I’ve tried to think of an algorithm that would make it at least allow for less boring designs being nearly as optimal, but I can’t. It could be a surface area requirement to break cubes, but then you just end up with circles. The tile limit promotes cubes for the fewest wasted tiles to walls. The range limit doesn’t do much except add a gameplay and design component on how you want to expand.
I don’t know what constraints you can add (or modify) to improve the design. Maybe having the option of different types of engines that don’t have to be on the rear (or facing out whatever direction you decide)? Maybe they could change how ship defence works to make you need to design more interesting defences into your ship?
There’s no good algorithmic solution I don’t think. It just needs to be some external force that makes the existing optimal design not as good in some way. It’s the same issue with the kill tunnels though; they can tweek it forever, but there’s always going to be an optimal method players will abuse.
Haven’t played the game, but maximizing surface area for cooling would work. IRL, cooling is a big issue for space craft that do more than just coasting with an occasional short course correction burn. Space might be cold but its near-vaccum is an incredibly good insulator.
So if heat management is a thing in a space game, this would encourage ships with more surface area (so non-boxy, non-circles). At the same time logistics within the ship would favour boxy/circle-shaped ships, so you’d have two contradictory design goals requireing you to find a good compromise between both. That should lead to some more interesting designs.
In avorion the physics simulation is pretty accurate, for example RCS thrusters placed farther away from the center of rotation are more efficient. However, still no air resistance in space so I just make bricks with struts coming off them.
I’ve tried to think of an algorithm that would make it at least allow for less boring designs being nearly as optimal, but I can’t. It could be a surface area requirement to break cubes, but then you just end up with circles. The tile limit promotes cubes for the fewest wasted tiles to walls. The range limit doesn’t do much except add a gameplay and design component on how you want to expand.
I don’t know what constraints you can add (or modify) to improve the design. Maybe having the option of different types of engines that don’t have to be on the rear (or facing out whatever direction you decide)? Maybe they could change how ship defence works to make you need to design more interesting defences into your ship?
There’s no good algorithmic solution I don’t think. It just needs to be some external force that makes the existing optimal design not as good in some way. It’s the same issue with the kill tunnels though; they can tweek it forever, but there’s always going to be an optimal method players will abuse.
Haven’t played the game, but maximizing surface area for cooling would work. IRL, cooling is a big issue for space craft that do more than just coasting with an occasional short course correction burn. Space might be cold but its near-vaccum is an incredibly good insulator.
So if heat management is a thing in a space game, this would encourage ships with more surface area (so non-boxy, non-circles). At the same time logistics within the ship would favour boxy/circle-shaped ships, so you’d have two contradictory design goals requireing you to find a good compromise between both. That should lead to some more interesting designs.
In avorion the physics simulation is pretty accurate, for example RCS thrusters placed farther away from the center of rotation are more efficient. However, still no air resistance in space so I just make bricks with struts coming off them.