An elegant solution to carrying large objects

As the title says:

An elegant solution to carrying large objects around, such as beds.

Meet the Mk1 Crate.

I’m sure @Tom, @Ponder and @Sdee have probably looked at this obvious solution before, I’m just wondering why they didn’t go with it.

While I do like the small icon approach I think this solution is a better fit and will massively cut down on the amount of models the dev team have to create. It also allows the standardisation of a carrying animation for large objects and allows more than 6 items to stack on the manufacturers outbox.

What do you guys think? Do you prefer the tiny beds and such or does a crate add to the immersion for you as well?


The only problem I can see with this is that things won’t be readily identifiable if you see 12 workers running around with boxes and need to find where a specific thing is and where it’s going. The box looks awesome though. :smiley:


I think it would be good for things like tools and weapons, but not furniture. It would be hard to tell whats happening and going where, as Grim mentioned.

ok, we DEFINITELY need the crate, as it just look too nice (funny thing to say about a box)… but i really do like the current approach to mini-models for the larger items… i would rather keep those, as i think it just looks neat to see the actual item in stock…

but we definitely need crate… big ones, small ones, ones filled with jam… :smile:


I agree a storage room full of crates of stuff would be awesome; although you can keep your jam. :smiley: Don’t they pretty much just stretch the small scale models out to become the large ones?

Of course this would work completely if once an item is en route you can’t do anything about it; so while they’re sitting on the outbox they could look like the small model and a worker comes and boxes them up. If you can’t do anything once an item is moving to redirect or stop it then these boxes would be awesome to see a worker box a bed up and walk away with it.

correct, thats how Cthulhu was handled…

hmm… well, thats interesting… i suppose i didnt read that in the initial suggestion… but i dont know if the extra work required would be worth it… would be fun to see though!

I disagree! This box obviously has furniture in it as it is heavier! :stuck_out_tongue:


@Froggy … seriously, stop hogging all the awesome from the entire internet… didnt your mother ever teach you how to share?

1 Like

And just to clarify, I do not believe the miniatures are scaled down. If you look at the carpenter workshop live stream (15:43) the bed on the outbox is clearly a model on its own, and not scaled down.

This solution requires about 1000 less models to be created.

crates can have icons on their side right?
You can design little pictogram stamps for different items


oOOOH. Lemme see if it works…

The beds are actually almost identical except one is recolored and has pillows; they could just be alternate versions for you to build.

correct, the miniatures are just that… second, entirely new, smaller versions of the larger item…

crud, did i say they were scaled before?

edit: yup…

but i was referring to scaling units, as opposed to things like tools, beds, etc. sorry!

1 Like

I wonder if they go in reverse for the worker size models? They like to build the models that the workers directly interact with to scale of the workers and then maybe when they shrink them for a “new” model they lose some of the detail. That’s what it looks like with the beds.



You’d still have to remodel it though. While there is a “stretch” option in Qubicle, as far as I know there is no way to shrink them to scale…

Still, the crate is awesome (though my first thought was also “how can I see what is what”), and if having the icon on the side of the crate (or somewhere on it) works, they’d be a nice little touch. Plus it could cut down on those 2 million voxels…

Edit: Ninja’d by the icon image while typing… That looks pretty good. Only question is would it work for larger objects?

1 Like

Exactly. Thank you.

You can shrink it using stretch but you lose all resolution.

1 Like

im not i completely understood your question, but @Tom literally makes (for example) the full-sized bed, and then makes a "one square " version of the same model… both are distinct assets…

now this is promising… but how would that “read” when zoomed out (borrowing from @Tom’s book of jargon)… :smile:

1 Like

It depends on how its implemented. A type would be a better solution.

A bed for all furniture
A sword icon for all weapons
A shield for all armour etc.

Especially as the idea was to SAVE on creating models.


My final evidence for my idea is:

The stacking of objects on the outbox queue.

Edit. While the bed miniature is no doubt cute, I think it will be incredibly difficult to keep all of the miniature items easily identifiable and to the same dimensions. The miniatures will have to be the same dimensions otherwise each one would require its own carrying animation which exponentially increases the amount of time required to create a miniature.