Recognized A major improvement for wireless

[GRHayes]

I spent the better part of a day hooking up a wireless control system having to go back and forth through out a ship to various docked entities to connect transmitter and receiver.

It got me to thinking about what would massively make this easier.

The solution is one that comes out of real life industry. Part of which is probably already implemented.

Most likely when a wireless block is put down a number is assigned. When they are connected they pair is created and stored using the numbers that was generated for the block.

In short make the numbers visible. And allow people to enter the connection in that way as well.
That means as blocks or docked systems are placed in a ship the wireless number can be written down and then when the opposite end is created they could simply enter in the idnumber given rather than make 500 trips back and forth through a ship. On large ship that could be a lot of time saved.

 

[Zaphord]

Yes please!

 

[Megacrafter127]

I spent the better part of a day hooking up a wireless control system having to go back and forth through out a ship to various docked entities to connect transmitter and receiver.

It got me to thinking about what would massively make this easier.

The solution is one that comes out of real life industry. Part of which is probably already implemented.

Most likely when a wireless block is put down a number is assigned. When they are connected they pair is created and stored using the numbers that was generated for the block.

In short make the numbers visible. And allow people to enter the connection in that way as well.
That means as blocks or docked systems are placed in a ship the wireless number can be written down and then when the opposite end is created they could simply enter in the idnumber given rather than make 500 trips back and forth through a ship. On large ship that could be a lot of time saved.

It isn't JUST a numer though. It is the location of the block on the entity, and said entity's UID, which is a String[the first name given to an entity]. That is, if my information is up to date.

 

[GRHayes]

It isn't JUST a numer though. It is the location of the block on the entity, and said entity's UID, which is a String[the first name given to an entity]. That is, if my information is up to date.

Even so that would still be easier than flying through the ship doing a space walk. You can't hook these things up in build mode across two entities. So even a 64 bit ID number would be easier. An entity ID and block id and location could be made into single string that could be re-entered where needed.

 

[TomW1605]

or they could be named like inter-ship remotes

 

[AssIn9]

This would be amazing. Enable copy and paste, and the uid could be any length. this would make it so much easier to repair generators and folding wings.

If we were to have a set pattern for the naming of the wifi, linking could be done on the fly for missiles and the like. +1 crew member, -9000 logic blocks in ship.

 

[Valiant70]

Schema could also add the ability to name your logic blocks, which would make things easier to remember.

 

[GRHayes]

Schema could also add the ability to name your logic blocks, which would make things easier to remember.

I understand Schema's method fully. The problem with using a naming system or just the number as I suggested is that it could be reused and then there wouldn't be a way to work out which is correct. Keeping track of all the names would be more work also.

By the block being identified as they do to a vessel or station or whatever object then they know it is in that object. The position limits it further unless you manage to put two blocks in the same spot some how. Even if you docked to vessels over each other with two blocks in the same area the current system prevents them from being confused because of the vessel or object assignment.

 

[Valiant70]

I understand Schema's method fully. The problem with using a naming system or just the number as I suggested is that it could be reused and then there wouldn't be a way to work out which is correct. Keeping track of all the names would be more work also.

By the block being identified as they do to a vessel or station or whatever object then they know it is in that object. The position limits it further unless you manage to put two blocks in the same spot some how. Even if you docked to vessels over each other with two blocks in the same area the current system prevents them from being confused because of the vessel or object assignment.

A name would act as a stand-in for the number, not a replacement. Naming each block would be optional. All names can be kept in a list and the list checked when someone tries to name a block. If multiple people naming things the same way becomes an issue, add an optional feature to automatically append ".playername" to the end of all names a player gives to his/her wireless modules.

 

[AssIn9]

I see this as a major challenge if it is limited to the client that is attempting to access the block.

if the wifi was addressed as AssIn9_12456_8_8_9 for example AssIn9_12456 being the name of the ship and 8 8 9 being the location of the wifi block on the ship, its universal. and I could tell a friend through chat the name and they could link the other end of the wifi block to my ship.

and all I can think of:
numbering them would be easier for us....... to hijack your wifi

 

[TomW1605]

hijack your wifi

possibly add the ability to lock blocks so that they cant be connected or limit it to faction