge involved in making these incredible builds.

Yeah he done fantastic work but from what hes said i doubt he will be be returning.

Combo blocks are/would be so much more work over something like volume calculations as there will be so many combos it would get insane quite quickly. Also a combo block would technically be one block so painting and textureing would be all or none.

Yes its tricky and actually fun to try and work out how to detail it, the problem is you end up with something much larger than you need. But altho thats not a massive issue it would be nice to see more creative options with regards to block placement. The CV blocks are 2m squared? so a small light is taking up 2m squared? LOL. See i would really be annoyed if you could phase non building blocks inside eachother like interstellar rift. You can have a small room with so much stuff just inside eachother where as here its too open. I feel all the blocks have claustrophobia :D Theres one screen block which is 50% of the long thin one. Now if i wanna put it down and have one next to it (in the same block location) i cant even tho they wouldnt overlap or anything allowing me to have an engines online and engines offline notice in a small space where as not i need 12 blocks of room dedicated to 4 toggles.

Im no stranger to making good crafts, just finished my second CV and it does look good but it is stupidly large for what i need. First one was too large and it was very small and compacked.

I think volume based would be the best.

[piddlefoot]

A block inside the block of another object inside the voxel is what we used to call compound blocks, this type of system is very problematic for a game that used HP for each voxel block.

How do you calculate a blocks true value if someone places a coffee pot inside one of the blocks and a weapons fire shot from enemy hit said coffee pot, should the whol voxel take damage of just the compound block inside that voxel.

Its so complex when you try to add shields that it becomes a waste of computational power with every single voxel capable of 5 times that mathematical complexity, yes it does work as we have seen in some game, but then those games are not as massive MP scale as this game, so they have some extra processing power to throw at it all.

Empyrion is better off just adding some better physics over trying to over-complicate things.

[Sinsling]

Compare what you need to what you want though. You need cv functionality. But what you want is cv functionality in a sv sized pretty package.

If you had the sized cv you wanted, svs would be obsoleted by turret carrying cvs of the same size that have med facilities and respawn points on them.

Cvs are large by design - they are flying bases. They are meant for tanking, moving production, heavy weaponry, and providing a forward base on new planets without needing to make bases. Compacting that bundle of function would remove any usage for svs or hvs beyond the first planet.

Some things I think could respond by cube volume - lights and flares for example - but not structural blocks.

[Tactical Nuclear Coffee]

Originally posted by piddlefoot:

A block inside the block of another object inside the voxel is what we used to call compound blocks, this type of system is very problematic for a game that used HP for each voxel block.

How do you calculate a blocks true value if someone places a coffee pot inside one of the blocks and a weapons fire shot from enemy hit said coffee pot, should the whol voxel take damage of just the compound block inside that voxel.

Its so complex when you try to add shields that it becomes a waste of computational power with every single voxel capable of 5 times that mathematical complexity, yes it does work as we have seen in some game, but then those games are not as massive MP scale as this game, so they have some extra processing power to throw at it all.

Empyrion is better off just adding some better physics over trying to over-complicate things.

Couldnt HP be calculated by volume?

If you have a square and you place normal steel armor then it would ONLY accept other steel blocks, not combat steel. And if you know the HP for 1 full block then it would be calculated based on its volume so if a block of steel is 100HP then a square with 75% volume would be 75HP or wouldnt that work?

As for the coffee analogy the whole block should take damage. I dont think realism added ontop would be a good idea :) After all a 15mm round and blow a 2m squared hole in a capital ship hahaha

Originally posted by Sinsling:

Compare what you need to what you want though. You need cv functionality. But what you want is cv functionality in a sv sized pretty package.

If you had the sized cv you wanted, svs would be obsoleted by turret carrying cvs of the same size that have med facilities and respawn points on them.

Cvs are large by design - they are flying bases. They are meant for tanking, moving production, heavy weaponry, and providing a forward base on new planets without needing to make bases. Compacting that bundle of function would remove any usage for svs or hvs beyond the first planet.

Some things I think could respond by cube volume - lights and flares for example - but not structural blocks.

Yes and im fine with them being big but thers a big CV and theres a big CV with 6m wide coridors. If you want lights on both sides its now 10m wide. The more detail you add the more space you need as you need a 2m squared space for a small light or a tiny bit of led screen ect.

Lights, flares, screens and a few other things for sure. Altho structural blocks would need to be done too. Slopes with 50/50 armor/glass should be a thing :)

[Sinsling]

Uh... Small lights are traversable? A 3 block wide path should have more than enough room for lights.

[Tactical Nuclear Coffee]

Originally posted by Sinsling:

Uh... Small lights are traversable? A 3 block wide path should have more than enough room for lights.

Yeah, 3 blocks, then walls, 5 blocks, as they are 2m squares that would make 10m wall to wall for just a hallway :)

[Sinsling]

Originally posted by Tactical Nuclear Coffee:

Originally posted by Sinsling:

Uh... Small lights are traversable? A 3 block wide path should have more than enough room for lights.

Yeah, 3 blocks, then walls, 5 blocks, as they are 2m squares that would make 10m wall to wall for just a hallway :)

Uh... No?

The path is 6 m wall to wall. Block 1 and 5 have the wall. Block 3 is the center. Blocks 2 and 4 can hold unobtrusive corner or wall lights that sit up against the wall on top block 1 and 5. Or if you want to make it really small, use a 2m hallway with a corner or wall light.

Now the real issue is if you want to slope the walls. Depending on how artistic you are trying to be, lights may not be aesthetically pleasing in the available space. But you can get real sneaky and place the light outside the wall (at least for now) because light isn't blocked by occlusion planes yet.

[Tactical Nuclear Coffee]

Originally posted by Sinsling:

Originally posted by Tactical Nuclear Coffee:

Yeah, 3 blocks, then walls, 5 blocks, as they are 2m squares that would make 10m wall to wall for just a hallway :)

Uh... No?

The path is 6 m wall to wall. Block 1 and 5 have the wall. Block 3 is the center. Blocks 2 and 4 can hold unobtrusive corner or wall lights that sit up against the wall on top block 1 and 5. Or if you want to make it really small, use a 2m hallway with a corner or wall light.

Now the real issue is if you want to slope the walls. Depending on how artistic you are trying to be, lights may not be aesthetically pleasing in the available space. But you can get real sneaky and place the light outside the wall (at least for now) because light isn't blocked by occlusion planes yet.

Im talking about outer wall to outer wall, doesnt matter tho as i doubt there will be a volume based block placement.

Yeah in order to have anything like slopes or curves in the hallway it needs to be even wider so yeah, needs to be big or needs to be bland :p

[Tryst49]

I resent having to leave huge spaces free because a wall section that only takes up around one tenth of the block space prevents anything else being placed on the entire block. A light that takes up a tiny fraction of the block space also precludes placing anything else on that block. Other things like decor items, elevator blocks, windows and so on with loads of empty space also require an entire block. It's total madness and really limits what you can do.

Even if we can't overlay blocks themselves, there should be groups, each of which can be overlaid.
Blocks
Lights
Decor
Windows and doors
Misc

Elevator blocks go into the misc section but it would mean that a wall mounted light can be placed on a wall but inside an elevator block because it is part of a different group, unffected by the block requirements of the Misc group. Lights placed in the same block taken up by an angled window, decor items placed next to walls on the same block occupied by the wall block. Railings in the Misc section means that we can have a double wide stairway with a railing in between since the stairway is in the Block category.

It would make life so much easier. there are things we can overaly without them affecting the HP of the block itself.

[piddlefoot]

That tiny little light your talking about, might look tiny to you, but to the game engine, Unity, all it see's is the whole voxel, it doesnt care one bit about what texture is displayed inside that voxel, only that the voxel has a HP number assosiated with it.

So picture EVERYTHING you see in the game as a solid cube like in MC, this is how the game engine works, this is why the game is sometimes called MC in space, it functions very similar in that regard, so the game engine just see's a full cube block there no matter what you see, so the only way to place a block inside that block is to turn on Compound Blocks which in turn totally stuffs up the HP system the game uses for block damage.

Now the game already has the ability to allow movement inside an occupied block, it does it for all of the thin steel blocks already, you can walk inside them and make secret tunnels in POI walls etc, it allows for a hitbox to be placed for damage and dynamic hitboxes too, like the head shot on a native vs a body shot.

So there is code to allow for such things in the game but anything they do they have to HP balance, and that is much much harder than it sounds for it to stay fair also.

This doesnt even touch on the bugs it can bring with SI and how many months it would take to just bug fix that alone.

Compound blocks sound great, but in real life are a bit of a nightmare to code for in a first person shooter type builder game if your trying to keep it a fair fight.

Do we really need or want another version of Lagshot ?

[Tactical Nuclear Coffee]

Then i guess when Empyrion 2 comes along maybe they will use a different engine, maybe something like Avorion. Much better building mechanic for a 50% building game :)

Piddlefoot, I hear ya on the volume thing tho. But surely reducing the size of building blocks would help? Sinsling said theres a block limit but iv never seen one. Not sure what it would be but im sure it could be upped if its stupidly low? However surely making CV blocks 50% smaller would allow for more detail while also not going through months of hastle doing volume based placements?

Somewhere between SV/HV and BA IE 50% smaller than base blocks lol :D

I think SV/HV is .5m squared and bases and CV are 2m squared. So 1m squared would be perfect for CV's? Would mean twice as many blocks needed for something the same size as we have now BUT would give us 100% more space for details (theoretically)

[piddlefoot]

Actually the reason we scale blocks, and even have a large / small version of each block is to save lag, to lessen polygons, see it takes many small blocks to fill the same area as 1 large block, the problem showed itself to extremes in SE where small ships woul lag far more than big ships if there equal size.
On a small ship you can also cram in 3 times more devices, they are things with timers and such built into them, now you have alot happening in that small area, by scaling to a larger block it allows super huge builds with alot less lag.

I mean build a death star with small blocks and you will soon see the issues.

In Empyrion because we dont calculate every single voxel like in SE every tick of the clock, small ships will lag alot less than there counterparts in SE but at some point still do have a limit to there size or lag creeps in.

In Subnautica they have the ability to place things like pictures, tables and things on table, but its set up completely different to Empyrion, and Subn doesnt have the problem of other players shooting at these things ever.

I just dont think its as easy as you might think.

[Sinsling]

And idea of why you haven't reached the build limit as well:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1475176994

that is maxed to 2 sides. imagine those bars extending in all 6 directions.

[Tactical Nuclear Coffee]

Originally posted by Sinsling:

And idea of why you haven't reached the build limit as well:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1475176994

that is maxed to 2 sides. imagine those bars extending in all 6 directions.

AHH Build limit not block limit, my bad.

@Piddlefoot Yeah Even if the build size limit could also be taken down by 50% as sinsling's picture shows its fairly MASSIVE lol. Which would still allow big ships obviously but keep it in scale and allow for more detail?

I dunno but i agree with all your conserns regarding it. Im sure scale would have been the better option before they went with 2m squared CV blocks but as it is now... i doubt it will be changed. That being said empyrion 2 may have a different engine with more advanced styles of building. Thats if they do another. :)

[EDIT] Still a WIP but surely thats a tad too big for one person?
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1475493447