Clampotron Sr. Docking Port PSA

[Tiron]

Should there be red arrows on engines then? And SRBs? Maybe even text saying THIS END TOWARD SPACE? When we get proper re-entry heat do we need red arrows pointing HEAT SHIELD THIS WAY?

Yes I'm drawing it to the extreme silly end, but consider that it'll take you longer to try and remember what way the arrow should point compared to just looking at the docking port when placing it. And the red arrow isn't the final solution, I've read and replied to threads where people couldn't figure out why their decoupler was sticking to the engine, even if it has an arrow AND description stating exactly what the arrow does.

If 'most people' can't figure out which way the docking port needs to go, and can't be bothered to actually look at it when placing it, then perhaps 'most people' should go play Hello Kitty Space Adventure II instead of KSP. If this game was to be dumbed down to the point that 'most people' could do it without a single error or learning along the way then it'd just be a single click game where you press the 'go to space' button.

Decouplers have an arrow because they have a very specific function, we don't need arrows on everything. Docking ports have an extremely clear visual indicating their function.

So to 'most people', stop being lazy and check your work while building, then test it thoroughly. It's part of the process.

Alright, let me see how far I can this apart.

1.) Engines and SRBs both have obvious, readily visible indications of which end is which. Specifically, big, obvious engine nozzles. Clamp-o-Trons and the Jr variation both have large, obvious shaping differences that indicate which side is which. The Clamp-o-Tron senior has small, subtle variations indicating which end is which. Someone that hadn't ever played the game before, and didn't know which end was which, might not be able to tell right now, frankly, because both sides have obvious 'doors', and the ring's so small it's barely noticeable unless you're looking for it specifically.

2.) The problem is not that people 'can't figure out which way it's supposed to go'(Noobs probably couldn't, but they'd figure it out after testing it), it's that it's difficult to tell which way it actually is, due to the differences being so subtle.

3.) I personally would prefer that 'most people' bought KSP, thus funding the development and ensuring that we got a finished game. As opposed to, say, Squad going bankrupt and development being stopped before completion, because everyone was playing Hello Kitty Online Adventures instead.

4.) Docking ports also have a specific function. Decouplers have an arrow because you couldn't tell which way it was pointing without it. Fuel lines, on the other hand, have arrows to indicate the flow direction just to make things easier. The fuel flows from the first part they're placed on to the second, and you can determine which end was placed first because only the first end is actually selectable after the fact. The arrows are just there to make it easier to tell after placement that it's placed correctly.

5.) Arrows don't insure you build it properly, witness people that still place decouplers the wrong way round. It just makes it easier to check that it is placed properly: You still have to check. You just don't have to zoom all the way in and squint.

Edited August 5, 2013 by Tiron

[annallia]

really, nobody here is wrong.

Although Tiron - your argument is flawed. if people dont check the orientation now - they won't check it if there is a pretty arrow on it.

as stated, people still get the decoupler the wrong way round. i dont even know which way the arrow should point!

this is simply a case of people not placing the part properly, if they dont check now, a huge sign pointing from it saying "THIS WAY UP DUMBFACE" wouldnt change a thing. the way i do it is place it properly the first time, if i'm unsure, delete it and place it properly the second time. pressing W twice if it should be inverted isnt exactly hard.

Exactly the same as the docking hub - squad didnt have written on each side "NOT A DOCKING PORT" people just made the mistake once, and never again.

equally the probe bodies models arent labeled with "DONT FORGET A BATTERY" and the solar panels arent labeled with "ONLY GENERATES POWER WHEN DEPLOYED". while the landing legs arent labeled with a directional arrow dispite the fact it isn't clear which way up they go before you first see the animation/deployment. there are certain things you have to learn in any game, like if reloading a half spent magazine loses the remaining rounds, or if fall damage or friendly fire is a thing.

SUMMARY:

Yes, an arrow would more clearly indicate the required orientation.

No, people wouldnt be more likely to check it.

There is a precedent of squad not labeling things that arent imediately obvious.

BUT:

all that said, mod an arrow onto your version if you feel it would help you, and feel free to distribute it to others if you feel it would help them.

PERSONALLY:

I like the aesthetics the way they are, I like the KW decouplers because they arent covered in arrows and stripes. I feel any obvious enough marking would either require the port to be thicker or just less aestheticly pleasing.

What DOES get my goat is that all the ports are of different depths. thats iritating!

I still think those should function as docking hubs... I mean cmon they look like what you would imagine a port would look like give us the damned hub!

That said your analogies don't quite work. You don't NEED a battery to work with a probe core, you could just as easily slap a few RTG's on to it since all the cores do have some capacity to hold a charge, albeit a minor one.

True solar panels are not labeled that they only generate once deployed but that is sort of a captain obvious type thing and even so, it is something fixable without abandoning the vessel, can't say the same for docking ports.

I will give you the point on landing legs, but counter with ladders show as they are deployed in the VAB allowing you know exactly how they have to be placed.

Point is there are only minor differences between the two, people will check if you make it more blatant. Don't want the arrows? Fine how about this instead: Modify the node from the outside half of the port allowing it only to connect with a decoupler/separator or another port. This way the game won't let you install them backwards at all while retaining their function.

[Tiron]

BUT:

all that said, mod an arrow onto your version if you feel it would help you, and feel free to distribute it to others if you feel it would help them.

I was trying, just to make the point about how easy it is, but I can't get the stupid texture to open properly. It opens all crazy corrupted. It gets better the larger I set the image size in the header, but it's still messed up at 1024 pixels and anything higher refuses to load. Sigh. Stupid useless tutorials...

Personally, I don't really need it, since I don't like the Seniors anyway. But it IS kinda hard to tell which way it's oriented without really looking at it closely. You can tell, but it's subtle. It can easily be made unsubtle. So why not do so?

And the arrows on the decouplers point towards the side that gets decoupled.

[shand]

I still think those should function as docking hubs... I mean cmon they look like what you would imagine a port would look like give us the damned hub!

That said your analogies don't quite work.

---

I will give you the point on landing legs, but counter with ladders show as they are deployed in the VAB allowing you know exactly how they have to be placed.

my analogies were graded from rediculous to sensible I'll let you judge where on the scale this comes up.

I actually think deployable things you should be able to toggle in the VAB. For example, i would quite like to see how low the landing legs go, but equally i would then like to be able to build the launch-vehicle tight to their undeployed position. but thats getting off-topic.

Tiron - what you using to try and open/edit it?

[Tiron]

my analogies were graded from rediculous to sensible I'll let you judge where on the scale this comes up.

I actually think deployable things you should be able to toggle in the VAB. For example, i would quite like to see how low the landing legs go, but equally i would then like to be able to build the launch-vehicle tight to their undeployed position. but thats getting off-topic.

Tiron - what you using to try and open/edit it?

Following the tutorial on the wiki, using Frhed to edit the header (as I've already got it) and GIMP 2.8 to open the file. Strangely, only the main view is corrupted, the preview in layers looks fine, at least on 1024. It looks like there's multiple interlaced versions of the texture layered on top of each other with a slight offset.

[Kerbface]

They really should be set to face out by default and require manual turning back to front, since that would be a fairly niche use of it.

[shand]

@kerbface - you mean like they do? docking face is pointing upwards by default.

@tiron - could you try using blender or unity to get the texture out? my experience only goes towards the finished product, but that might help?

[Kerbface]

@kerbface - you mean like they do? docking face is pointing upwards by default.

If that were the case, I wouldn't have to worry about whether it's on the right way. But I do. Because it doesn't always start off facing outwards from the surface. None of the docking ports consistently do.

[shand]

If that were the case, I wouldn't have to worry about whether it's on the right way. But I do. Because it doesn't always start off facing outwards from the surface. None of the docking ports consistently do.

Are you sure? they always default to pointing docking face UP in the VAB for me. if you are surface facing them i believe (if you havent pressed any buttons) they are default docking face OUT. the only situtaiton i can think that wouldnt be ideal is when you are placing on a sideways facing node (say a sideways stack), then you have to rotate using wasd, but the rotation behaviour is consistant.

PS: are you using Snap-to ("C")? that might help if not.

[Tiron]

@tiron - could you try using blender or unity to get the texture out? my experience only goes towards the finished product, but that might help?

It's already out, I think...it's just in .mbm format which GIMP evidently doesn't handle well. Or something. Don't know.

Since I was only really going to do it to prove a point, I probably just won't bother. The actual edit would be trivial, I just can't get the (@%( texture to open properly to edit it.

[karolus10]

Docking ports had clearly visible docking Collar on their docking side, I wouldn't knew that is even possible to place it using "wrong end" by mistake .

It's fairly easy to assess proper position of Medium and Large docking port by looking at their hatch.

You Always keep a Yellow handle on the bottom.

Edited August 5, 2013 by karolus10

[RoboRay]

Yeah but then you have to look at the 'port' side of it. What if you've got it in the middle of a stack? What they're saying is it needs like, arrows on the side or something.

How do you install something in the middle of a stack? When you place the port, you can see it. The side with the access hatch and little viewing window in the texture is the "outer" side that supports docking. If you are unwilling to take one second to glance at the part you just attached to make sure you installed it correctly, then there's no reason to add more orientation indicators... because you're not going to expend the one second it takes to look at them, either.

Edited August 5, 2013 by RoboRay

[Awass]

Unless you are able to construct ships with docking ports already placed in between two parts, you look at it as you're building. Sure an arrow wouldn't hurt but this really is a non issue. You might make this mistake once, but you'll never make it again.

Well sure, but it's really annoying when you make the mistake the first time, even if it is also the last. And you can put it in between 2 parts. For example, if you have it attached to one part above it and a decoupler below it.

[SuperWeegee4000]

I always found it quite easy to remember which side is which, but I can't dock at all, so....

[Awass]

Actually, the point is, most people don't examine parts after they place them. Having the opportunity to do so is irrelevant, especially since it's frankly, a needless bit of extra time and work in the middle of building stuff. Given the way the camera works in the VAB, actually looking at the port might not be the easiest thing to do: If it's very high up in the VAB, or very low, the camera rotation limits are going to get in your way.

The sides of it are easy to see.

But seriously, why are you arguing about this? It's a 5 second texture change I could do myself if I wanted to.

Edit: As soon as I find the textures but...

Well I got looking at it, and I just noticed, there IS a very slight shaping difference. It in fact does still have the 'lip' that the two smaller ports have, it's just...really tiny. You CAN use it to tell if a port's connected the right way or not from the side though, if you look closely enough.

Edit2: I'll also just add that there IS a mod around here called 'subassembly loader' that allows you load and attach an entire preassembled section. That same functionality is also on Squad's 'Planned Features' list, if you hadn't noticed...

Yeah. I mean it really is a non-issue like the say, but not because it's not a problem, but just because it's such an easy fix. Why not? Is there anyone who would actually be opposed to making a little change like this? However minor a problem it may be (although this one was pretty annoying), you may as well fix it.

Karolus10: Multiple posting, rest of post has been removed and merged bellow - please using "Edit Post option", thank You.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

EDIT_1:

Docking ports had clearly visible docking Collar on their docking side, I wouldn't knew that is even possible to place it using "wrong end" by mistake .

It's fairly easy to assess proper position of Medium and Large docking port by looking at their hatch.

You Always keep a Yellow handle on the bottom.

Well when you're using them for the first time and you're putting it between 2 parts and you're in a side view, it's easy to overlook.

EDIT_2:

How do you install something in the middle of a stack? When you place the port, you can see it. The side with the access hatch and little viewing window in the texture is the "outer" side that supports docking. If you are unwilling to take one second to glance at the part you just attached to make sure you installed it correctly, then there's no reason to add more orientation indicators... because you're not going to expend the one second it takes to look at them, either.

What if you're using a Sr. Docking port for the first time, and you're viewing it from the side, and it doesn't even occur to you that it might be backwards? That happened to me. I didn't check the part, not out of laziness, but out of ignorance.

Edited August 5, 2013 by karolus10
Post merge

[HeadHunter67]

And yet my peanutbutter has the need to inform me that it may contain nuts (I do find the wording disturbing... just the "may" part).

A peanut is neither a pea, nor a nut... discuss. Most peanut butter doesn't contain nuts, as peanuts are a legume.

I can see how some people might overlook placing the Sr. port on backwards. Unlike other ports, it doesn't have an easily distinctive shape.

Edited August 5, 2013 by HeadHunter67

[magnemoe]

Docking ports had clearly visible docking Collar on their docking side, I wouldn't knew that is even possible to place it using "wrong end" by mistake .

It's fairly easy to assess proper position of Medium and Large docking port by looking at their hatch.

You Always keep a Yellow handle on the bottom.

Thank you, I tried to look at the outer frame who is also different and did not see the handle.

Has had more issues with the decoplers, so fun to drop landers where the engines don't work. So I made a lot of checking of this on my last rocket to Jool, just to find that I forgot to add probe cores to the four satellites.

[shand]

What if you're using a Sr. Docking port for the first time, and you're viewing it from the side, and it doesn't even occur to you that it might be backwards? That happened to me. I didn't check the part, not out of laziness, but out of ignorance.

Then that's something to learn. would an arrow really help here? do you think the arrow would point towards the docking edge, or towards the structural edge? would you think the arrows would have to converge or be parallel? would you even think the arrow was important - if you were naive enough (note: being naive is not a bad or offensive thing, it just means you have no experience with the area in question) to not think the side of the model was relivent when placing, would you suddenly think different because of a slight asethetic difference?

The real issue here is this game is (currently) BASED around trial and error. Your spaceships evolve (sometimes literally). all my ships undergo docking testing with my spacestation if their docking target is critical and beyond LKE and all ships, or designs, undergo testing on kerbin, minmus or mun depending on their mission demands.

You learn something doesn't work doing a certain thing, and adjust it for future missions. In this case i reckon the number of people who repeat this error once they become aware of it is very low compared to for example, the decoupler (have solid white for the lower - stay connected edge and dashed red and yellow upper - explodey edge)

[RoboRay]

What if you're using a Sr. Docking port for the first time, and you're viewing it from the side, and it doesn't even occur to you that it might be backwards? That happened to me. I didn't check the part, not out of laziness, but out of ignorance.

In that case, the arrow wouldn't help either. You'd say "Does the arrow show the side that I attach to my ship, or the side that I will be docking with? I dunno... why isn't Squad making this easier for me?"

I guess you could ask Squad to stencil one side with big orange letters spelling out "Point this side toward the other ship!" but I think a lot of people would find that aesthetically unappealing.

I think the hatch marking makes it about as obvious as it can be using the texture to impart information. If the part really does require installation instructions, they should simply be added to the text description of the part in the VAB.

Edited August 5, 2013 by RoboRay

[karolus10]

How do you install something in the middle of a stack? When you place the port, you can see it. The side with the access hatch and little viewing window in the texture is the "outer" side that supports docking. If you are unwilling to take one second to glance at the part you just attached to make sure you installed it correctly, then there's no reason to add more orientation indicators... because you're not going to expend the one second it takes to look at them, either.

Amen !

Decouplers are different, because one of their end has "cutting" edge and some of them look same on both ends, but docking port's won't... even if You pick the part and put it between stages with closed eyes (thumbs up, if you manage to do it) You still should see from side which side is which .

EDIT_1:

What if you're using a Sr. Docking port for the first time, and you're viewing it from the side, and it doesn't even occur to you that it might be backwards? That happened to me. I didn't check the part, not out of laziness, but out of ignorance.

Nearly every stack part default position allow to add them in right orientation when put on top/bottom of the stack, so it should give some clues, also if You put it wrong in the first time it's very unlikely to do it another time .

About installation instructions for docking part... I won't think it is necessary to instruct players that docking ports should be "Hatch outwards", Beter would be adding docking tutorial scenario that surely will made auto-explanatory how docking ports works .

Edited August 5, 2013 by karolus10

[Tiron]

How do you install something in the middle of a stack? When you place the port, you can see it. The side with the access hatch and little viewing window in the texture is the "outer" side that supports docking. If you are unwilling to take one second to glance at the part you just attached to make sure you installed it correctly, then there's no reason to add more orientation indicators... because you're not going to expend the one second it takes to look at them, either.

Subassembly loader. Or the planned stock implementation of the same feature. Which of course requires that you first build the subassembly, of course, unless you get it from someone else...

[Blue]

On an unrelated note, I've manged to verify that it is possible to do multi-SR port docking.

To be honest, this only was done to prove it could be done-- and was done in version 0.2 before the SAS update. But now I know that if I want to dock up two of my heavy interplantary spacecraft and use one of them as an expendable stage, I can.

[shand]

On an unrelated note, I've manged to verify that it is possible to do multi-SR port docking.

SNIP

To be honest, this only was done to prove it could be done-- and was done in version 0.2 before the SAS update. But now I know that if I want to dock up two of my heavy interplantary spacecraft and use one of them as an expendable stage, I can.

ooo interesting - i kinda assumed it worked but hadnt tried it. how does she hold up? i'm contemplating using a combination of snr and normal docking ports for my mega structures.

[annallia]

Amen !

Decouplers are different, because one of their end has "cutting" edge and some of them look same on both ends, but docking port's won't... even if You pick the part and put it between stages with closed eyes (thumbs up, if you manage to do it) You still should see from side which side is which .

EDIT_1:

Nearly every stack part default position allow to add them in right orientation when put on top/bottom of the stack, so it should give some clues, also if You put it wrong in the first time it's very unlikely to do it another time .

About installation instructions for docking part... I won't think it is necessary to instruct players that docking ports should be "Hatch outwards", Beter would be adding docking tutorial scenario that surely will made auto-explanatory how docking ports works .

The problem is the side view isn't blatantly obvious on the Sr. port. And while it may be true that looking at it from the top/bottom the camera doesn't always allow said view on say a larger build.

I have decided on a little test: Find the one with the upside down port *Hums "one of these things is not like the other, one of these things does not belong"*

#1

#2

#3

[Blue]

ooo interesting - i kinda assumed it worked but hadnt tried it. how does she hold up? i'm contemplating using a combination of snr and normal docking ports for my mega structures.

Works like a dream-- that example is exactly what it looks like with both spacecraft being identical: Both are my 'Philadelphia IV' Interplanetary ships. 4 Orange tanks, 2 narrow long tanks, ASAS, probe, 2 large RCS tanks, 12 Nuclear engines. Tested it at 100% thrust, looked solid, and still can have a payload on top of the pushed spacecraft.

And that's despite the fact that, as shown, only 3 of the four ports are docked. It was very difficult, but I would recommend docking unfueled spacecraft of that size, and refueling them once they're docked. 3/4 Ports was first attempt, and I didn't want to bother with trying it over again.