Read by Council Grid based logic computer system

[GRHayes]

It would be better if they just turned the display into a terminal and gave it inputs and out puts. Then you could connect a sensor to the input and anything you wanted controlled to the out put and then simply write a program using their script of choice. I can care less if it is LUA, BASIC, ladder logic... I've used them all.

 

[Parameter]

It would be better if they just turned the display into a terminal and gave it inputs and out puts. Then you could connect a sensor to the input and anything you wanted controlled to the out put and then simply write a program using their script of choice. I can care less if it is LUA, BASIC, ladder logic... I've used them all.

I this this is a fine idea, but maybe not the best general approach. A large number of gamers are not programmers and do not aspire to be. Visual logic systems are bit easier to understand, and definitely easier to scope. If you allow programming, you have to define a memory space for it to operate in. You have make your own interpreted language, or use one where you can lock down unused functionality to prevent exploitation. You have to synchronize program output between the server and all clients, and come up with a throttling mechanism to limit or discretize its computation. These problems aren't insurmountable, but they are far harder to implement than a handful of canned logic interactions and a discrete logic simulator for them.

That said, I hope one day we have the ability to write basic programs with logic outputs. It would allow players to do significantly more with automation and AI than they can now.

 

[GRHayes]

I this this is a fine idea, but maybe not the best general approach. A large number of gamers are not programmers and do not aspire to be. Visual logic systems are bit easier to understand, and definitely easier to scope. If you allow programming, you have to define a memory space for it to operate in. You have make your own interpreted language, or use one where you can lock down unused functionality to prevent exploitation. You have to synchronize program output between the server and all clients, and come up with a throttling mechanism to limit or discretize its computation. These problems aren't insurmountable, but they are far harder to implement than a handful of canned logic interactions and a discrete logic simulator for them.

That said, I hope one day we have the ability to write basic programs with logic outputs. It would allow players to do significantly more with automation and AI than they can now.

I think you missed the point. I suggest you look up what ladder logic is. It is visual the same thing you are doing but on a display.

 

[Edymnion]

As a bit of a logic connoisseur I don't think this would help all that much. Sure it would make some small logic contraptions take up less space but anything complex with lots of ins and outs interacting with other parts of other circuits would be impossible to build.

I actually have formal training in logic design. I have built complicated logic systems on a breadboard with actual wires.

Trust me, not only is what OP saying perfectly doable, it mirrors real life quite well. What he just said is basically an EEPROM chip.

I've been a fan of using the current circuit blocks for this from the start.

 

[GRHayes]

I actually have formal training in logic design. I have built complicated logic systems on a breadboard with actual wires.

Trust me, not only is what OP saying perfectly doable, it mirrors real life quite well. What he just said is basically an EEPROM chip.

I've been a fan of using the current circuit blocks for this from the start.

Its doable but there are better solutions. I say that with 30 years electrical engineering and industrial controls added to my naval nuclear and computer science. Very doable in fact.
Just I think their would be a far better solution if they just emulate a PLC (programmable logic controller). They are used in industrial and military applications.
Here's an example of how they are programmed

 

[Magrim]

Damn, it's getting a bit too highbrow in here for me.

 

[BDLS]

Do not bounce out my friend. All discussion on this is good discussion.

 

[Criss]

I have a feeling most players aren't going to want to learn to program to make starmade logic circuits (although I admit it would be cool). This interface is as simple as it gets.

You say that, yet people learned how to do the same thing with redstone. Redstone required ludicrous setups just to get the logic blocks we already have, which is a big upgrade. I would say something like this is entirely possible. At the least it would be moddable. The issue is allowing a single block to act as if it is multiple inputs and outputs. I have an elevator system that determines when doors open and close based on where the elevator is on the rail. That requires at least 2 inputs. That is where this system gets a bit confusing. Still it is entirely viable if you want to condense a circuit down to a single block, but only if the issues I brought fourth are addressed. I am sure schema would have some input as well.

 

[Parameter]

Its doable but there are better solutions. I say that with 30 years electrical engineering and industrial controls added to my naval nuclear and computer science. Very doable in fact.
Just I think their would be a far better solution if they just emulate a PLC (programmable logic controller). They are used in industrial and military applications.
Here's an example of how they are programmed

While I respect your experience (I'm formally trained as an electrical engineer and have ~ a decade of experience in programming, from low-level assembly control systems to high-level application development), I think the level of logic emulation you're advocating is higher than most gamers would advocate for.

Just as PLC programmers aren't likely to require a SPICE simulation of the systems they program, gamers desiring logic for their video games aren't likely to require the level of design knowledge even something like ladder logic would require. In Starmade, I think it's sufficient to provide high level logical functionality to players using Schine's existing system, but with some mechanism for compacting and/or encapsulating logical blocks for easier circuit layout and scalability.

Collegiate courses are offered in Programmable Logic Controller operation - I do not think gamers should need the equivalent of a college course to make logic for their space station airlocks.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

This is similar to a suggestion I posted a while back to reduce block bloat with logic.
http://starmadedock.net/threads/universal-computer-block.20364/

The main idea is a mini-game like that of the shipyard simulation, where you would build the logic inside the computer block the same way you do know. Only there would be relay/sensor/in/out connectors on the computer block to them connect to external systems.

Should reduce a ton of logic systems down to one block.
If you coupled this with a more advanced version of the Display block, that would be handy.

 

[GRHayes]

While I respect your experience (I'm formally trained as an electrical engineer and have ~ a decade of experience in programming, from low-level assembly control systems to high-level application development), I think the level of logic emulation you're advocating is higher than most gamers would advocate for.

Just as PLC programmers aren't likely to require a SPICE simulation of the systems they program, gamers desiring logic for their video games aren't likely to require the level of design knowledge even something like ladder logic would require. In Starmade, I think it's sufficient to provide high level logical functionality to players using Schine's existing system, but with some mechanism for compacting and/or encapsulating logical blocks for easier circuit layout and scalability.

Collegiate courses are offered in Programmable Logic Controller operation - I do not think gamers should need the equivalent of a college course to make logic for their space station airlocks.

Most people take PLC training as OJT. There are a lot of course and types of PLCs plus usually the people doing the programming are also doing the wiring and so on.

A PLC also doesn't have to be the removal of the current system. They just allow for it if needed. They still have their own block count plus you could use them as a primary control. If you ever worked with real PLCs they have tones of modules for different tasks many of which are external to the PLC itself. They allow for what is known as a distributed control system. They interface with stuff like HMI and more.

While SPICE is used primarily for integrated circuits you can change the component library and emulate more than just integrated circuits. PLC programming software does what spice does just with a different component list. It emulates the circuit and then when you need compiles the code to transfer to the PLC and allows interfacing with the PLC. You better believe they want to emulate the circuit before hand and make sure it works most the time when it comes to industrial stuff real lives can be lost if it doesn't. But maybe you are talking they don't need it to handle integrated components. PLCs use ORs, ANDs, NOTs, and timers and flip flops. Exactly the same way they are doing now except it is clean and organized. It was designed to mimic and replace relay logic. In short what they are doing now is no different other than one is done with blocks and the other would be dragging those components across a screen into rungs on a ladder. If you ever worked on industrial controls then you would know how easy PLCs are to work with by design.

As for programming I've been doing so since the atari 800xl and commodore 64 was out. My school was down the road from IBM we tested the IBM PC XT AT for them along with programs such as Lotus. I've programmed everything from ASM in PICs, and other software to the point of having written a compiler and OS I also am familiar with APIs like OpenGL, directX, SDL and others besides programming PLCs.
In fact my college is based around CS. My electronics and electrical engineering experience stars of as a Nuclear ET/RO. The goes to me working for DOD/DLA and then Texas instruments. In short I've worked on everything from automated sites and installations to microprocessor development. At some point I realized with my credentials continuing college was a waste of money. I made more than most the engineers I worked with. Why pay money for something that gets you literally nothing in return other than more debt. For most people that won't be the case. All of what I done means squat here because all that counts is is the idea solid and worth implementing that is for the development team to decide.

But as to college course being offered on it meaning it shouldn't be include that is about the lamest answer I have heard. They also offer intro to DC and digital logic. Which this would be covered under so maybe what they currently have in it shouldn't be in there too is that what you are saying even the OPs suggested idea is college material. There are colleges that also teach game development and things like marching cubes and building objects using limited geometry and more. So maybe we shouldn't build stuff with cubes because it to is included in a college course.

 

[Magrim]

So....whose epeen is bigger? I'm confused.

 

[Andir]

For everyone talking about input/output.... we already have a solution. Wireless logic blocks. I/O is determined by how many wireless blocks you can fit and name. You have your logic grid block and wherever you need logic you place a wireless logic block that has a name that matches the wireless logic block inside the logic grid.

 

[Raisinbat]

This smells an awful lot like computercraft, which i don't like because it removes logic from the game. As soon as you open that screen you won't be in starmade anymore; you'll be in LogicMade. Logic stops being a part of a ship, its just metadata attached to it, like the name of the entity. For me this is a huge drawback, i love building mechanical ships, and this means i'd be spending hours in LogicMade instead.

From what i can tell the plus-points boils down to three reasons:

1. I want more logic on small builds
2. This makes logic easier to represent/read
3. It's realistic!

1. i think is a valid point, but there are going to be limits in a voxel game. When your entity is ~30 blocks it wont be able to do anything in combat terms anyway; it wont have the power to support weapons for breaking even a single block, so fuzzing over two or three blocks being needed for logic is pointless. Granted, i don't like building small/cosmetic stuff so i may just be biased here. Just saying, there WILL be limits to what you can do; 20 blocks wont make a difference for a combat build, and making a DDR machine on a fighter might just be a dumb idea to begin with.

2. I think a lot of the discussion has not addressed properly.

This block would accomplish several things.

1. Logic would be more compact, making it easier to integrate into small craft or organize large project
2. You could potentially save precious block IDs. Some of today's logic blocks might only exist in Compute-Space. Compute-space blocks might not need blocks IDs, or have a different list of block IDs, or just be 2D tiles, etc. You could add as many new logic blocks as you'd like and not affect the world block ID count.
   
3. Compute blocks could optimize logic calculations. When a user exits compute mode, the game creates a BooleanLogic object under the hood to call instead of simulating logic blocks.
4. Provides a pathway for more complicated player automation. You could even add some higher-level logic or routines and let players write their own tiny programs or even AI

1:When you make the same information more compact, you make it harder to read, not easier. Does allow you to fit more into the same space though.
2. So you want to remove the blocks from the game to have this computer thing instead? So me putting down an activator, linking that to doors so they open when i click it, and having the activator link to a not block that opens another door as an ultra simplistic airlock is now impossible without doing 10x the work? (Please dont comment on how shitty this airlock, its just an example of simple and easy logic work being made more complicated.)

This change will make a lot of everyday logic much more complicated than it currently is, and you can no longer see at a glance where the problems are. Have to go back and forth from menu in order to test anything instead of just pushing my button.

Adding more logic blocks i've always seen as pointless, and what would it do here? I would assume you could save certain pages and then use them inside other pages like calling a function; why would you need blocks at all? Just make your own flipflop and call that. More options for the sake of more options just confuses people who aren't familiar with it, and the ones that are don't need it.
3. I don't think logic blocks are that much of a power hog. Are there any logic builds that cause problems?
4. I don't even know what you're sugesting here. How would this be easier to achieve with 2D than the current blogic?

You shouldn't have to have this (from another thread):

This sums up my biggest issue with a lot of the arguments for this. I can make a bigger clusterfuck than this, it's easy! I can do it in 2D too. You cannot create a format that automatically makes logic neat and readable (If you can, collect your Nobels price instead of sitting here!) Making your logic readable is a skill in itself. Making this 2D won't change anything; you can allready make 2D logic, just dont go up!

To kind of hijack this, i think a lot of logic would be easier to keep track of if we had a way to view build mode similar to Dwarf Fortress: Seeing only a 2D plane that you can move up and down one block with 'q' and 'e'. This would also make it easier to interact with computers burried in system blocks :p

It sucks to take up a bunch of mass and be messy to do neat things with the current logic system.

I think you made a mistake in making this about two issues, because you can't take spaghetti monsters out of logic. I agree that it would be nice to have logic in smaller ships, but only up to a point. Again there's two issues here; cosmetic and combat value. Cosmetically, i'd say that i sympathize with what you want, but taking logic out of the game ruins a lot of the fun in building, for the sake of making some smaller builds viable. It won't make logic any easier, only harder. The entry level logic (button toggles light) becomes much more complicated and stops people getting started with logic.(You still need a physical button; you now have to link that button as input into your computer and link the output of the computer via a different interface to the light) Consider if we got tiny vehicles like mopeds we could drive around, but they weren't made with blocks; instead you open an interface and select engine, tires, color via dropdowns. You're not building a moped anymore, that's not a part of the game. To me this would do that to logic.
In terms of combat value i would love to see logic blocks (and cosmetic stuff) have 0 mass(or maybe 0.001), and not increase the number of modules needed in support systems.

 

[BDLS]

We'll just have to agree to disagree on all of your points. Sure you'll still have spaghetti monsters as you say, but I personally think reading and designing 2D diagrams is easier and cleaner looking. Yes, different pages would be part of that.

Also, I dislike the idea of shutting down an idea because it doesn't "feel like" the current game, as you say about going into a circuit editing grid. The sky is the limit with creativity, don't put a limit on what you can accomplish by trying to conform to a single style. Having lots of blocks to make simple circuits just isn't cool. How is putting 20 delay blocks on your fighter for some logic circuit fun? Why do they have to be so big for simple functions? Nothing would be that much more complicated at all with a logic computer. Hell, maybe ship cores themselves could be the area where you design your logic.

I don't really have much to add to this. Frankly, it kind of pains me that some people think the current system wouldn't be highly improved by condensing logic. Kind of repeating myself on all my opinions now, but it's interesting to hear other sides.

 

[Raisinbat]

Also, I dislike the idea of shutting down an idea because it doesn't "feel like" the current game

It isn't the current game. We place blocks to make ships; we dont make grids.

The sky is the limit with creativity, don't put a limit on what you can accomplish by trying to conform to a single style

This does NOT change what you can accomplish in starmade, only the amount of blocks needed to do it.

How is putting 20 delay blocks on your fighter for some logic circuit fun?

What the hell would your fighter need 20 delay blocks for? How is putting 20 delay squares into a grid more fun?

Nothing would be that much more complicated at all with a logic computer. Hell, maybe ship cores themselves could be the area where you design your logic.

It's not a colossal jump in dificulty, but you DO add complexity to it, especially simple circuits that can currently be done with 1 or 2 blocks, like clocks. You can no longer see the pulses moving around your ship, which helps tell where your circuit is goofing off. It pains ME that you think what i find to be the best voxel logic i've ever seen should be thrown out and dumped into a single block that's completely detached from your ship. If you want to make small ships with moving parts why dont you go make .gifs instead? No logic holding you back there, unless you also prefer making things out of cubes.

 

[Lone_Puppy]

I think there are a lot of valid arguments here.

• My main wish is to have a smaller footprint for logic in my ships.
• I like the existing way we configure logic in 3D space, which is why I would like to continue using it in a mini game inside a computer block.
• A 2D view would be handy, but when thinking of existing circuit diagrams they can stretch out a fair bit. But this would make it much easier for electrical engineers and could be useful for quick diagnostic and analysis of a circuit layout. Lets face it, our logic is pretty much integrated circuitry. Starmade moves away from flat circuit boards an gives us the awesome freedom to build it in 3D space in real-time, which I absolutely love. And in reality, this is how people are going to print their DIY home made technology on their 3D printers, not to mention the manufacturing industry. Which has pretty much been doing that with Microprocessors, memory circuits and most cosumer products anyway.
• Having relay/in/out connectors on a computer block would allow for mechanical control of rails, switches and other computers like the weapons, effect and whatever else comes up in future.
• Scripting would indeed make it quicker to configure, and perhaps a compromise could be reached where we could change the meta-data for the computer logic at the XML file level.

 

[Magrim]

For the record I do not advocate this change being forced on the playerbase. I see no problem with keeping the current system in place, so that existing ships don't get broken and the players that want to see their logic contraptions in action can.

I don't really see many balance concerns with having both methods in game if either the mass of logic blocks are reduced to zero or their mass is added to the ship weather they are condensed into a single block or not. There might be a small issue with adding the mass, one might be able to alter the position of the pip others see sufficiently to cause confusion.

Edited for clarity.

 

[TomW1605]

if this is anything like the lego mindstorms programming method (for those that know) i fully support it and think this should happen.

 

[Ithirahad]

2. So you want to remove the blocks from the game to have this computer thing instead? So me putting down an activator, linking that to doors so they open when i click it, and having the activator link to a not block that opens another door as an ultra simplistic airlock is now impossible without doing 10x the work? (Please dont comment on how shitty this airlock, its just an example of simple and easy logic work being made more complicated.)

Please...

We will still have our activators and buttons and AND/OR/NOT-gate blocks and flipfloppy things and whatnot, and they'll still be the simpler, easier way to build simple things like rail switchers, airlocks, and the like. All this suggestion does is eliminate massive spaghetti-monster logic that is a pain in the ass and takes up tons of space.

This sums up my biggest issue with a lot of the arguments for this. I can make a bigger clusterfuck than this, it's easy! I can do it in 2D too. You cannot create a format that automatically makes logic neat and readable (If you can, collect your Nobels price instead of sitting here!) Making your logic readable is a skill in itself. Making this 2D won't change anything; you can allready make 2D logic, just dont go up!

Yes, but organized large-scale logic usually doesn't fit into practical applications that aren't 500 meters long; a single block, however, certainly does. We have these things in our ships and stations called "systems" and "interiors" and, personally, rather than reserving a massive box to keep all my logic ducks in a row I would end up just cramming all the stuff in as small and form-fitting a space as possible - then come back later to find that there's an issue that I can't fix because I can't find anything.