Playing on the net of a cube.

This is the place to request new mods or give ideas about what could be done.
Post Reply
User avatar
mrudat
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:21 am
Contact:

Playing on the net of a cube.

Post by mrudat »

It might be feasible to implement playing on the surface of a cube, by unrolling the surface into its net.

At any point in time, the map would look something like the following, where the player's position is a the centre of the cross (the 2 surfaces).

Code: Select all

 3
1265
 4
If the player were to walk off the edge of the '2' surface onto the '3' surface, the tiles and entities on the various surfaces would be re-arranged like so, by placing and deleting tiles and teleporting and rotating entities:

Code: Select all

 5
136
 2  
 4
There would need to be proxy objects (like Factorissimo) to connect the edges that are no longer adjacent in 2d, but are still logically connected in 3d.

I imagine that it would play something like Seablock, where if you create enough landfill, you eventually end up making the planet bigger.

An infinite-reseach that consumes an ever-increasing amount of landfill and each tier increases the size of the cube by 2 tiles on each side (so that everything remains rail-grid aligned).

It might be simpler to support expanding the planet if special underground pipes / belts are used to join the edges; when the edges are aligned they should just work, if they're not, stuff needs to be moved by script; when the planet is expanded, they should keep working if they're close enough to the edge.

Impatient
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 2:51 am
Contact:

Re: Playing on the net of a cube.

Post by Impatient »

why?

User avatar
5thHorseman
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1124
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Playing on the net of a cube.

Post by 5thHorseman »

Impatient wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 1:53 am
why?
Don't start asking that too much or you'll stop playing entirely.

I assume the OP wants to play on a map that has no boundaries but is not infinite. it may be interesting to try.

I'm trying to figure out how you'd draw the ground when you were at the corner of a cube.
Image Image

Impatient
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 2:51 am
Contact:

Re: Playing on the net of a cube.

Post by Impatient »

5thHorseman wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:02 am
... or you'll stop playing entirely.
I indeed stopped.

User avatar
Ranakastrasz
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 2073
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 3:05 am
Contact:

Re: Playing on the net of a cube.

Post by Ranakastrasz »

The only thing that jumps out at me is that trains would probably explode from the transition and probably can't be properly teleported with train AI. Aside from that and the borders between squares, a non-linear simulation should be at least plausable. I would suggest only allowing a limited number of object types in the borders, and note that teleportation scripts would be required to avpid disjointing.


I would ask why, but I have long since learned better.
My Mods:
Modular Armor Revamp - V16
Large Chests - V16
Agent Orange - V16
Flare - V16
Easy Refineries - V16

User avatar
mrudat
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:21 am
Contact:

Re: Playing on the net of a cube.

Post by mrudat »

The main reason why is someone (not particularly seriously) suggested playing on the surface of a 4D object, which I don't think it would be feasible to represent with a 2D map, so I tried to think of what could be feasibly implemented, and I think you could implement a cube.

You can only implement angles of 90 degrees, given that you need to be able to rotate entities as the surfaces move around, and you can only have one surface joined directly to another surface, and thus, a cube.

If there's some systematic way you could allow walking from one surface to one of two others, you could possibly do a hypercube.

You could maybe do a solid with octagonal and square sides, but I'm not certain that you could avoid needing to rotate a surface by 45 degrees at some point.

User avatar
5thHorseman
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1124
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Playing on the net of a cube.

Post by 5thHorseman »

The classic 2d to 3d mapping is a torus. It's just a rectangle with wraparound. That wouldn't require any rotating.
Image Image

Post Reply

Return to “Ideas and Requests For Mods”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users