CV Docking

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by shargett2, Feb 22, 2018.

  1. shargett2

    shargett2 Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2016
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    123
    There has been a lot of discussion around the idea of HVs docking with SVs. I am a big fan of this, but I have run into another issue.

    I have created a large CV, but it is too big to mine with. I have a small utility CV, but it is unable to process ores. I like to build with a purpose, and as a result I build each ship with a purpose. I would like to be able to build a detachable CV miner from my "Mothership" CV. To do this we would need the be able to dock CVs on CVs.

    To avoid absurdity such as a class 10 docked on a class 1 cv, I would recommend that not only the docked be smaller than the ship docking to. Maybe set it to be at least 2-3 class sizes smaller than the one you want to dock on. In my case, my mining cv is class <1 and my mothership is class 11
     
    #1
    Ephoie likes this.
  2. Tigreen

    Tigreen Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2017
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    37
    The people I game with and I were talking about the same issue. I have a big ship for moving from system to system and smaller ships for everything else. We end up building the same ships over and over or taking them apart and re spawning them when we get to a new planet. It would be amazing to have our small CVs docking to our big CVs. Or add another type like Mother Ship (MS or MV) that can have CVs and smaller dock on it. Or change SVs to have the ability to use mining turret and multi turret in space.
     
    #2
  3. MidasGunhazard

    MidasGunhazard Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2017
    Messages:
    719
    Likes Received:
    772
    I feel like docking options are all part of the same discussion, as far as past threads suggest. It would seem that most players wanting HV/SV docking also want CV/CV docking, etc. Currently there isn't really a space for making a 'dropship' (small CV or large SV that can launch from a CV and carry HVs/SVs to the surface), and that's a shame. It's hopefully something the developers will address, since in their polls a few months back HV/SV docking was one of the items to vote for, and HV/SV docking was the second highest in the secondary feature list after alternative energy. Hopefully this means that it's an idea the devs are interested in exploring, and it's somewhere in the 'to do list'.
     
    #3
    Sofianinho, Ephoie, Theurgist and 3 others like this.
  4. Tigreen

    Tigreen Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2017
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    37
    Drop ships would be amazing.
     
    #4
    Ephoie, Hicks42 and Na_Palm like this.
  5. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    I'll note once again that class size as the devs define it is largely a performance rating rather than anything to do with the physical size of a ship; one can easily make a class 10 ship that's smaller than a class 1 ship.

    Also, why would it be a problem to dock a large ship to a small ship? It might be undesirable most of the time, given that smaller ships would tend to have less-powerful thrusters, but I see no reason why it should be prevented.

    Basically, we need generalized docking code.
     
    #5
    Spirit_OK likes this.
  6. SylenThunder

    SylenThunder Commander

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2016
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    134
    #6
  7. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    The only consistent way to set the parent structure is to use the one that all docking pads are pointing toward. Also, Eleon's class size should never be used to determine things like what ships can be docked together; it's a server performance rating, nothing more.

    I propose the following set of rules for the docking system:
    • The parent structure can only have other ships docked to it.
    • Structures docked together function as effectively one entity:
      • The mass and moment of inertia of the full docking chain are computed from the individual masses and moments of inertia of the parent structure and all docked ships.
      • All subsystems are shared:
        • Subsystems are subject to derating if applicable (e.g. after docking two ships with CU devices, the total number of CUs available after docking is less than before docking because the number of CUs available on a ship scales sublinearly with the number of CU devices).
        • The parent structure can delegate subsystem control (e.g. movement or weapons) to a docked ship anywhere in the docking chain, but always retains the ability to regain control of all subsystems.
        • If the parent structure is a ship, the whole docking chain is capable of movement (otherwise it's stationary and thrusters/warp drives are shut down).
    • Resources in unified storage (e.g. fuel and O2) are not shared by default, but can be shared/filled-up on a per-ship basis.
      • Each structure in the docking chain can set quotas for maximum resource transfer for all of its docked ships
    I'm not sure right at present if these rules take care of all exploits, but they do take care of most of them, and also would give a very flexible docking system.
     
    #7
  8. Hicks42

    Hicks42 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2016
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    3,345
    *Pops up like some demented flower and smiles Hugely* Someone is speakin' my Language.
     
    #8
    spacefarmer likes this.
  9. Hicks42

    Hicks42 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2016
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    3,345
    Or, give us a Separate vessel to handle the Jobs in space that an HV does on the ground and let SV's and HV's dock to It and It to the CV's and Bases. Then we have SV's the best small vessel for combat, CV's the best Large and HV's and Drop Vessels doing the Utility jobs on the ground and in space respectively. Good division of Jobs that way in My estimation.
     
    #9
    Theurgist and Bollen like this.
  10. Macbrea

    Macbrea Commander

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2018
    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    133
    I think the correct way to do this is as follows:

    A Large block is 4 times the size of a small block.
    Allow items to dock to other items as long as they are more then [4 x (block size x size class)] larger.

    A size class 1 CV or Base could dock a 4 size classes of HV or SV.
    A size class 4 CV or Base could dock a 16 size classes size class HV/SV or a 1 Size Class CV.


    So, if you build a mobile Size class 16 CV space station. It could carry 2 size class 2 CVs and 8 size class 1 SVs.

    That simplifies the entire equation and allows neat combos. IE...

    A size class 4 SV carrying a docked Size class 1 HV.

     
    #10
  11. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    What definition of "size class" are you using here? Also your proposal would prevent ships of similar size from being docked together, which seems rather arbitrary.
     
    #11
  12. Macbrea

    Macbrea Commander

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2018
    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    133
    My definition of Size class is exactly the same as it is today. And yes, this does prevent a size class 17 SV from docking on a size class 4 CV.

    Today here is what we have:

    Any size SV or HV may dock on any size CV or BA.
    CVs currently are unable to dock on BA at all even though repair item says that they should be able to.

    My proposal at least allows odd docking combinations and allows a Base to be able to handle certain sizes of CVs. The size difference (IE. Size 5 base could allow upto size 2 CV) is something easy for a player to understand.

    A programmer could easily put a Docking Units value in the Docking block of the stats. And each item docked would show it's value in a format of 12/16 units. None, if this is extremely difficult from a systems requirement.
     
    #12
  13. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    Eleon's size class has little to do with a ship's actual size or capabilities; it's a server performance rating and nothing more. To use it for things like restricting what ships can dock to each other is a really bad idea.

    Why try to restrict what sizes of ships can dock with each other? My proposal several posts above presents a much more general way to handle docking, no matter what it is you're trying to dock together.
     
    #13
  14. Macbrea

    Macbrea Commander

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2018
    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    133
    If the CU proposal is used then I would suggest the maximum ships (CU value) that can be docked be based on a CU calculation. I was basing my proposal only off the current game as we have it now.
     
    #14
  15. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    I still don't see the need for any kind of docking restrictions. As long as docked structures behave like one entity in a consistent manner, it shouldn't matter whether you've docked a giant SV to tiny CV or vice versa.
     
    #15
    Joexer and Spirit_OK like this.
  16. SylenThunder

    SylenThunder Commander

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2016
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    134
    You could do the math based on overall mass too. Especially if you want to calculate how that added mass will affect handling.
     
    #16
  17. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    Yep, docked ships cannot become massless. But mass should not lead to any docking restrictions.
     
    #17
  18. krazzykid2006

    krazzykid2006 Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2017
    Messages:
    647
    Likes Received:
    703
    Yeah, there is no reason to restrict docking based on size class at all.

    The better option is to add the mass of docked vessels to the main vessel. Then it doesn't matter if you dock a size 28 to a size 1.
     
    #18
    MidasGunhazard likes this.
  19. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    Indeed. Even better is if the whole docking chain can act as one (compound) ship/base. Then you could do interesting things like dock extra engine nacelles or storage modules to a ship.
     
    #19
  20. MidasGunhazard

    MidasGunhazard Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2017
    Messages:
    719
    Likes Received:
    772
    Yes, this would be ideal. It lends well to things like carryalls that are little more than a frame, cockpit and some high-powered engines, which might all be less mass then whatever it's intended to carry.

    Hopefully the weight systems they've hinted at will pave the way for such possibilities in the near future.
     
    #20

Share This Page