PC Are subterranian prefabs possible?

[DaChibii]

Not sure what you mean.... blocks are only supports if they have contiguous blocks underneath all the way to bedrock

...
 

So what you're asking for is underground POIs that already break SI rules? Or stackable POIs that break SI rules? Because a POI isn't defined by its boundary but by it's shape. I mean you could break up any of the skyscrapers into smaller POIs and it would work.

 

[Kalen]

...
 

So what you're asking for is underground POIs that already break SI rules? Or stackable POIs that break SI rules? Because a POI isn't defined by its boundary but by it's shape. I mean you could break up any of the skyscrapers into smaller POIs and it would work.

heh, I'm not asking for anything.... I was stating that the problem with stacking POIs was that, more likely than not, the top POI will end up being structurally unsound because it is likely that any supports in the upper POI will be compromised by empty spaces in the POI below it.

Now if a POI designer specifically builds two POIs to make sure this doesn't happen, sure that would work.   But at that point, they might as well just make 1 POI with an underground component.

 

[DaChibii]

heh, I'm not asking for anything.... I was stating that the problem with stacking POIs was that, more likely than not, the top POI will end up being structurally unsound because it is likely that any supports in the upper POI will be compromised by empty spaces in the POI below it.

Now if a POI designer specifically builds two POIs to make sure this doesn't happen, sure that would work.   But at that point, they might as well just make 1 POI with an underground component.

It's only unsafe if the POIs are designed that way. And the whole point of POIs opposed to static builds are it allows the Level Designers and RWG great variety and ease in developing play areas for the players. So... as I stated before, it's a level design issue if the engine allows it, and programming issue if it doesn't.

Basically so far your arguments and discussion have been to paraphrase... 'You can't do that because it would collapse.' But that's not an issue. It's like saying you can't stack houses on top of each other, and architects and engineers go... 'Yes. Yes you can if you design it that way'.

The core reason behind any underground POIs would be a way to increase the play area of a world without increases the world boundaries or crowding the 2D surface space. Additionally, you could use it to develop additional paths for the player to navigate around the world (cave tunnels, road/rail tunnels, storm sewers, etc.). The idea behind modular and tileable POIs to make it easier for the RWG and make feel more varied and sort of normal. In the end these concepts are more for the developer and less about the player, since static authored content will always be superior to procedurallty generated stuff but purely authored content is just not scalable. So developers often make tools that help with the authored content that later get turned into procedural generated mass content tools or just released to the public and let the community make authored content.

 

[Kalen]

Basically so far your arguments and discussion have been to paraphrase... 'You can't do that because it would collapse.' But that's not an issue. It's like saying you can't stack houses on top of each other, and architects and engineers go... 'Yes. Yes you can if you design it that way'.

Yes, I keep finding new ways to say the same thing because you just don't seem to get it.

Unless every POI is designed with supports in the same place, you can't randomly place one POI beneath another without risk of making the upper POI structurally unsound.   I'm not really sure how else to explain it.

The core reason behind any underground POIs would be a way to increase the play area of a world without increases the world boundaries or crowding the 2D surface space. Additionally, you could use it to develop additional paths for the player to navigate around the world (cave tunnels, road/rail tunnels, storm sewers, etc.).

I fully understand why it would be a good thing if you could do this.... unfortunately,  as things stand right now you can't.

The idea behind modular and tileable POIs to make it easier for the RWG and make feel more varied and sort of normal. In the end these concepts are more for the developer and less about the player, since static authored content will always be superior to procedurallty generated stuff but purely authored content is just not scalable. So developers often make tools that help with the authored content that later get turned into procedural generated mass content tools or just released to the public and let the community make authored content.

Yes, as I said, if every POI was redesigned to have their supports in the same place then they would be modular and you could do what you are saying.   I doubt anyone is going to redesign the 500 current POIs to do this though.

So, theoretically, yes, you are correct.  

 

[DaChibii]

... Why are you under the impression that all POIs need to be stackable? Or that they can't have contextual placement. Any underground POIs would have to be designed to be stackable and thus be new POIs (since existing underground POIs have an above or surface component). Seriously.... You are the one that isn't getting it. The question wasn't asking about whether you can take existing POIs and throw them underground. It was if underground POIs were possible, which they are.

By the way the game already does contextual checks when doing POI placement, so just add in a check to see if the POI can be used as a support POI underneath during RWG.

 

[Kalen]

The question wasn't asking about whether you can take existing POIs and throw them underground.

I guess you missed the post earlier.... the question was asked, "Are they able to go below other PoI's and overlap?"

I was responding to the challenges that would present in terms of SI.