CV Docking

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

  1. Hicks42

    Hicks42 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2016
    Messages:
    1,343
    Likes Received:
    3,450
    Also you basic datum is incorrect. Large blocks have 64 times the volume of small. .5 m on a side = small, 2m on a side = large. I'll let you take it from there. ;)
     
    #21
    geostar1024 likes this.
  2. Spirit_OK

    Spirit_OK Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    257
    It does. Programmatically when you dock X to Y, you make X the child structure of Y and pass all the transformations (movement, rotation, etc.) from parent to all childs. What can and can not be done in this state (power on/off, engines on/off, turrets on/off..) is totally arbitrary and a subject to balance reasons.

    No, there is another! The easiest way to set the parent-child relationships without even looking at what part is where is to point at something and say "I'm your father". That implies that somewhere up the chain can be a grandfather and a grand-grand-father and so on.

    What I mean is an hierarchy tree with root and nodes of descending tiers. For example, BA "B-0" is a root, it has a docking attribute set to "0" in the Control Panel. Entities with attributes "1" and more can dock to it. CVs "C-1" with attribute "1" and "C-2" with attribute "2" are docked to BA. SV "S-2" with attribute "2" can dock to BA or "C-1" but cannot to "C-2" as they are of equal tier. The structure is like this:

    BA "B-0"
    -----CV "C-2"
    -----CV "C-1"
    ----------SV "S-2"
    ---------------SV pilot
    ---------------SV passenger

    SV is docked to CV that is docked to BA. If CV flies away, SV stays with it. Pilot and passenger can go around SV and CV, as they are child objects and inherit movement (thus moving relative to SV -> relative to its parent CV).

    There can be an auto-negotiation protocol for setting correct tier to dock at what you're targeting or a manual hotkey to go up/down a tier. There even can be reverse docking situations when a BA is docked to a CV (!) and go along with it (classic example - "Nostromo" and the refinery). As for the engine, it is all already there in unity, you can set anything as a child of anything.
     
    #22
  3. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    6,291
    Likes Received:
    9,098
    Right, though the implication I was trying to convey was that I wanted the child ships to be treated as if they were in fact part of the parent ship at the operations level (the rules for which I outlined in a post a few pages back).

    I was a bit imprecise, as I did mean to refer to the abstract relationship rather than to literally where a docking part was pointing. In any case, I agree :).
     
    #23
  4. cormacc2002

    cormacc2002 Ensign

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    10
    This is a good idea I would limit it to just only two ships that can dock with each other a large CV with a smaller one Yes I would like to take a small CV miner along and when moving to other planets take it with you this would help if your friends are not around to help you move to the new world.
     
    #24
  5. Tryst

    Tryst Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    507
    While it does sound good, I think it really does tend toward being overly complicated. Especially when you start talking about mass, inertia and such and what can dock to which.

    Keep it simple and people will be able to understand it better.

    A CV to CV docking system for example, treats the stationary vehicle as the parent at the time of docking. The child is then treated in the same way as a docked SV (its systems are disabled). It doesn't matter which one is larger since, the child cannot then move without undocking from the parent. Therefore, if the child is larger, moving it after docking in an attempt to move both CV's would result in it undocking. Only the parent can be moved without undocking.

    After docking, the resulting size is recalculated by adding both ship sizes together. If the parent does not have sufficient thrust to move both ships, it's not going anywhere.

    I would however, like to see a grappling hook system where a CV can grapple another CV that is so badly damaged that it cannot fly. This would allow an override of the parent/child system and the CV that has grappled the other always becomes the parent. The grapple is launched from the docking pad and pulls the other CV down to dock. Tugs used to grapple other ships would have extra thrusters to compensate for the additional load regardless of thier own size. These can be grouped and turned off for normal use and turned on when required to move a larger ship docked to it.
     
    #25
  6. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    6,291
    Likes Received:
    9,098
    And that's why I proposed to have no restrictions on what can dock to what, and to treat docked ships as essentially extensions of the parent ship (if the permissions are set correctly). Then everything just works.

    Note that in space, the parent ship will always have sufficient thrust.
     
    #26
  7. instantrice

    instantrice Ensign

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    11
    Would a simpler option be adding a "pending" state to docking? If two vessels of the same type (CVs for example) come together and are both powered, but I'm landing my red CV on my blue one. The Docked status changes to Pending. If I power off the CV, it docks to the other CV. If I get out, move to the blue CV and turn it off, the blue one becomes docked to the red one. In my head, you make the powered off ship just turn into a mass block on the powered one. This may not be feasible at all, but I thought it was simple enough in theory.
     
    #27
  8. Tryst

    Tryst Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    507
    Inertia still has to be overcome. This works many ways, to get moving and to stop and also to turn. A ship with thrusters that are too small will take a long time to get a large mass moving and a long time to stop it as well. Since it also takes a lot to stop it, newtonian physics would dictate that, even if you turn the ship and thrust in another direction, the original directions force would cause it to slide until the thrusters managed to counter the slide. The result could be quite catastrophic if heading toward a structure or asteroid at speed.

    Since a group known as Association of Spacecraft Safety & Haulage Around Terrestrial Structures (I won't spell the acronym) made this illegal, any ship that is to low powered for the mass will not activate its thrusters due to computer override.
     
    #28
  9. TheDeadlyShoe

    TheDeadlyShoe Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2016
    Messages:
    336
    Likes Received:
    332
    it would render turret limits meaningless, and they exist for more than one reason
     
    #29
  10. Spirit_OK

    Spirit_OK Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    257
    Name at least three? *Looking back at B-17 bomber (12 machine-guns) and T-35 Soviet tank (6 turrets, 10 barrels total)*
     
    #30
  11. Tryst

    Tryst Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    507
    Not if the child isn't fully powered. I suggested a two part power down before:
    1. Power down thrusters, RCS and weapons.
    2. Power down everything.
    The first allows O2, gardens, fridges and other essential items to remain powered.

    To remain docked to another CV, the child CV needs to power down to the first level, making weapons unavailable. The parent CV will be unable to move until this happens. Alternatively, docking automatically powers down the child until a player overrides it and it automatically undocks.

    Complaining that a single player can have 2 CV's after undocking and therefore all the weapons from both CV's firing at you is totally pointless. So can you. The problem that any single player has in that instance is that, one CV is a sitting duck because they can only control one CV at a time.
     
    #31
  12. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    6,291
    Likes Received:
    9,098
    Not if the entire docking chain were checked for weapons and only a certain number of weapons could be firing simultaneously.
     
    #32
  13. Ian Einman

    Ian Einman Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    1,226
    I like this, but there's some details I think need to be hammered out, as well as some improvements that I think would be good.
    • If you dock a ship, to a ship, to a ship, to a ship, is it realistic for all of that to stick together? I think that a docking pad or landing gear needs some measure of how much mass it can dock. If you exceed that, then if you try to move it comes undocked. You could increase the docking strength by using better docking pads or more of them.
    • Not sure how "delegating control" would work. I think you control whichever vessel you are sitting in the cockpit of. You should be able to switch the docking pad to "locked" so it does not undock when you move upward. If you do that, you can tow another vessel.
    • I like the idea of being able to transfer fuel and oxygen between structures. I would implement it as a "refueling bay" device you can build, which will allow docked devices to pull fuel, oxygen, and possibly ammo from the parent structure. You could choose which things it can reload, whether it is private or faction, and whether it is automatic upon landing, or you have to activate it.
    • I'd like a mode where the ship can run on the electrical power of the parent structure. This might be another switch on the "refueling bay". This lets you run fridges and other devices on the ship while you are "plugged in".
     
    #33
  14. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    6,291
    Likes Received:
    9,098
    Unless ships acquire an SI system, I see no need to give docking clamps a finite clamp strength. But I certainly would not put in mass restrictions; if we're going to have docking clamps with finite clamp strength, then the shear force at the docking clamp should be computed directly from the docked entity's mass and the current acceleration, and the docked ship should undock if that's exceeded. Of course, given the issues with undocked ships in larger ships preventing the larger ships from moving, having entities that can undock by themselves doesn't seem like a great idea at present.

    And what if you have two or more players in a ship? There needs to be some deterministic way to determine whose input results in motion of the docking chain. I don't know exactly what the control delegation interface would need to look like, but I think that concept is still essential.

    So, that's a question: should there need to be extra devices in order to accomplish things like energy and materials transfer? I'd argue that the docking clamp itself could serve that purpose. On the other hand, depending on how automation is implemented, entities having their own operational internal logistics network could be a prerequisite to automated resource transfers between docked entities. But, either way, I don't really see the need for a dedicated "refueling bay" device.
     
    #34
  15. Aetrion

    Aetrion Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    52
    This is one of my top issues with the game as well. I want to be able to have a giant CV that is essentially a carrier that serves as my mobile base, but since you can't dock smaller CVs to it you can't do things like have dropships that deliver tanks and mining vehicles down to a planet, or smaller specialist ships that don't feature their own jump drives and are able to do tasks like mining or assault operations. It's one of the really big holes in this game right now.
     
    #35
  16. Nef

    Nef Lieutenant

    Joined:
    May 15, 2018
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    27
    I'd love to see this as well. Docking of all kinds works well in Space Engineers, so I can't imagine running into too many strange issues. Heck, you can even make a capital class sized car and dock to a small capital class vessel but use the car to fly around the ship, lmao.
     
    #36
    Tom7i and spacefarmer like this.
  17. spacefarmer

    spacefarmer Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2018
    Messages:
    294
    Likes Received:
    393
    Honestly, I think the SV/CV delineation should be scrapped all together, and just have them into a single class called "flying vessels", which are completely capable of docking with themselves. What you make them into, a small miner or a huge travelling base, is up to you. Not only would this solve the issue mentioned in the OP of this thread, but it would potentially allow for some more detailed creations, by allowing small blocks and components to be placed on larger blocks. This would allow you to place the outline of a ship in large blocks, and then do the detail work with small blocks.
     
    #37
  18. Nef

    Nef Lieutenant

    Joined:
    May 15, 2018
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    27
    I actually tend to build capital class sized small vessels just because small vessels allow for 4x the internal detail.
     
    #38
    spacefarmer likes this.
  19. Frigidman

    Frigidman Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2016
    Messages:
    6,544
    Likes Received:
    10,294
    Exactly.

    And exactly.

    If a larger ship dies, sometimes you need a tugboat to slowly haul it somewhere =p The flight may be slow and clumsy, but you'll get there.
     
    #39
  20. Rifter

    Rifter Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    36
    I fully agree that you should be able to dock anything to anything. This is one of my major gripes with the game.
     
    #40
    Frigidman likes this.

Share This Page