Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Descan]

The only "realistic" thing I really want is a 3d galaxy. Ours is 100k light years across but also 10k light years deep. It's 10% tall as it is wide, and I'd love if that were represented.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

The only "realistic" thing I really want is a 3d galaxy. Ours is 100k light years across but also 10k light years deep. It's 10% tall as it is wide, and I'd love if that were represented.

It's been done before. I don't know how you feel about the matter, but man it was very hard to manage.

[sambojin]

Perhaps it is. It's just a trick of perspective and gravitational lensing to your viewpoint that everything just happens to appear on a perfectly flat plane. There's probably a blackhole, some expansive doppler effects and a bit of time dilation occuring between your viewpoint and the actual galaxy as it stands.

Geez. Don't you know anything?

[Criptfeind]

Sword of the stars has 3d galaxies (or, probably more accurately, random clusters of stars. 250 stars or whatever does not a galaxy make), even ones that are way less flat then ours. It's mostly a pain in the ass, and personally, once I played around on a non flat map, I'd always go back to the mostly flat ones. After that I really couldn't care less about non flat galaxy maps. Also maybe I'm misremembering (which my spell checker says is not a word but google disagrees so okay), but there seemed to be at least some cosmetic height staggering, just hard to see because all the names and stuff are on a flat overlay.

However, non flat galaxies, if their game could actually support it. I mean, it might be a cool option you know?

[MDFification]

01_EMBASSY_PROPOSE

Blorg is love, blorg is life.

[Teneb]

01_EMBASSY_PROPOSE

Blorg is love, blorg is life.

Spoiler: image (click to show/hide)

[redwallzyl]

The only "realistic" thing I really want is a 3d galaxy. Ours is 100k light years across but also 10k light years deep. It's 10% tall as it is wide, and I'd love if that were represented.

they actually have a slightly 3D map. They showed it off in one of the streams. It's just hard to see it because your looking top down.

[Shadowlord]

Star Ruler II does as well. There's 3d, but they're still mostly flat, so it's unobtrusive, unlike in SotS where the sphere-like 3d maps get really annoying to try to play in. (Fortunately SotS allows you to just play on flat maps if you prefer)

[umiman]

Sword of the stars has 3d galaxies (or, probably more accurately, random clusters of stars. 250 stars or whatever does not a galaxy make), even ones that are way less flat then ours. It's mostly a pain in the ass, and personally, once I played around on a non flat map, I'd always go back to the mostly flat ones. After that I really couldn't care less about non flat galaxy maps. Also maybe I'm misremembering (which my spell checker says is not a word but google disagrees so okay), but there seemed to be at least some cosmetic height staggering, just hard to see because all the names and stuff are on a flat overlay.

Yeah, it's something you use once then never again because it's a massive headache to deal with. SotS 2 had it really, really bad especially with their stupid province system.

Because honestly, from a practical standpoint there is literally no difference between stars on different planes versus a flat galaxy except distance. It's just unnecessarily confusing.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Sword of the stars has 3d galaxies (or, probably more accurately, random clusters of stars. 250 stars or whatever does not a galaxy make), even ones that are way less flat then ours. It's mostly a pain in the ass, and personally, once I played around on a non flat map, I'd always go back to the mostly flat ones. After that I really couldn't care less about non flat galaxy maps. Also maybe I'm misremembering (which my spell checker says is not a word but google disagrees so okay), but there seemed to be at least some cosmetic height staggering, just hard to see because all the names and stuff are on a flat overlay.

Yeah, it's something you use once then never again because it's a massive headache to deal with. SotS 2 had it really, really bad especially with their stupid province system.

Because honestly, from a practical standpoint there is literally no difference between stars on different planes versus a flat galaxy except distance. It's just unnecessarily confusing.

Someone's graduated from the Khan school of strategic thinking, I see.

Yes, 3-D space is confusing. It also creates scenarios that are impossible with 2-D space. You can't "encircle" someone's territory and cut them off from expansion quite so easily if they have "up" and "down" as expansion vectors as well. You can have a  string of colonized planets creating a corridor of owned space that goes over or under someone else's territory across the galactic arm, allowing you to move unrestricted without infringing on any borders. Lots of things are possible if you spend the time to think about it.

Some of my most favorite maps in SotS are the highly-3D ones, especially when playing as humans. The node network being what it is, you can find good paths far more often, and can be cut off far less easily, if you have some extra directions to go into.

[umiman]

Sword of the stars has 3d galaxies (or, probably more accurately, random clusters of stars. 250 stars or whatever does not a galaxy make), even ones that are way less flat then ours. It's mostly a pain in the ass, and personally, once I played around on a non flat map, I'd always go back to the mostly flat ones. After that I really couldn't care less about non flat galaxy maps. Also maybe I'm misremembering (which my spell checker says is not a word but google disagrees so okay), but there seemed to be at least some cosmetic height staggering, just hard to see because all the names and stuff are on a flat overlay.

Yeah, it's something you use once then never again because it's a massive headache to deal with. SotS 2 had it really, really bad especially with their stupid province system.

Because honestly, from a practical standpoint there is literally no difference between stars on different planes versus a flat galaxy except distance. It's just unnecessarily confusing.

Someone's graduated from the Khan school of strategic thinking, I see.

Yes, 3-D space is confusing. It also creates scenarios that are impossible with 2-D space. You can't "encircle" someone's territory and cut them off from expansion quite so easily if they have "up" and "down" as expansion vectors as well. You can have a  string of colonized planets creating a corridor of owned space that goes over or under someone else's territory across the galactic arm, allowing you to move unrestricted without infringing on any borders. Lots of things are possible if you spend the time to think about it.

Some of my most favorite maps in SotS are the highly-3D ones, especially when playing as humans. The node network being what it is, you can find good paths far more often, and can be cut off far less easily, if you have some extra directions to go into.

Is... Is that a challenge?

FITE ME 1V1 BRO!

[inteuniso]

Loving war, nonviolent aggression, and peaceful defensiveness shall free the stars into collective federation.

[redwallzyl]

a 3D map is vary vary confusing as cool as it may be.

[Cruxador]

The only "realistic" thing I really want is a 3d galaxy. Ours is 100k light years across but also 10k light years deep. It's 10% tall as it is wide, and I'd love if that were represented.

It's already rendered in 3D, although I kind of suspect it's actually done on a plane in terms of game mechanics and stars are just rendered with a graphical displacement in the 3D space.

[Descan]

Yeah, it's 2D in mechanics, as you can be boxed in by other empires and can't get past them with ships or colonies without them allowing you to fly through their space. A 3D map would make that very difficult to do, since you could just go over or under them.