Dev Asks: Docking, Ship Inventory and ship to ship transfert.

[tsunamayo]

Hello there,

First I am not a fan of the current docking logic with the massive docking port, I think it is quite limited. What I would like to do is to give a simple docking 1m block, and then let the station builder build his own door. Then he could use the copy/paste (at one point true prefab) to build a door suited for his need. I would provide the iris door as a simple door.

Now onto ship inventory. As you know I have started working on fuel. Here is my planned approach: 1) Fuel and item are two separate inventory circuit. => do you guy think it is too complex? It visually make sense. 2) Items pipe would be 0.5m rounded square. They will have no transfer limit. Dedicated crate will be used to store items. 3) regarding crafting, I would like to use dedicated conveyor belt and in / out port on the crafting system so you have fun designing factory. They are out of the ship inventory scope. 4) Fuel will have a max transfer limit, so you will need to potentially plug several pipes into a block of reactor. Think 1 small pipe for 2 reactor for example. Pipe are 0.25m and 1m like now. 1m is 16x faster than 0.25m, making them mandatory for big stack of system. Dedicated fuel tank will be used to store fuel (the new brick) 5) regarding the docking port: this could transfer item and fuel alike. You will just need to plug a fuel pipe and a item conveyor to it (anywhere would work). 6) I would give a dedicated item scoop system brick and gas harvester brick, so you can pick up item (mining ore, loot) or harvest gas in the wild.

That is the plan. If you have any comments before I go too deep into the implementation it is now or never!

[ultrak2k]

I think seperate fuel and item pipes is an excellent idea, rather have depth, and it's not overcomplex. I absolutely love the consideration of conveyor belts, having crafting be fun and unique is something I've always wanted in this. Item transfer limit not existing for mining is a bit wierd but I guess it makes sense if you have huge mining setups Overall these are excellent ideas and I can't wait to see them implemented, I have no complaints.

[ZachZent]

1. Fuel and item are two separate inventory circuit I don't believe this will be too complex at all. It comes down to if you want a universal pipe for everything, remember future factory stuff included, or a bit of separate. Let me make a slight future-proof suggestion. I have a factory suggestion on the backburner right now, but one of the features which had been floating around for a few years now is to have three types of pipes: solid, liquid, and gas. Each of the pipe type can transport that specific type of item such as fuel in liquid and items in solid. This I believe adds a bit of simple complexity (easy to understand, but more then just universal pipe) and will work well when factory stuff comes out in the distant future.

2. Items pipe would be 0.5m rounded square. They will have no transfer limit. Dedicated crate will be used to store items. https://github.com/tsunamayo/Starship-EVO/issues/1292 I just want to make sure this old but sound idea is still known as I believe it is the best option especially for NPCs. I'd also consider the three types similar to pipes: solid (chests), liquid (barrels), and gas (tanks) as I'd say it is still simple enough to understand. May be something for later and just starting with a universal chest.

3. Regarding crafting, I would like to use dedicated conveyor belt and in / out port on the crafting system so you have fun designing factory. They are out of the ship inventory scope. Again, the factory suggestion is still in the backburner so I'll leave this one for now. Just remember that factory stuff should be semi-exclusively used for automation and large scale production. Players shouldn't need to make a factory just to craft something for their ship. Think minecraft crafting. You can make everything with various crafting blocks (crafting block and furnace) but (with mods) you use automated systems to produce large amount of stuff.

6 I would give a dedicated item scoop system brick and gas harvester brick, so you can pick up item (mining ore, loot) or harvest gas in the wild. This is a side idea, but maybe the deeper you go into a gas giant, the higher the rate of fuel you can collect though at the cost of more damage to your ship/shields. That way when someone eventually makes cloud city, they may put it lower or higher in the gas giant to get different quantities of gas with relative risk. Also if the damage grows exponentially the deeper you go, you create a soft barrier for ships so players can't fly too far in.

[Kaiser-Indrasil]

1. How about we use 1 kind of universal pipe but also introduce a sorting block that can blacklist or whitelist certain inventory items? It would make understanding piping easier and help players create very complex systems with sorters. Also, you could not mix together items in a different states of matter, so if you wanted to transport for example, ore, ammo, and batteries, you couldn't add liquid hydrogen or gaseous oxygen to the list. Instead, you would've to make separate pipes with different sorter settings.
2. Regarding my previous comment, we could have different pipe bandwidth depending on the items sorted. Using the previous example, ore would be transported the fastest, batteries slower, and ammo the slowest (cos it's volatile). If you added all of them to one sorter, the pipe would transport all of that stuff at the slowest pace (dictated by the ammo).
3. Again, my sorter idea (totally not taken from Space Engineers) would be good here to, cos sorters would transport only in 1 direction.
4. See point 2
5. Yes, although you'd need one connector for every type of matter you wanted to transport accross ships, so 3 max - each for solids, liquids, and gases.
6. Gas harvester, yes please! I'd suggest making another post on the mining gameplay though, cos it's too broad.

[ultrak2k]

1. How about we use 1 kind of universal pipe but also introduce a sorting block that can blacklist or whitelist certain inventory items? It would make understanding piping easier and help players create very complex systems with sorters. Also, you could not mix together items in a different states of matter, so if you wanted to transport for example, ore, ammo, and batteries, you couldn't add liquid hydrogen or gaseous oxygen to the list. Instead, you would've to make separate pipes with different sorter settings.

2. Regarding my previous comment, we could have different pipe bandwidth depending on the items sorted. Using the previous example, ore would be transported the fastest, batteries slower, and ammo the slowest (cos it's volatile). If you added all of them to one sorter, the pipe would transport all of that stuff at the slowest pace (dictated by the ammo).

3. Again, my sorter idea (totally not taken from Space Engineers) would be good here to, cos sorters would transport only in 1 direction.

4. See point 2

5. Yes, although you'd need one connector for every type of matter you wanted to transport accross ships, so 3 max - each for solids, liquids, and gases.

6. Gas harvester, yes please! I'd suggest making another post on the mining gameplay though, cos it's too broad.

I agree with sorting blocks for item pipes and conveyors, but not a universal pipe, would rather have solid liquid gas, or item-fuel Bandwith depending on item mass or size would be a cool one, though! Solid liquid gas diffrentiation would be peak good stuff though, as per your point 5

[ultrak2k]

Question, though: Will we get different types of fuel eventually? If so, would some have different throughputs then others?

[tsunamayo]

@ZachZent I think liquid and gas should be the same thing. In the game you will harvest gas, but that would be stored as a liquid. Yes for sure I though about the gas giant thing, but it would take a bit of time get it look right. But I totally would like to do this one day. So factory would not be mandatory, you can drag stuff by hand in each module and get what you need. It will be the way to go to get large quantity though. @Kaiser-Indrasil I think actually if you gonna have some sort of incompatibility having dedicated circuit make it more clear for the player. I wanted to have sorter / router yes (and logic gate that scan what is going in). Again the plan is Gas = liquid (you mine gas, that is stored as liquid) @ultrak2k yes I want to have various fuel, and some chemistry. But later. I want a ship being functional with various fuel for simplicity (so same throughput). Each fuel would get a boost though.

[ZachZent]

@ZachZent I think liquid and gas should be the same thing. In the game you will harvest gas, but that would be stored as a liquid.

For right now it is fine, but think about the future. Refining and whatnot, and not just with fuel. For example a crafting recipe may need water, or perhaps an advanced machine needs water cooling. Or gas items and byproducts. Or simply refining gas fuel to a liquid state. For now one pipe for gas & liquid is ok, but gas items allows for many more crafting options in the future

[ProPeach]

I like the sound of everything in the list, awesome!

One small thing I did think of though, if the upcoming connector will be used for cargo and fluids with separate pipes for each, routing two kinds of pipe into one block/brick might be challenging in common situations -

Here, the Connector (green) is just placed flush in a 1 block thick wall which I think will be a very common use for it. There is only 1 face available for pipes/cargo tubes (blue/red), so you would be forced to use brick pipes to fit fuel and cargo pipes.

If the Connector block could stretch along its length, it would create many more faces to attach pipes to. This would be almost essential if the Connector block has no limit to its throughput so you can attach many pipes to it.

This might not even be a problem or is something that you've already thought of, but I figured I'd post either way. Looking forward to building with these changes!

[tsunamayo]

@ProPeach damn smart move I didnt though about that... That is why I wanted a 1m connector, so you have room for a 0.5m item pipe and several 0.25 fuel (but no 1m). This could solve the issue- and allow higher fuel rate!

[ProPeach]

Very helpful for fuel hungry ships! I was reminded of the vertically scaling rotor idea for a higher mass limit, but this time it's for more connection points

[ZachZent]

Some fuel ships for your enjoyment Tsuna

Uncle Ulty

DarthPeter0

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/416013956331601930/820454174470307870/Starship_EVO_2021-03-13_17-30-06.mp4 ZachZent (Fuel Shuttle:tm:)

[Garrett-C]

I do like all of this.

The improvements to docking do sound like they would be great. The current stuff does have a lot of issues. A sort of universal dock that we build custon docking systems around does sound great. Would also maybe be nice to have like a magnetic pad that allows a small ship to stick to a bigger ship, like the opposite of the current maglock.

In terms of the items and item pipes I do like the sounds of it. It does fit the internal logic we have currently.

[Briaireous]

this some good shit. sad i got to redo the city road modules i got already... but hell im all for what ya got in mind. also.... would like a disconnect tool for the connectors, or a way to disconnect then through logic.

[TIKIRobo]

I think all of these ideas are pretty sound but i would love to see a small (.25.25.25) docking port to say recharge or rearm small drones

[Garrett-C]

I think all of these ideas are pretty sound but i would love to see a small (.25.25.25) docking port to say recharge or rearm small drones

I also think there should be a brick version. Useful for things like docking escape pods, support ships, drones etc. Would also maybe be cool of there was a way to save some of these to the actual blueprint, especially for like escape pods.

[ExodistSKY1]

I really like this idea!
A suggestion I have: Docking: Could you also do a non physical path/waypoint block to allow for more efficient custom docking options? such as within hangers of space stations, carriers, or in between corridors to allow for an entrance path as well as an exit path

I think this would allow the docking to be managed in an efficient way by the builder and also could be utilized more effectively by the NPCs and AI

As suggested adding a brick sized version for Drones and smaller craft would be fantastic

1. not too complex and makes sense

2. I think Peach's stretch connector would be ideal

can we get an extendable hose? that can be used in conjunction with the piston to create extendable refueling/refitting options

[Kaiser-Indrasil]

can we get an extendable hose? that can be used in conjunction with the piston to create extendable refueling/refitting options

I agree - we need a way to transport fuel between child entities, especially since we have voxel hinges that you can attach lightcruise engines to - which in turn need fuel.

[Regnion]

There potential issues with station docking.

1) If we build our own doors, will NPC's be able to recognize them, or will we have to use the prefab doors? 2) If we need a docking collar to be telescoping, how will NPC's interact with it? Making a telescoping docking collar out of 1m blocks would be absolutely tremendous in size. We would likely need some sort of stair block for NPC's, since they can't recognize bricks. 3) We need a station anchor block, and merged stations need to lock in place- I had a station I'm working on slowly break apart over 30 minutes due to a small bump. They will be bumped again when refueling.

[Dwarf-LordPangolin]

First I am not a fan of the current docking logic with the massive docking port, I think it is quite limited. What I would like to do is to give a simple docking 1m block, and then let the station builder build his own door. Then he could use the copy/paste (at one point true prefab) to build a door suited for his need. I would provide the iris door as a simple door.

As long as the iris doors are kept around, that's OK; a premade door is kind of a must for the modular system you're going for, especially if people want to mix and match modules from different builders. It's definitely good to have the option of making your own doors (I would love to make some shuttles that docked flush with the hull of their parent ship) but it's a pain to need to make them (I never really enjoyed making my own doors, it was a huge relief when the premade blocks were added). Plus, it's necessary to have a standardized docking system so ships made by different players can still dock with each other. I'm just going to keep using the iris doors 99% of the time, since I know they'll be compatible with things other people build; we tried for years to implement a standardized docking convention in Space Engineers, but if allowed to people will always build their own system, and it's never compatible with others.

You might want to consider adding a 1x2 docking block, since some people build with even-symmetry instead of odd-symmetry. Also, would player-made doors allow for airtightness? I thought part of the reason for the current docking port was that it needed to be a door-type block for airtightness/pathing reasons.

Fuel and item are two separate inventory circuit. => do you guy think it is too complex? It visually make sense.

I think that would be OK. As long as the item pipes can go through hull like the fuel pipes can, that shouldn't make running lines through a ship too inconvenient, and it's fun to be able to set up logistics systems like that.

Items pipe would be 0.5m rounded square. They will have no transfer limit. Dedicated crate will be used to store items.

The dimensions sound reasonable, and the lack of a limit is refreshing (Space Engineers had two sizes of conveyors, and some items could only fit through the larger ones -- it was annoying). By crates, do you mean something like the Minecraft Chest block? And if so, will we be able to scale these up like the fuel tanks for bulk storage?

regarding crafting, I would like to use dedicated conveyor belt and in / out port on the crafting system so you have fun designing factory. They are out of the ship inventory scope.

I am probably more excited about the idea of designing my own factories than is healthy. This sounds excellent!

Fuel will have a max transfer limit, so you will need to potentially plug several pipes into a block of reactor. Think 1 small pipe for 2 reactor for example. Pipe are 0.25m and 1m like now. 1m is 16x faster than 0.25m, making them mandatory for big stack of system. Dedicated fuel tank will be used to store fuel (the new brick)

This all sounds good. I do have a question though: will adjacent blocks transfer fuel between them? That is, if I have a reactor right next to a fuel tank, will I need to stick pipes on the side, or can the game just assume that if they're right next to each other they're connected? That would be much more convenient.

regarding the docking port: this could transfer item and fuel alike. You will just need to plug a fuel pipe and a item conveyor to it (anywhere would work).

Letting it transfer both is actually essential; otherwise people would need to make sure that both the fuel and item connectors were lined up; people would otherwise inevitably build to different standards, leading to ships being unable to dock with each other. So yes, a single port for both kinds of things is a good idea; Peach's suggestion above is also a great idea.

If it hasn't been suggested already, I'm going to add my own suggestion too: the end of the docking port needs to be able to extend outward like the piston. Ship hulls often aren't flat, and the odds of two ships being able to bring their docking ports together without something getting in the way are astronomical. If the end of the docking port can extend outward -- a long way outward, like 20m -- that problem is gone. This picture is a great illustration of how this would work, and why this is needed; the docking port on the corvette is further inboard than the engines. If two ships like that tried to dock, their ports couldn't reach, because the engines would keep bonking into each other. But because the docking port can extend so it's the furthest point from the midline, it can dock with any other ship that can do the same thing.

I would give a dedicated item scoop system brick and gas harvester brick, so you can pick up item (mining ore, loot) or harvest gas in the wild.

Both sound great!

[Servomotor]

" Hello there,

First I am not a fan of the current docking logic with the massive docking port, I think it is quite limited. What I would like to do is to give a simple docking 1m block, and then let the station builder build his own door. Then he could use the copy/paste (at one point true prefab) to build a door suited for his need. I would provide the iris door as a simple door."

I like the idea of being able to make our own doors for docking ports but there has to be a universal option so that any ship can dock to any other ship or space station.

I have been watching the early 2000's Star Trek Enterprise lately and I always laugh when an alien spaceship docks to the Enterprise, or when the Enterprise Shuttle Craft docks to an alien craft. How do these aliens know how to make a universal docking clamp/door when they have never met? Well the answer is because the Studio making Enterprise needed a simple solution for these complex questions. We will need the same in game, a universal docking port.

I think the current system is fine. I love the doughnut, but it has its limitations, mostly in that the opening is too small. I think the opening/door entry area should be 2.5 blocks minimum in height and maybe 3 wide.

I think round is good, like the current doughnut because round shapes help offset the block nature of the game. I just wonder if the docking port should actually be larger. (see attached picture).

I think for custom docking where we need large openings that act more like hallways in a space station, a custom docking port is absolutely necessary, but we also need a ship to ship universal clamp/connector.

I'd even go so far as to say we need a prefab universal ship to ship clamp/connector/extending airlock, much like we may need some prefab landing gear. I know this requires an a 3D artist and has cost associated with it.

The only way I could see making the game to allow for purely custom docking connectors is if we could create our own prefabs. Basically, allow us to make a prefab out of a build and save it as a "blueprint", but it would have to be a special blueprint that would act like a prefab when placing it. Have a section of the building UI for "Custom Prefabs" that we can create, and place easily. Similar to copy paste, but these could be shared so that others could download them and place them easily.

I am sure there are pitfalls with this idea, I am just brainstorming at the moment.

EDIT: Here is a mockup of a "Custom Prefab". Just putting this here to help better illustrate what I am asking for.

[Regnion]

It is absolutely imperative that all docking and connecting points are universal. We can have a 1m item/fuel connector, sure, but boarding needs to be universal as well. Ideally, the boarding module should double as a item/fuel connector. Otherwise, you will have such variety and inconsistency, people will struggle to design their ships in a manner that is effective. @Servomotor's post above is 100% correct.

[pinesh]

I'm getting serious Mekanism vibes from all these gas and pipe systems!

[Garrett-C]

I think the idea of having a universal port that is just the 1m block is ideal. That way you can have the rest of the port however you want. I don't mind the current donut but it's not going to be fitting for every type of ship. Whereas a simple connector like the old spike and port system allows users to make a port that fits the style of the build.

[Regnion]

The problem with unique docking ports- what makes you think your doorway is going to fit the one on my station? Or on someone else's station? Or on another ship? There needs to be uniformity to ensure all of us can easily connect, especially to accommodate NPC's if not players. If anything, maybe Tsuna can give us a square port in addition to the round one, and people can pick between them. Or, meet in the middle, and go with an octagon. Or all three.

[AlienXtream]

i like the conveyor thing. its logical and fun. same for the fuel. fuel/coolant should be separate things as you say. they are liquids. however i think having item forms is also a must (think jerry cans but spacey). this would mean that early game or ships with damages logistics can be refueled manually in a pinch but a "can" will only hold a small amount and cant be automatically emptied (i.e player has to do it). can would be usable on tank and anything that accepts fuel (not just engines but perhaps also generators for planetary logistics).

docking ports should NOT transfer fuel/items automatically BUT if both the dock and the port have logistics built into them by the player(s) then transfer should be possible. would suggest using the new pipe connectors for that. and have the check run once on successful docking or when logistics edits trigger rechecks.

power on the other hand SHOULD transfer but only "limited power". by limited power i mean if i dock with a depowered derelict ship basic power should be restored (lights, computer/logic/doors) but more power hungry systems like the engines, generators, shields etc remain inactive.

should also introduce either solar panels or "solar-paint" for low level powering of ships (i.e limited power). nothing complex requiring line of sight to sun. just "ambient light" collection. would also mean you could add unique star types later that influence solar panels. some stars may be too dim to power them at all (brown dwarf) while others might power things fully (high mass star) and others still could damage them (gamma stars).

sorry. went off on a tangent. still, some ideas there you might want to consider.

[Garrett-C]

The problem with unique docking ports- what makes you think your doorway is going to fit the one on my station? Or on someone else's station? Or on another ship? There needs to be uniformity to ensure all of us can easily connect, especially to accommodate NPC's if not players. If anything, maybe Tsuna can give us a square port in addition to the round one, and people can pick between them. Or, meet in the middle, and go with an octagon. Or all three.

Yeah I get that but that’s where players have the freedom to conform to a standard if they want or to use some form of proprietary one if they want. Honestly I think the game should maximise player freedoms where possible and allowing players to build custom docking ports is honestly something that it needs to have. Forcing everyone to use one standard is just not very ideal from a gameplay sense.

On top of that even with a standard there is no guarantee that my standard docking port will allow me to dock at your standard docking port due to other factors like placement and space.

Additionally a .25m and 1m docking port that allows the transmition of fuel and items allows for things like some form of extending refuelling arm for example. Something that’s not possible if we are forced to use a standard like we are.

At the end of the day if players want ships to work together they can build them with that in mind. Not everything should be a prefab, have some faith in players to build in a way that they enjoy.

[RockefellerDoctor]

I agree with the sentiment of having just one universal docking system rather than every ship needing to custom make one for every different ship; sounds way too time intensive for far too little gameplay payoff.

[Regnion]

No one is forcing you to use the prefab docking collar, if you want to build one, go right ahead. You have the freedom to build whatever you want, and the freedom to not use prefabs. Your freedom is maximized and you are not forced to do anything you don't want to. Enjoy your docking experience, without stripping everyone else of the opportunity to have uniform functionality so they can maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of their vessels.

When NPC's cannot board your ship, because they cannot recognize the docking collar and door you made, I have faith you will enjoy it knowing that you made that decision purposefully.

[Garrett-C]

No one is forcing you to use the prefab docking collar, if you want to build one, go right ahead. You have the freedom to build whatever you want, and the freedom to not use prefabs. Your freedom is maximized and you are not forced to do anything you don't want to. Enjoy your docking experience.

That’s the thing though. If the docking collar is the way to dock then you have to use it if you want to dock at all.

If docking is done with a small port and the rest can be built up then as long as people build the ports in the correct spots then they can build docking collars however they want.

There is a very clear difference here on the level of freedom. One is a prefab that has to be used, the other is just up to the player to put the port in the right spot relative to the custom docking collar.

Keep in mind that games like starmade managed to make a system like this work across the player base so it’s not even unreasonable to state that it’s been done before.

[ZachZent]

Honestly I don't see a problem. Starmade's one worked, but it isn't like there were many building options for it especially compared to SEVO. What is better, convenience and compatibility for everyone when docking or creative freedom in the docking block? I don't think there are die-hard docking port builders out there that would not buy the game just because they can't modify 3x3m of space. It just be easier for everyone, new and experienced, for a simple solution. Plus with a prefab, NPCs may be able to cross it to another ship. The 3x3 or 2x2 connector block with an extendable bridge to connect with the other ship

[Garrett-C]

Honestly I don't see a problem. Starmade's one worked, but it isn't like there were many building options for it especially compared to SEVO. What is better, convenience and compatibility for everyone when docking or creative freedom in the docking block? I don't think there are die-hard docking port builders out there that would not buy the game just because they can't modify 3x3m of space. It just be easier for everyone, new and experienced, for a simple solution. Plus with a prefab, NPCs may be able to cross it to another ship. The 3x3 or 2x2 connector block with an extendable bridge to connect with the other ship

To me it’s just a bit of an annoyance that in a game with the potential to build so many things in unique and creative ways that we would want to just fall back on everyone having to use a prefab for something as common as docking.

Yeah I doubt it’s going to be the make or break point for anyone sure. But would you not agree that the freedom to build a docking port how you want it is a feature that we would have and no other game really would compare with?

Your point about the limited options in docking port building in starmade is exactly why I think it would be a shame to just lean on prefabs. I think we should leverage what makes this game so unique and that is the much more creative building. No other game in the market has quite this many options for building in my eyes it would be better to focus on that, not just using a prefab when things require some thinking.

Simplicity is one thing but where is the gameplay of working out how to build you ship if it just deteriorates into just slapping a prefab on it? I would much rather be allowed to spend the time designing a docking port than just slapping on some standard one that everyone has.

Let’s remember that the player base is smart enough to work out how to make 2 ships dock without needing a prefab for if.

[ProPeach]

Could the docking door prefab in #1757 be of use here?

In a nutshell, it allowed two prefab ports of different sizes (2x2, 2x1) to dock with no trouble. The design probably needs work, but it's a decent blend of small form factor (easier to integrate into designs) and universal docking functionality.

Otherwise, some kind of procedural umbilical tube could work. Say if a connector could be stretched from 2x1 up to ~5x5, and the game generated a hollow shape between two that wanted to dock that players could walk between. This would enable players to design a docking port that fits their ship size, as well as feeling safe that they can still dock to any other ship regardless of the other ships size. You place down the red frames at your chosen size. When you dock, the game fixes the two ships ~5m or so apart and generates a connecting part for you. Aesthetically this could be a more curvy forcefield or industrial metal looking thing depending on the style Tsuna wants, but really it's just a path for the player to walk through. Forgive the quick and dirty model! Here we have a 5x5 port connecting to a 2x1 port.

Regardless, I think we need both the prefab docking port for players to walk through, as well as the block/brick sized connector block. They're two different solutions for two different use cases, and we'd be a little lost without either of them.

[Garrett-C]

Could the docking door prefab in #1757 be of use here?

In a nutshell, it allowed two prefab ports of different sizes (2x2, 2x1) to dock with no trouble. The design probably needs work, but it's a decent blend of small form factor (easier to integrate into designs) and universal docking functionality.

Otherwise, some kind of procedural umbilical tube could work. Say if a connector could be stretched from 2x1 up to ~5x5, and the game generated a hollow shape between two that wanted to dock that players could walk between. A little bit like a loft in 3D modelling, or draping a canvas between two doors

Something like the system proposed in that post for the docking doors would be a good way to go honestly. Keeps it small enough that you can design around it and have way more varied docking collars than the current system.

The only issue is the lack of a way to do fuel and item transfer but then that does enable the choice to add some form of umbilical cord type that can be used when wanted. Which does sound like a good way to do gameplay if you ask me. That said you would probably want some form of way to transfer fuel and items via child entities for that.

[Uncle-Ulty]

After reading most of the comments about docking, I want to make some comments

1- Add docking for hovercrafts and other future vehicles too, since we need to fuel them anyway. A docking for hovercrafts would help a lot to align the hover inside the garage/cargo

2- I think it's clear that we have several situations and necessities for docking. Ships with different sizes, shapes, demands, and whatever. So, I think only 1 universal docking port won't be enough. A single (0,25x0,25x0,25 and/or 0,50x0,25x0,25) docking port may work for a small ship or fighter, but won't be ok for a medium/large ship, and a 1x1 docking port may be too large or too little for some ships.

So my proposal is: add at least 3 prefab docking ports, with different sizes. One small docking port, (0,25 x 0,25 x 0,25 and/or 0,25x0,25x0,50) that would work for item transfer and docking. A medium docking port (1m x 1m) that would look like a hatch and works as a tiny door too, and item transfer. And a bigger docking port, that would look like a hallway/gate, and this would be useful for large ships.

All of them extendable (like piston max range?), prefab, and to work as item transfer. This would add some variety to attend to specific necessities. I know a single docking connector would be easier, but we have different demands, and as Regnion said, a prefab docking port would be easier for a NPC to detect.

About fuel and items.

In Factorio game, gas and liquid uses the same kind of pipes, which makes everything easier! So, tanks should be used for gas and liquids, fuel or not (for future crafting).

E.G. I'm building a super tanker (Zach already posted the image), and I made 72x separated fuel clusters with this in mind, so I have 72 outlet pipes. Which requires some management, and this means some logic valves to open and close the flow, in order to organize which way each fluid gonna flow, to avoid mixing different items/fluids. Also, we should have a visual signal to show what is flowing inside the fluid or the item pipe.

So -logic valves -a way to visually show the pipe content

[Regnion]

Why not combine the maglocks with such connectors? They don't have to actually be piped in order to secure a load, but the function would be the same in terms of holding a ship or vehicle in place with the option of supplying fuel or transferring items.

Perhaps the docking collars could also be a flat block that opens up and deploys, like the iris door. This way connectors can be flush, but spring out when Docking Permission is requested (like how landing gear will toggle, but a prefab). Or, enable it to work across child entities and we have it pop out ourselves (like landing gear), but that might be difficult to figure out from a dev standpoint.

I would rather have cargo pipes and fuel pipes be separate, but they'll be using the same docking collar for transfers.

You won't have space in a 1m docking collar for both a hatch and moving of fuel/cargo.

Summary:

1) Combine maglock functionality, which reduces total number of blocks and streamlines the process of carrying vehicles or ships within larger ones and providing them with fuel, power, ammunition, etc.

2) Consider a fancy opening animation for docking collars to "hide" them when not in use, or, figure out how to transfer items across child entities, and we can deploy the docking collars ourselves. Docking should also level out the ship automatically.

3) .25m and 1m docking collars for moving fuel, items, and energy. 3m collars for moving energy and providing a doorway. Consider a second 1m docking collar that moves energy, and has an iris hatch (think the one on top of the Millenium Falcon). All docking collars should be able to secure a ship or vehicle in place, but with different weight limits (better to be generous than insufficient).

[Garrett-C]

Why not combine the maglocks with such connectors? They don't have to actually be piped in order to secure a load, but the function would be the same in terms of holding a ship or vehicle in place with the option of supplying fuel or transferring items.

Perhaps the docking collars could also be a flat block that opens up and deploys, like the iris door. This way connectors can be flush, but spring out when Docking Permission is requested (like how landing gear will toggle, but a prefab). Or, enable it to work across child entities and we have it pop out ourselves (like landing gear), but that might be difficult to figure out from a dev standpoint.

I would actually recommend separate pipes for fuel and times- when using the xray vision to see your piping, it can get confusing if cargo and fuel pipes are both highlighted. It would not be confusing if labeled properly and some visual differences implemented in the blocks themselves (warning stripe on the texture itself?).

I think the issue with combining maglocks and the connectors is that they serve a different purpose. The connectors should allow 2 ships/stations to dock and in essence, be on the same grid, the maglock does not force the linked entity to the same grid. The maglock seems more useful for things like cranes where the entity being moved may not necessarily have a connector to connect to.

I think something like this is the best of both worlds in terms of a way of doing docking. You have a very low profile docking block, basically the size of a door, maybe with the option to stretch it to 2m wide also. Then the actual docking process is universal but people can design the collar however they want. I particularly like the idea of the one on the right where the module is more of a door frame allowing the player to design the actual physical door as well if they want.

I am also not sure weight limits for docking should be a thing. For a couple of reasons. 1. Which side bears the weight? If I docked a cargo ship to a station then which side should the weight limit apply to? Arguably a space station would be outside the weight limit so if the cargo ship has to bear the limit then the cargo ship wouldn't be able to dock even though it makes no real sense. 2. Assuming there is no way to boost the weight limit you essentially put a cap on the max size of ship that can dock.

Basically, I think a docking connector should be very low profile so that the player can design around it rather than be forced to use something large like the current system. I think a 2x1 doorway is the smallest that is reasonable for the movement of people between ships because obviously, people will want to move through it. A 2x1 frame gives the most building flexibility but also the benefit of a standardized docking port. Seems like the best of both worlds if you ask me.

[willlascas]

About the Docking System. I think you could use the empyrion docking system, where you add a 0.25 height docking block and can expand it sideways. Basically, you would only have to touch any flat surface and it would automatically sweeten and it would be extremely easy to adapt it to the current workshop creations.

[ProPeach]

About the Docking System. I think you could use the empyrion docking system, where you add a 0.25 height docking block and can expand it sideways. Basically, you would only have to touch any flat surface and it would automatically sweeten and it would be extremely easy to adapt it to the current workshop creations.

This is basically what I hope the Maglock will evolve into. It already has that functionality (mostly), but the form factor could be made much more useful like this

[Dwarf-LordPangolin]

I think there's been some confusion on the matter. The main issue here is not creativity; it's geometry. This is true regardless of whether we're talking about 1m blocks that transfer items, or 3x3 docking collars for moving people, or an all-in-one block that can transfer both items and people (which even if only used for stations, we really need, for reasons that will become clear in a moment). Let me use a ship that's in the game as an example of what I'm talking about; I will use the current Connector block to illustrate what I mean, but the same would apply to a smaller block.

This is the Whirlwind. It's one of the ships I've made for the game. When I made it, we didn't have a docking block, so it will need to be upgraded with whatever docking system is used. That's easy to do, and not a problem.

The problem is that there are only a few places on the ship where a docking block can be placed. It can't be on the bow (it's full of guns), or the aft (full of engines), or in the wingtips (turrets are in the way). There's really only one spot where a docking block can be placed, and that's on the middle. The problem is that the middle is also the skinniest part of the ship. If I tried to dock with almost any other ship, it would be rammed by the wings first.

That's the reason I said this was about geometry: if you really want to maximize player creativity, you need a system that can work with any kind of hull shape -- otherwise players won't be able to build the ships they want. And realistically, there's only one kind of system that can do that: a system that can extend its length.

As long as I don't do anything stupid and put part of my ship in that space, I will be able to dock with literally any other ship with the same kind of system, no questions asked. It just needs to use whatever the current pistons use to stretch when activated. It gives me perfect freedom to design my ship how I want it to be.

That solves half the problem: I can now transfer people or items from one ship to another. But what about both?

Well, that's easy! All I have to do is put a connector block next to my door, bring my ship next to theirs, line up both blocks, and --

Well ... fudge. They don't line up.

And that's the second problem: if you don't have an all-in-one docking block that is both a door and a connector, sooner or later you're going to run into a situation where your door-connector combo doesn't line up with theirs -- because you placed your connector right next to the door, and they placed theirs 1m from it -- or to the right, when you placed yours to the left. You get the idea; there's almost an infinite number of ways that two different blocks could be arranged, even right next to each other. This is why an all-in-one block is essential; if the players want to design their own docking systems for their own stuff, that's fine, but there needs to be a standardized, premade block that can do everything.

To show what I mean, look at Garrett-C's example. My ships would never be able to dock with his, because I wouldn't make my docking setup anything like his; his ships can't dock at 90 degrees to each other, both because he only has a single connector, and because his doors are 1x2m. My setup would look like this:

Again: the geometry doesn't match. If his system docked with mine, his door would be facing my hull. And I guarantee that there are even more ideas about how to this should be done. And before anyone says "let the community agree on a standard everyone should use!" that's just an all-in-one block with extra steps. You'd still be forced to use it if you wanted to dock with anyone else using the system, and it'd be bulkier than a premade block to boot. I watched literally the exact same thing unfold in Space Engineers: the game has been out for the better part of a decade, there's still not a community standard system that a majority of players use, and people made mods for docking blocks because the developers didn't, despite the players begging them for one.

Summary The best way to ensure the greatest level of player creativity is for all docking blocks -- .25m, 1m, 2x2m or 3x3m, whether for items or people, whatever -- to have built-in pistons or umbilicals that can extend to the limits of the ship's bounding box. The only concession the player will have to make is making sure that there's a straight path from their docking mechanism; they can then place it wherever they want on their ship.

There have been a number of different ways of doing this that have been posted here. I'm particularly partial to Peach's suggestions, but the exact method doesn't matter. What we need is:

• A .25m connector block for refueling/resupplying speeder bikes, small drones, or other really small things, with umbilical.
• A 1m connector block for refueling/resupplying larger things things that have room for it, with umbilical.
• The current 2x2 (for even-symmetry) iris door for refueling/resupplying and moving people, with umbilical.
• The current 3x3 (for odd-symmetry) iris door for refueling/resupplying and moving people, with umbilical.

Those should cover practically every contingency. I'd like a 1x2m connector for even-symmetry convenience, but I can just place two 1m connectors next to each other, so that's no big deal.

Note: If the player wants to, these parts still allow them to design their own creations; they can make a custom door and put a connector wherever they want with it. I really don't want to get more messages accusing me of being opposed to creativity; I am literally champing at the bit for that 1m connector, because I've wanted to make shuttles that use a 1m connector, with custom doors, to dock flush with my hull for at least a year. But giving players an all-in-one block as well guarantees that everyone can dock with everyone else.

[Garrett-C]

Very detailed post here @Dwarf-LordPangolin

I think there's been some confusion on the matter. The main issue here is not creativity; it's geometry.

I would argue it's a mixture of both. We have to remember 2 things.

1. The game has one of the most powerful building systems out there and to not allow players to leverage that on even the smallest sections of their ship would be a real shame.
2. The system needs to work in a practical manner. As you have outlined with your images of the ship some times it would be beneficial to have a system with the built-in capacity to extend. Maybe there is both a fixed and an extending variant.

That's the reason I said this was about geometry: if you really want to maximize player creativity, you need a system that can work with any kind of hull shape -- otherwise players won't be able to build the ships they want. And realistically, there's only one kind of system that can do that: a system that can extend its length.

I agree having a solution that is compatible with a greater variety of hull shapes is crucial to creativity. But so is a solution that is more than just a big slab of a docking module like the current one. That's why I am of the opinion that having one as small and low profile is ideal. You maintain the universal nature of the feature but also the ability to design your docking collar in a way that fits your build. Again the current system works great from a functional standpoint in terms of universal docking but it's very limiting in how the player uses it.

As long as I don't do anything stupid and put part of my ship in that space, I will be able to dock with literally any other ship with the same kind of system, no questions asked. It just needs to use whatever the current pistons use to stretch when activated. It gives me perfect freedom to design my ship how I want it to be.

There is a very important part to this line that I think is overlooked. "With the same kind of system" That's a sentiment I am a big fan of. While I understand the desire for a universal solution I don't believe that it has to be 100% Universal all the time. Look at the USB standard. In general, it's universal but there are sub-standards like USB C or USB A etc. I am of the opinion that this can add a lot to the world-building of the world when exploration is introduced and the gameplay around ship design. Instead of everyone being guaranteed to use the exact same standard some variety can lead to more interesting gameplay in my opinion.

That solves half the problem: I can now transfer people or items from one ship to another. But what about both? Well, that's easy! All I have to do is put a connector block next to my door, bring my ship next to theirs, line up both blocks, and -- Well ... fudge. They don't line up.

And that's the second problem: if you don't have an all-in-one docking block that is both a door and a connector, sooner or later you're going to run into a situation where your door-connector combo doesn't line up with theirs -- because you placed your connector right next to the door, and they placed theirs 1m from it -- or to the right, when you placed yours to the left. You get the idea; there's almost an infinite number of ways that two different blocks could be arranged, even right next to each other. This is why an all-in-one block is essential; if the players want to design their own docking systems for their own stuff, that's fine, but there needs to be a standardized, premade block that can do everything.

I see what you are saying here but I don't really agree. The idea that everything must be done in one block assumes that players can't design things in an intelligent way. A view I disagree with. I would argue with the added complexity of pipes the game intends to move in a direction where ship design does have some limits and does require actual thought. I believe the thought of "Do I want fuel connectors here?" Or "Where should I put my fuel connectors" Is an addition to gameplay, whereas a dumbed-down all-in-one prefab simplifies matters too much. I can get where people are comming from with not wanting something like this though.

To show what I mean, look at Garrett-C's example. My ships would never be able to dock with his, because I wouldn't make my docking setup anything like his; his ships can't dock at 90 degrees to each other, both because he only has a single connector, and because his doors are 1x2m.

I will say my suggestion was based on the idea that something like the following image shared by zach in a previous discussion would be involved in the prefab. With the goal being to allow a 2x1 and a 2x2 to dock.

On that note how does and all in one block solve the problem of size variety? Do we just force all users to use a 3x3 docking port? I am very much of the opinion that this again is a massive limit to how players could build ships.

Again: the geometry doesn't match. If his system docked with mine, his door would be facing my hull. And I guarantee that there are even more ideas about how to this should be done. And before anyone says "let the community agree on a standard everyone should use!" that's just an all-in-one block with extra steps. You'd still be forced to use it if you wanted to dock with anyone else using the system, and it'd be bulkier than a premade block to boot. I watched literally the exact same thing unfold in Space Engineers: the game has been out for the better part of a decade, there's still not a community standard system that a majority of players use, and people made mods for docking blocks because the developers didn't, despite the players begging them for one.

Community-based designs have several advantages over an all in one block though.

1. More freedom with what your docking port looks like. Not everyone will have an identical-looking donut on the side of their ship. Look at say your port design. That looks nice for say a more industrial ship but if I were to design a very sleek ship that sort of docking port would look massively out of place. The more prefabs we force players to use the more we standardise what design style has to be used in the game.
2. More freedom with the functionality of your ship when it docks. Maybe you want to limit the fuel you can send by only having one connection for fuel or maybe you want rapid item transport so you have 4 item transporting ports.
3. The ability to design with the intention of being incompatible with some designs. Maybe you only want your fleet to be able to function together. With a forced universal solution you have no choice on the matter.

Summary

• A .25m connector block for refueling/resupplying speeder bikes, small drones, or other really small things, with umbilical.
• A 1m connector block for refueling/resupplying larger things things that have room for it, with umbilical.
• The current 2x2 (for even-symmetry) iris door for refueling/resupplying and moving people, with umbilical.
• The current 3x3 (for odd-symmetry) iris door for refueling/resupplying and moving people, with umbilical.

Again the issue here is fixed sizes. And the practicality of the connector. With this system, you are only able to build docking ports of a very limited size. The bigger issue however is that 2x2 and 3x3 don't actually work as sizes for an all-in-one solution.

As you can see the 3x3 size means that it is not possible to have large pipes connected to the system making it impossible for this size to really service an all in one solution.

Note: If the player wants to, these parts still allow them to design their own creations; they can make a custom door and put a connector wherever they want with it. I really don't want to get more messages accusing me of being opposed to creativity; I am literally champing at the bit for that 1m connector, because I've wanted to make shuttles that use a 1m connector, with custom doors, to dock flush with my hull for at least a year. But giving players an all-in-one block as well guarantees that everyone can dock with everyone else.

I don't believe you are opposed to creativity. That would be daft, you are playing a game that currently has little more than a creative building environment, you clearly don't hate creativity.

I do however feel like your point about players still being able to design their own is honestly wrong. On a purely technical point yeah you are 100% right however from a realistic view you aren't. If players are using some universal 2x2 or 3x3 connector there is no gain or functional reason for you to build your own design outside of that. The system in essence forces users to use the prefab or be unable to use any other docking facility that they didn't design. So it forces the use of the docking port in a soft way.

I personally would love the very simple 1m/.25m block solution Tsuna discussed originally but I can understand the appeal of something standard to allow for easier designing of things like space stations for the player to find when exploring. That said I am absolutely opposed to anything that isn't so low profile that the player can build the docking collar around it. The player should not be forced to use the same prefab as everyone else because that, in turn, forces the design language that players have to use. Hence why I think something based on a door for people transport and then an external connector for pipes is the best of both worlds. It allows the user to build a docking collar however they want but also ensures the universal nature of docking.

[Briaireous]

There are two extreme routes that can be taken with docking, you can either go the same way as starmade where it is purely up to the player after you provide the nessesary parts for docking which resulted in the USD after players finally came to an agreement, or a prefab that can accommodate any build style.

Going the first route will allow for player creativity for docking, but eventually players will find builds that are not compatible with each other. At that point the player base can either come together and develop a USD of sorts due to the frustrations of docking. Or the community could not come together and continue on as is with no compatible docking.

The prefab way can greatly inhibit player creativity if you give it a big enouph footprint. It may be possible to pull off if you stick with something like a wire frame for most of the structure and only make the connections for item/fuel transfer big enough for those purposes.

As for the issue with docking on ships like the whirlwind that dwarf made, if the docking port has the ability to act like a piston, the issue can be dealt with. Probs would be a good idea to allow players to change the max value the connector can stretch out.

[Garrett-C]

Yeah @Briaireous that is a pretty good summary of the 2 extreme ways to do it.

There may be a some form of middle ground like you outlined with having a prefab be as basic and small scale as possible.

I think if there is some way of maintaining guaranteed universal docking while not resorting to a massive prefab which forces everyone to have an identical docking collar then that's what should be aimed for.

[pinesh]

What’s the point in going through all the labor to create custom docking, if the player base ultimately has to come up with some universal standard anyway. That seems like a lot of wasted effort to reach the same point.

For ships too small to fit a docking prefab, (which need not be bigger than a standard door which is already needed for npcs) ,They can just use a landing pad, which should automatically have a pseudo connection for fuel and whatnot. That way small ships and fighters can land on bigger things and get fueled up etc.

[Garrett-C]

What’s the point in going through all the labor to create custom docking, if the player base ultimately has to come up with some universal standard anyway. That seems like a lot of wasted effort to reach the same point.

For ships too small to fit a docking prefab, (which need not be bigger than a standard door which is already needed for npcs) ,They can just use a landing pad, which should automatically have a pseudo connection for fuel and whatnot. That way small ships and fighters can land on bigger things and get fueled up etc.

Player freedom. With the current system, all ships have the same donut on the side. With a more free system where users only have say a 1m block or a doorway that handles the docking, you can design a docking collar that fits your build.

For example, if you want a very angular build you can't currently have an angular docking collar. With a system designed with player freedom in mind and not just a chunky port then people can have docking ports that look like they belong on the ship.

[TIKIRobo]

A .25m connector block for refueling/resupplying speeder bikes, small drones, or other really small things, with umbilical. A 1m connector block for refueling/resupplying larger things things that have room for it, with umbilical. The current 2x2 (for even-symmetry) iris door for refueling/resupplying and moving people, with umbilical. The current 3x3 (for odd-symmetry) iris door for refueling/resupplying and moving people, with umbilical.

I like this idea but with one small change, the umbilicals should be optional, the reasoning behind this would be somethings like say an escape pod system using docking ports would want to remain flush with what ever it is docked to (or relatively flush with maybe a .125 gap in-between)

[tsunamayo]

Sorry guys I have been watching and working on the other thread, it seems I have a lot to catch-up...

[Briaireous]

all good, the other thread is more..... important in comparison to this one imo

[Dwarf-LordPangolin]

On a purely technical point yeah you are 100% right however from a realistic view you aren't. If players are using some universal 2x2 or 3x3 connector there is no gain or functional reason for you to build your own design outside of that. The system in essence forces users to use the prefab or be unable to use any other docking facility that they didn't design. So it forces the use of the docking port in a soft way.

The problem with this logic is that it amounts to saying "if you give players a universal connector, most of them will use it instead of making their own because it's more convenient." So you're basically admitting that most players, if given a choice, don't want to be forced to go to the trouble of making their own connectors. I agree that if given that choice, the game won't have as many cool, creative docking mechanisms, but I think they should be given that choice, instead of having it be made for them, and being forced to be creative when if they don't to.

My proposal would give everyone their options; people that want a quick and dirty prefab can use it, while people that want to hand-craft their own, super-unique docking system can do that too -- and people like me that have a use for both can do both. Everybody wins. If there is no universal connector, however, people will be forced to make their own, even if they don't want to.

I do agree with you, however, that the current form factor could certainly be much better; the iris door is functional, but it does have a very large footprint, lends itself exclusively to a particular style, does not work well with the pipe system (as you correctly pointed out), and gives almost no freedom in designing around it; it's also a bit cramped. I've actually been a fan of the door shown in the image from Zach's post that you linked above for some time; I agree that it would be preferable if we had something like that instead of the iris connector. Then players could place that and decorate around it as desired. I also agree with you 100% that everything should be as low-profile as possible.

[Garrett-C]

On a purely technical point yeah you are 100% right however from a realistic view you aren't. If players are using some universal 2x2 or 3x3 connector there is no gain or functional reason for you to build your own design outside of that. The system in essence forces users to use the prefab or be unable to use any other docking facility that they didn't design. So it forces the use of the docking port in a soft way.

The problem with this logic is that it amounts to saying "if you give players a universal connector, most of them will use it instead of making their own because it's more convenient." So you're basically admitting that most players, if given a choice, don't want to be forced to go to the trouble of making their own connectors. I agree that if given that choice, the game won't have as many cool, creative docking mechanisms, but I think they should be given that choice, instead of having it be made for them, and being forced to be creative when if they don't to.

My proposal would give everyone their options; people that want a quick and dirty prefab can use it, while people that want to hand-craft their own, super-unique docking system can do that too -- and people like me that have a use for both can do both. Everybody wins. If there is no universal connector, however, people will be forced to make their own, even if they don't want to.

I do agree with you, however, that the current form factor could certainly be much better; the iris door is functional, but it does have a very large footprint, lends itself exclusively to a particular style, does not work well with the pipe system (as you correctly pointed out), and gives almost no freedom in designing around it; it's also a bit cramped. I've actually been a fan of the door shown in the image from Zach's post that you linked above for some time; I agree that it would be preferable if we had something like that instead of the iris connector. Then players could place that and decorate around it as desired. I also agree with you 100% that everything should be as low-profile as possible.

Incorrect. What I am saying is not "most players, if given a choice, don't want to be forced to go to the trouble of making their own connectors" what I am saying is if for example the naturally spawning stations all use a prefab players will in essence be forced to use the prefab. Doesn't matter if you want to do that or not if it's the only way to connect to other players or stations.

If there is a prefab then players end up having no real used of building a custom one because it will be incompatible with the universal one that other players have used or that stations use etc. So your solution of "have both" is great in practice but not practical in reality.

That said it the prefab for universal docking is low profile and designed in a way like the door Zach shared it kind of achieves most of what we both want. Which I think is why we both sort of agree that it is a good design. I can also see that door design working well with the sort of extending idea you described, sort of like the air bridges in airport terminals.

The only issue I think we may disagree on in terms of the zach door is I think it should stay as just a door and not have fuel and item transfer added to it which I imagine you would disagree with? My view on thay is that's it's fairly difficult to connect the pipes to it without making it bulky again. However maybe you could keep the small profile and have pipes going into the side of the block, as we can have pipes in hull thay shouldn't be impossible to integrate, so I do think it could work in theory.

It's certainly not easy to balance player freedom and universal functionality, I mean to an extent the two ideas are almost directly opposed. I do think there is a good compromise to be found somewhere though.

[Briaireous]

Btw, was just thinking... ammo was gona be a thing right? In that case would the conveyors be needed to bring ammo to the turrets?