[WIP] Kip Engineering: Now updating - Universal Docking Ports

[CaptainKipard]

I am sorry about my ignorance, but can't it be done the same way with how KAS containers are slotted into their holders, or like how box sat's modules can be slotted into the frames?

Oh... you're right. I completely forgot about those. Unfortunately that still doesn't solve the problem of the small size.

[RainDreamer]

I am thinking since they could be taken out by the player away from the main parts, it could be easier to click , even if they are small, since they are not in a bundle of things and you may misclick on other things.

Also, how small is this thing, actually, comparing to a Kerbal? I thought this would be boxsat's size at least, since you say it is compatible with a jr. docking port. Even if the hard drive is half the size of a box sat module, it would still provide enough surface area for a click when a kerbal holds it.

[CaptainKipard]

I am thinking since they could be taken out by the player away from the main parts, it could be easier to click , even if they are small, since they are not in a bundle of things and you may misclick on other things.

I don't understand what you mean. Please provide some drawings. They make everything clear.

I played around with the idea of dividing the thing up in a way that you have two "large" slots on the sides, but it just looked bad.

Also, how small is this thing, actually, comparing to a Kerbal? I thought this would be boxsat's size at least, since you say it is compatible with a jr. docking port. Even if the hard drive is half the size of a box sat module, it would still provide enough surface area for a click when a kerbal holds it.

The docking collar you see on top there fits the Docking Port Jr; The part is 0.625m wide.

[RainDreamer]

I don't understand what you mean. Please provide some drawings. They make everything clear.

I played around with the idea of dividing the thing up in a way that you have two "large" slots on the sides, but it just looked bad.

I mean something like this:

You can take a hard drive out, then put it on the ground, away from all the other things that you may accidently click on, and you load science in it, then you put it back.

About the large slots problem...I am not sure what to do with it. Maybe a sliding door to cover it up?

[CaptainKipard]

I'm making this thing based on this thing because it seems to be dead.

Criticise.

Also I'm still open to ideas for the science capsule because I don't like the idea of tiny parts.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Cpt. Kipard

[RainDreamer]

So it is another 4 kerbal pod? At a glance it reminds me of something you would put on a space station. Looks very interesting though.

[CaptainKipard]

Whether it's a four-person I haven't decided yet.

And guys. Telling me it looks good or interesting is not criticism. At least say what you don't like about it.

[RainDreamer]

Well, it is still...quite barebone and I have no idea what each part represent yet to give a conclusive criticism.

I think the widen bottom is a bit bare comparing to the top with lots of visual detail, but that may change once there are textures.

[toadicus]

Kip, for the science pod you could probably eliminate the need for multiple parts by assigning allowRepeatedSubjects = True in the ModuleScienceContainer definition. Since it's possible that could be considered a little cheaty, you could make sure that once science goes in, the only way to get it back is via recovery or transmission using dataIsCollectable = False, or give it an absolute capacity using capacity = N, where N is an integer describing the maximum number of experiment runs (not data) it can hold.

Here are all the fields you can define for a ModuleScienceContainer:

	[KSPField]
	public bool dataIsStorable;

	[KSPField]
	public bool CollectOnlyOwnData;

	[KSPField]
	public bool dataIsCollectable;

	[KSPField]
	public bool allowRepeatedSubjects;

	[KSPField]
	public float storageRange;

	[KSPField]
	public bool dataIsRecoverable;

	[KSPField]
	public string collectActionName;

	[KSPField]
	public string storeActionName;

	[KSPField]
	public string reviewActionName;

	[KSPField]
	public int capacity;

	[KSPField]
	public bool evaOnlyStorage;

Most of them are pretty self-explanatory, but if you want any info on the specifics I can try to help out.

[CaptainKipard]

Thanks again. That looks like a nice workaround. Does CollectOnlyOwnData limit collection to only the data that was generated or stored by Kerbals? Is it per-Kerbal?

[toadicus]

CollectOnlyOwnData is the one I know the least about, and I'm guessing that it prevents the container from storing an experiment that originated from another part. So, you could put it on a thermometer to make sure the player doesn't stash a bunch of barometer data on it. That's mostly a guess... but I'd leave it at "false" for now.

[RWB Barker]

I'm making this thing based on this thing because it seems to be dead.

Criticise.

Also I'm still open to ideas for the science capsule because I don't like the idea of tiny parts.

http://i.imgur.com/SzyOV0C.png

How will Kerbals enter or leave?

[I.O.M.]

http://i.imgur.com/SzyOV0C.png

I'm happy to see you decided to keep this concept alive. It looks good so far.

Some thoughts...

I think the hand rails along the top portion are unnecessary. They don't seem very practical.

Where will the crew hatch be? Bottom? Side?

I can't wait to see it textured

[CaptainKipard]

I think the hand rails along the top portion are unnecessary. They don't seem very practical.

If you have any ideas for practical greebles then I'm all eyes.

Where will the crew hatch be? Bottom?

How will Kerbals enter or leave?

Probably through the bottom.

[CaptainKipard]

I'm redoing the Universal docking ports right now. I need some criticism and ideas for the textures and geometry. Do your worst.

[CaptainKipard]

Another colouring experiment. Still looking for feedback.

[Svm420]

I like to the 2nd background i guess. Looks more metallic. Not sure how I feel about the colors of the rings themselves. They seem to saturated, i think, though in game lighting and what not may change my opinion. I am not sure what I would want, and not that i don't like what you have I'd download either one of those day one. Just wanted to give you some feedback though both look better than what we have so either way improvement.

On second looking I like the second picture except the blue just feels plasticy rather than metallic if that makes sense I like the black/dark gray. I know you're probably trying to make the ring visually distinct.

[Eleven]

I loved the Universal Docking Ports when they first came out, the only thing I would criticize is the thickness of them, especially the smaller they got. If I remember correctly, the standard size one was actually thicker than the largest one. The only other thing I would change would be to make them have that 'stock like' look and feel

[CaptainKipard]

On second looking I like the second picture except the blue just feels plasticy rather than metallic if that makes sense I like the black/dark gray. I know you're probably trying to make the ring visually distinct.

I was going for "painted". I'll see what I can do.

I loved the Universal Docking Ports when they first came out, the only thing I would criticize is the thickness of them, especially the smaller they got. If I remember correctly, the standard size one was actually thicker than the largest one. The only other thing I would change would be to make them have that 'stock like' look and feel

I know. Others have complained about the thickness of the little parts (it may have been you even). All the parts are the same thickness actually, but I'll make the small ones thinner.

As for stock-alike textures, that's something I'm fundamentally dead set against. I'm aiming to make all of my textures as realistic as I can. I'll do my part in dragging this game into the next generation, and I'll make you and everyone else like it.

[funk]

I've been using your ports a lot and like them very much. Nevertheless if youre reworking it I've some suggestions, which come to mind when thinking about playing with them.

1. Mass: In cases I need strong connections, I'm using other ports, because especially the 3,75m port is a lightweight. Perfect would be a tweakable for mass between predefined magnitudes.

2. I need a 5m port!!! If it has a 3,75m node it would be enough. I'm currently using Spaceys 5m port.

3. Wishes for the future: Having a procedural part like docking port. Of course standard sizes (perhaps 1,875m?) only, but if you can choose in the VAB which nodes are used, select mass etc., it has the potential to replace all the other ports.

Keep up the good work!

PS. They are really thick, I always try to clip them into other parts...

[FreeThinker]

Exactly why is mass such an important factor when determining the strength? Also instead of using a fixes Mass, would a dynamicly set mass also work. That way , the mass would only be active when you connect, instead of always.

[CaptainKipard]

Well, guys choose. Either it's thin and therefore lightweight or thick and heavy. I'm not making magic here.

[funk]

Hmm, ... if I can choose... both ;-). If you use the same textures it won't harm. Perhaps FSmeshswitch?

[FreeThinker]

Well, guys choose. Either it's thin and therefore lightweight or thick and heavy. I'm not making magic here.

I think you can do both by increasing mass after you made a connection

[toadicus]

Kip, I like the second version better in general. It may just be the image, but the grab-latches (I think that's what they are) on the smallest ring look a little "messy" for lack of a better word. Also, the round widgets on the outer two rungs look a little "pixel-y", to me. Again, might just be the image. I generally agree with sentiments that the smaller sizes ought to be thinner.

Regarding the mass: personally I'd stick with a fairly realistic mass using aluminum or something as the primary material. If people want to tweak it heavier to get better connection strength with KJR, they can just use a modulemanager patch (I'll even write one if asked).