Hi if anyone is in lamblis could someone check my place.Its COSMICVIBRATIONS.Im not on pc so i cant check.Im only ps4.Hope my place is ok because ive already plotted most of it.
I guess that could be a part of a check for the Compactness Algorithm.
If the empty space next to your beacon are reserved plot, then it does not lower the Compactness. because it is occupied space. That also means, the check need to control more than the 2 plots next to the beacon, because if you hit an other settlement, you probably leave not just 2 Plots open, i would check the next 5 Plots, maybe more.
Also holes inner some very compact Settlements should not count to the Compactness level if they are just lets say 10% of the whole compact Area.
That would prevent a directly negative compactness value, if an beacon is vanishing and you have for a while an empty space in your town. Mostly Townroads are affected in this case, especially if they are builded on the limit, because of expansion.
@james @lucadeltodecso
Is it possible to make water and lava bodies not create negative score?
Would this allow for bridges and tunnels to work from landmass to landmass, with being in compliance?
Would this also solve for plotters on islands?
3 Likes
3 of our roads are due to water. If I remove them, people will be cut off 
1 Like
While I understand the sentiment, all I have to do is place water or lava beside my road and the algorithm would ignore my roads. Since it is easy to gather and place water, I think this is exactly what would happen.
3 Likes
What if they make it to plots with 4 plots of water on either side?
Or so many plots of water deep below?
Since you canāt place water outside of a beacon it might be able to be added, though I donāt know how they would make that determination.
2 Likes
Oh good point. When the water regens outside of beacon, it would go red
ok I had forgot about that. So if they are just looking at the plot and not what is in the plot, then they evaluate the adjoining unbeaconed plots for water. Not sure how much server computations this might take, but might work.
EDIT: Of course it evaluates from the top down right now, so they would have to evaluate side to side for this part or underground lava or water would impact the computation. That might be an issue. Currently adjoining plots on a different level will help your compactness rating since it uses a top down view. If
4 Likes
Yeah, and that would also line up with their goals I think, but would also allow for beneficial bridges across liquid
Since it looks two plots out, they would have to make a 2d top-down view on if those plots are indeed water or lava. @lucadeltodecso is it possible to add in something like this or would it end up being too crazy? The lava planets do use quite a few roads to help people get across safely.
1 Like
Okay, now i really need a hint about how this algorithm works.
The struggle is real! 
If i turn up the threshold to 1.0, the Beacon with the questionmark goes uncompact.
But the beacons with a way more weird shape stay compact.
There is something that you need to adjust in the math.
A beacon like the showed one should never get any Minus to Compactness if the overall compact structure just has outside lines in a same compact way.
What takes 0.01 Compactness away from such a beacon, can result into a massive Compactness loss for totally nice and good placed beacons, but with an uneven shape.
Not everyone is plotting in squares.
There was other good examples mentioned by others.
1 Like
Thankyou for checking.I am pyramid 11 moon ,ancient aliens ,and have few alts on my land.Hope its within the rules.
3 Likes
What if they check the neighboring plots like the .1 to 1.0 scale. If above threshold water, then no negavite score added?
Since the plots can be at a different level than the liquid, I still think it will take a different evaluation for the liquid versus the plots. Plots can be at different levels and still help each other from a compact evaluation. Literally a top down 2d view of all the plots. The water would have to evaluated at the level of the plots so a 2d view at each level the plots exist. So if I have a bridge that is 3 plots high it has to evaluate each level separately and determine at any level if there is water. And if I built over the water and do not have plots touching the water it would fail this test. Possible? Sure but I have no clue how server intensive this is compared to what they are proposing.
2 Likes
Here is what luca posted last night.
Edit: it helped me make a lot more sense of some of the odd shapes that butt up against other beacons.
2 Likes
Thanks for this hintā¦ i must have missed it 
1 Like
So since they are looking at columns, are they able to differentiate since the surface would be lava or water on either side?
Does the system take prestige into account too or? I was mostly worried about my base on Delta - turns out the mall is gonna have probs instead - totally not what I expected.
My places on Delta are circled in pinkā¦friends & neighbors have the rest. Red circled areas have me perplexed as to why they are purple 
