Ok Im here lol. Yea, as far as the open ended response, you can expect a 6dB loss per double the distance by law, and also a 6dB loss per double the opening of port area in an environmental factor, not enclosure factor as long as the environment has at least 5 walls of the 6 per all 3 planes of reflection. So, the factor of distance is relevant for this scenario. What to do in the space is likely to seal the enclosure due to the noise factors that may exist in a ported design in that kind of space. You are very limited on space requirements for any kind of efficiency that will outperform a sealed enclosure given the environmental factor mentioned above along with the needed tuning in the LF range to increase output at a given passband.
SO, I agree that the best situation is to go sealed to maintain low end response by means of compression only, and make the baffle area the largest area of the dimensions to create that IB reflective sound propagation, where baffle loss is a consideration. The larger the baffle area/plane on the box, the more you will experience the effect of the sealed enclosure low end smoothness.
Distnce will be a factor in both sealed or ported designs so based on usability and purpose, sealed would be the way to go, with a larger baffle area. Best to make the design based on the golden rule on this one with the baffle being the central dimension. So, if you are using 10s, make the depth according to the depth of the subs plus an inch, say its 8", then based on the golden rule and the limitations of 1 cubic ft with a single 10 and its appropriate diameters, you will have a box that is 8" deep, 13 wide, 16.75 high with regard to 1 cubic ft where the golden rule becomes less accurate but usable with two of the three dimensions, mainly for depth and one baffle dimension.
Does that help?