additional 3m Block Variant for Armors - way more divisible.
Pitching this idea in video form here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EupUbiS3nTI
In my previous feedback (https://support.keenswh.com/spaceengineers2/pc/topic/45853-tiling-conforming-sub-2-5m-shape-variants-for-2-5m-tiling), I advocated for additional assets that would allow people to building *within* a 2.5m block more easily. I've thought about it more, and I think I want to walk that back a bit in favour of this idea:
Keep everything (mostly) as it is, except add a 3m Variant to Light and Heavy Armor.
I talk through the complete thinking in this video here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EupUbiS3nTI), but to restate the thing in text form, the current assets don't make for a good time when building on a 2.5m tiling. Walls and Catwalks take up the full 2.5m, so one has to break out of that and that gets to be a pain. I've been enjoying tiling on 3m for a myriad of reasons (again, watch the video), but Armor became a problem - if I'm building on a 3m tiling, wrapping the ship in 2.5m blocks of armor leads to a *ton* of Gap-Filling with tiny blocks that eat up tons of PCU.
so here's my idea: An additional set of Armor variants (for both Light and Heavy) based around 3m. They wouldn't conflict with the existing 2.5m variations, and they'd be trivial to model - much better route-of-least-resistance than my previous idea.
The additional benefit here is when we compare factors. Consider how one could sub-divide an existing 2.5m block evenly: one can do 2 divisions of 5 deco-blocks - a half-slab, 5 divisions of 2 deco-blocks (the 0.5m block), or 10 divisions of 1 deco-block. That means when it comes to slopes, half-slabs, or any other future partial-block variation, we're pretty much limited to halves, fifths, and tenths.
In contrast, if there were a 3m armor block variation, not only would it do better at meshing with the tessellation I mentioned before, we open up a lot of design space for all sorts of slopes, round-overs, and chamfers that leave behind an integer-number of deco-block spacings behind:
We could have slopes that are 6 deco-blocks tall, or 4 deco-blocks tall, or 3 deco blocks tall, and they would still be compatible and align with the 3m armor blocks. Partial variations that don't eat up tons of PCU divide nicely into a 3m armor set.
again, to be clear here, I'm not advocating eliminating the 2.5m armor blocks, or making anything else adhere to this 3m tiling - just armor blocks.
There are other blocks that I would love to see a 3m variation of (like glass, floors catwalks) but I think those are far less crucial in this scenario than they would be in my previous suggestion. That being said, I would still love to see a 3m tall set of stairs and ramps (or even better a single stair tread) but that's a whole 'nother thing.
I like this feedback
Verily, this seems a good idea
Verily, this seems a good idea
Armour panels in SE1 are 10cm thick for large grid. My guess is that in small grid it is 1/25th of 0.5m - 2cm.
I hope armour panels fit in to what ever system is settled on, they have already proven their usefulness.
Armour panels in SE1 are 10cm thick for large grid. My guess is that in small grid it is 1/25th of 0.5m - 2cm.
I hope armour panels fit in to what ever system is settled on, they have already proven their usefulness.
Yeah, the ability to have sort of modular housings and rooms and etc that all fits easily on a tileable grid would be nice. Perhaps there could even be an option for the 2.5m stuff to snap on a 3m grid...
Yeah, the ability to have sort of modular housings and rooms and etc that all fits easily on a tileable grid would be nice. Perhaps there could even be an option for the 2.5m stuff to snap on a 3m grid...
I haven't spent too much time in se2 yet but I think I was running into this issue without understanding it yet.
I really think bumping the largest armor block size up to 3m
I haven't spent too much time in se2 yet but I think I was running into this issue without understanding it yet.
I really think bumping the largest armor block size up to 3m
Since it's basically the same idea, I hope you don't mind that I quote my previous comment here, so those who would not have seen the original topic see it as well:
"I think that it's good that the default is the 2.5 m grid. Big blocks line up perfectly, and it creates a common standard. What would a size change solve? You would still get a gap if you put gaps between blocks. For example, in the case of stairs, imagine a 2 m grid. Great, you have 4x2 m stairs, and they tile great at the large size. However, you want to put one block between large blocks because you want walls. Now you need 4.25x2.25 stairs. It's the same problem, and I think that it results from forcing the system by trying to make large ships with detailing blocks. A solution, in my opinion, could be to simply use detailing blocks to solve the problems that detailing blocks create, and that would mean to make stairs with small or detailing blocks so they fit your custom grid perfectly.
Another solution, which I don't like as much and I think could be more complicated but maybe worth exploring, would be to make the outer 0.25 m layer of large blocks to be "fillable". What I mean by this is that you'd have a 2.5 m block, and you would be able to cover its skin with detailing blocks, but inside of the model itself, within the 2.5 m width, which would give you something that looked like a 2.5x2.5x5 m block."
You say that gap-filling armor eats up a ton of PCU, but doesn't inner-walling eat it too? Building large grids with small blocks will always be expensive (1 000 detailing blocks fit in the space of one large block), unless we get some sort of purely decorative blocks with zero physics.
It's not that I don't see the problem, but I think it's not something that can be solved easily as long as block sizes are separate blocks, because it floods the G screen. Maybe being able to take a block (any block), and then choose its size without having to drag the specific size to the hotbar could help add more block sizes without filling the G screen with different sizes.
Since it's basically the same idea, I hope you don't mind that I quote my previous comment here, so those who would not have seen the original topic see it as well:
"I think that it's good that the default is the 2.5 m grid. Big blocks line up perfectly, and it creates a common standard. What would a size change solve? You would still get a gap if you put gaps between blocks. For example, in the case of stairs, imagine a 2 m grid. Great, you have 4x2 m stairs, and they tile great at the large size. However, you want to put one block between large blocks because you want walls. Now you need 4.25x2.25 stairs. It's the same problem, and I think that it results from forcing the system by trying to make large ships with detailing blocks. A solution, in my opinion, could be to simply use detailing blocks to solve the problems that detailing blocks create, and that would mean to make stairs with small or detailing blocks so they fit your custom grid perfectly.
Another solution, which I don't like as much and I think could be more complicated but maybe worth exploring, would be to make the outer 0.25 m layer of large blocks to be "fillable". What I mean by this is that you'd have a 2.5 m block, and you would be able to cover its skin with detailing blocks, but inside of the model itself, within the 2.5 m width, which would give you something that looked like a 2.5x2.5x5 m block."
You say that gap-filling armor eats up a ton of PCU, but doesn't inner-walling eat it too? Building large grids with small blocks will always be expensive (1 000 detailing blocks fit in the space of one large block), unless we get some sort of purely decorative blocks with zero physics.
It's not that I don't see the problem, but I think it's not something that can be solved easily as long as block sizes are separate blocks, because it floods the G screen. Maybe being able to take a block (any block), and then choose its size without having to drag the specific size to the hotbar could help add more block sizes without filling the G screen with different sizes.
addressing some of the feedback I've been getting, just for further explanation and exploration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmwmvjlHZp0
addressing some of the feedback I've been getting, just for further explanation and exploration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmwmvjlHZp0
Replies have been locked on this page!