In Developement Cockpits: Simple solution (remote core access)

[Valiant70]

maybe make a block that when destroyed by shipborne weapons the whole ship self destructs

That would be the worst thing ever...

How did we even get on this subject in a thread about cockpits? We should be talking about the computers the bridge crew are using, not the stuff blowing them up. LOL

 

[Rixxan]

well, as I agree that would be too OP, we would have to think about how to prevent mass cockpit extermination. Making them immune would be really weird, but still. How would we prevent crewing?
That's how we got on this tangent, as an alternative of blowing **** up till you hit core but still making both options available. I mean, A cockpit can be stormed by boarders, and a core can be blown up, but if a crew is piloting from the bridge and you no longer enter a core/computer but use it, you can get shot and how would you prevent that?

Jeez we're off topic

 

[Ithirahad]

It all matters how the data structure for ships is set up at the moment, as blocks on the ship are stored relative to the position of the ship core. Additionally linking to the core is still how all the systems be accessible to the weapons menu, thinks like weapons, defence and support effects etc.

It'll really be up to Schema, what he wants to do as he knows the structure of entities and how he handles the data. It might be that ship cores still play a big part like in supporting chain docking or in some other way we can't see.

There's no need to remove cores, we just need to be able to place equivalent blocks elsewhere and most issues should be completely fixed. After that, all we need is the aesthetic change from players being sucked into cores to player models remaining visible when they're using a block like a core or computer.

 

[Valiant70]

There's no need to remove cores, we just need to be able to place equivalent blocks elsewhere and most issues should be completely fixed. After that, all we need is the aesthetic change from players being sucked into cores to player models remaining visible when they're using a block like a core or computer.

We wouldn't HAVE to remove them, but at the very least we need to be able to move them. Fortunately that's a planned function for shipyards at some point in the future.

 

[Darkzellz]

I like your idea, but why not make it even simpler, a block that simply is a link to a core ... using logic, you place it, and it eccentrically allows access to the core it is linked too? ... :D

 

[Valiant70]

I like your idea, but why not make it even simpler, a block that simply is a link to a core ... using logic, you place it, and it eccentrically allows access to the core it is linked too? ... :D

That's actually more complicated than my original idea. The idea is, you place the block, activate it, and it's exactly like you activated the core. No connecting logic or anything.
[DOUBLEPOST=1440273939,1440273749][/DOUBLEPOST]Later on I had this idea:

If that's the way it works, it seems very strange. How do stations and other entities like asteroids store their blocks? All entities should probably use the same system (except for planets maybe... they are too large for the same solution to work well and be truly scalable).


That's OK. That can stay. I'd do it like this:

• Rename "core" to "control computer." It could either keep its current appearance or get a new one. It doesn't really matter.
• Optionally, everything may link automatically to the first control computer placed on the ship.
• Allow multiple control computers to be placed and linked.
  • When a control computer is "slaved" to another one, the master can access everything linked to the slave.
• To decide which control computers have helm control (turning and thrusters), add a "flight computer" block.
  • If this block is destroyed the ship will not be able to control the helm. This makes sense because weapons, jump, and everything else can be lost if a computer is destroyed.
  • A control computer has helm control if a flight computer is linked to it.
  • There may be multiple flight computers, but if one is in use the other will not activate. Upon attempting to activate a second flight computer, a message appears warning that the attempt to take the helm failed.
• For an AI module to control a ship function, a control computer with said function must be slaved to it.
• Turrets do not need a flight computer. Control computers get control of the turret axes by default. If multiple cores are present, the first one activated gets control of the axes. Placing multiple control computers on a turret would be kind of pointless, though.
• Moving parts like doors do not need a control computer at all. A ship built manually outside of a shipyard would require one to dock the parts initially, but it could be removed after docking.

On a ship, it would typically be a good idea to have one "master" computer accessible to the captain and several "slave" computers that crew members may use. You could put the master computer in CIC, the helm on the bridge, weapons in the weapon room, etc. You could even have a "navigation computer" with a jump drive slaved to it. The navigator could set a waypoint and jump to it while the pilot dodges enemy fire, shoots asteroids, or chats with the captain.


Right. You could run this idea by him and see what he thinks of it, though.


That would be... weird. That sort of thing should really be handled by metadata rather than a block. If Schema did it that way, I suspect he would be planning to change it. I have no idea.
[DOUBLEPOST=1435188426,1435188218][/DOUBLEPOST]
Oh, looks like we had very similar ideas.

However, as I am growing frustrated with a lack of any cockpit functionality, I'd be really happy with the simple solution for now so I can build ships the way I want to!

 

[Darkzellz]

That's actually more complicated than my original idea. The idea is, you place the block, activate it, and it's exactly like you activated the core. No connecting logic or anything.

yea, but see, cores are linked to alot, your weapons are liked to the core, not the ship itself, so you would have to re-rout everything, but if core's were to stay as they are and your "helm" were to simply link to the core (something that is already done with all the other systems) it could be used as a core, without BEING the core, anything confusing a ship is a bad idea, what you really want is a "cockpit" a cockpit should pretty much allow all the things a core does, but is not a core. So, flight, building, and whatnot, right? then how is the core supposed to recognize this "cockpit" i guess it could be as how it recognizes cameras, but instead of filtering through cameras, it would reverse the processs, allowing access to the core from the external block.

 

[Valiant70]

yea, but see, cores are linked to alot, your weapons are liked to the core, not the ship itself, so you would have to re-rout everything, but if core's were to stay as they are and your "helm" were to simply link to the core (something that is already done with all the other systems) it could be used as a core, without BEING the core, anything confusing a ship is a bad idea, what you really want is a "cockpit" a cockpit should pretty much allow all the things a core does, but is not a core. So, flight, building, and whatnot, right? then how is the core supposed to recognize this "cockpit" i guess it could be as how it recognizes cameras, but instead of filtering through cameras, it would reverse the processs, allowing access to the core from the external block.

Technically it would be linked to the core like a weapon computer. It would just do so automatically without you having to think about it, once again like a weapon computer.

 

[Darkzellz]

Technically it would be linked to the core like a weapon computer. It would just do so automatically without you having to think about it, once again like a weapon computer.

Sorry, meant that, not camera XD

 

[Valiant70]

Frick! No planned tag yet! XD

(And bump)

 

[aytoms29]

what could happen is that you could have sertain blocks to be hooked up to the core (Joystick, Computers, Radar, ect.) via slaving so when you can select the block like it was the core but it would start up with you sitting and controlling the ship while the player model is visable. (my view makes sense to me. dont judge)

 

[Bench]

We have a simple solution in the works for remote flight control separate to the ship core, allowing for building of bridges on your ships.

 

[Crimson-Artist]

hopefully when we use this remote access block our character model will still be viable. whats the use of a bridge if we just disappear into the captain's chair

 

[Ithirahad]

We have a simple solution in the works for remote flight control separate to the ship core, allowing for building of bridges on your ships.

In the works as in in development as we speak, or on the list of things to do? Also, what Crimson-Artist said; assuming it isn't already the plan please tell Schema to keep player models where they are when a player accesses a helm block or whatever rather than having them disappear. I get that this is Alpha, but it's about time we abolished that bit of immersion-breaking ugliness.

 

[Bench]

In the works as in in development as we speak, or on the list of things to do?

There's progress on it so it's gone from just an idea to starting to have some work on it so i guess in dev.

 

[Ithirahad]

There's progress on it so it's gone from just an idea to starting to have some work on it so i guess in dev.

Ah, nice. Commence hype memes :P

 

[Edymnion]

We should be talking about the computers the bridge crew are using, not the stuff blowing them up. LOL

Have you never seen an episode of Star Trek? The computers the bridge crew are using *ARE* the things blowing them up! :P

 

[Valiant70]

We have a simple solution in the works for remote flight control separate to the ship core, allowing for building of bridges on your ships.

There's progress on it so it's gone from just an idea to starting to have some work on it so i guess in dev.

Hey! That's great!

Rather excited edit: Wait, isn't there a different bumper sticker for "in development?"

(By the way, the bump post was meant to be joking, not angry! :p)
[DOUBLEPOST=1445302442,1445302055][/DOUBLEPOST]

Ah, nice. Commence hype memes :p

This is as big as ship-board spawning!

 

[Valiant70]

Scratch that. It's bigger than shipboard spawning. I showed this thread to everyone on my server's site chat and everyone's freaking out. The hype is over 8000!

 

[Valiant70]

This hype train is over two years old. We got hover vehicles last update. Could we please have helm controls next update?