EnglishGermanFrenchRussianItalianSpanish
Log inRegister
 
What is currently used for factory chain delivery?
Post new topic Reply to topic Goto page 1, 2  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
Reven





Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Posts: 1089 on topic
Location: HMS Indomitable
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Tue, 14. Nov 17, 03:19    Post subject: What is currently used for factory chain delivery? Reply with quote Print

I'm still getting used to some of the changes in AP after a long time away from the community. I'm setting up some large factory chains and have been using CLS to great effect. I made some significant placement decisions based on the idea of using a TL as an intermediary warehouse, and was surprised to find that CLS doesn't support a TL as a supplier. Since I see it commonly suggested to use a TL as a warehouse, I'm curious what people are using instead of CLS in order to use a TL as a warehouse.


_________________
Ex Turbo Modestum
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 2335 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Tue, 14. Nov 17, 04:47    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

As of X3 Reunion, CLS1's usefulness is now comparatively reduced [*], as factories can be connected to each other into complexes (by means of Complex Construction Kits.) As far as being unable to assign TLs into the chain: could it be that it's a pilot level thing, requiring the pilot to train to a certain level before being able to interact with TLs? (I seem to recall something along these lines... but my memory could be flawed - it's been a looooong time since I've needed to use CLS1, except for a recent revisit of X2.) [**] Also, because TS and TP ships can no longer dock at TLs (as of Reunion), CLS2 ships using TLs as waypoints must have Transporter Devices installed.

So, complex construction kits (or "tubes") are the usual way to link factories to each other in proximity. For linking complexes to each other, I would say the usual route is to use CLS2 (external commodity logistics.)


[*] As far as I'm aware, in absolute terms the functionality is the same (unless interactions with TLs have indeed been downgraded) - the however, strong new options render CLS1 *relatively* of less use than before (previously, it was essential - now it has to a large extent been superseded by other options.)

[**] Quickly checking the Bonus Pack documentation shows me that the CLS pilot must be at least Supplier (level 3) in order to interact with a TL. The notes make mention of delivering *to* TLs, which implies that TLs can be assigned as consumers, but I found no explicit mention either way regarding setting them as suppliers.


_________________
-
The unholy one is curiously free of illegal cargo.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Reven





Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Posts: 1089 on topic
Location: HMS Indomitable
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Tue, 14. Nov 17, 06:14    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Thanks for the tips. Complexes don't interact with my OCD well. Unless I take the time to perfectly align the transfer ports the game puts the linkage tubes in all sorts of strange and unusual configurations that drive me nuts. I find a nice neat grid of stations and a few CLS transports is still preferable. Plus the size and scope of what I'm putting together (which is a multi-sector affair) would be prohibitively large for a complex.

With CLS a TL can be a destination (consumer in the CLS parlance) but not a supplier. Which is a little odd to me, so I've adjusted the script on my installation to make it work.

Still, with the number of different sites that recommend the use of large TLs as a warehouse, I'm curious what logistics scripts those people are using.


_________________
Ex Turbo Modestum
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Timsup2nothin





Joined: 22 Jan 2009



PostPosted: Tue, 14. Nov 17, 06:51    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

I use TLs as warehouses, and use CLS2 almost exclusively...though I am on a mission to learn more about CLS1.

By the way, I suffer from the same brand of OCD regarding complex tubing as you do, and I have three words: Tubeless Complex Mod. It isn't even really a mod, since it doesn't pop the modified tag, and everything lands where you put it.


_________________
Trapper Tim's Guide to CLS 2

On Her Majesty's Secret Service-Dead is Dead, and he is DEAD

Not a DiD, so I guess it's a DiDn't, the story of my first try at AP
Part One, in progress

HEY! AP!! That's new!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 2335 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Tue, 14. Nov 17, 06:59    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Reven wrote:
Complexes don't interact with my OCD well.

Fair enough - and yes, they DO make odd-looking messes! One way around this is to place the stations atop each other (I mean, literally occupying the exact same space) and quickly link them - you then have a plex that looks like a single factory, which is either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on personal preference. Of course, this only works for multiples of identical factories.

In any case station arrays with some CLS1 freighters buzzing among them have their own charm which I miss from the X2 days. Smile That was in fact one of my main reasons for re-playing that golden oldie recently.


Reven wrote:
Still, with the number of different sites that recommend the use of large TLs as a warehouse, I'm curious what logistics scripts those people are using.

Most likely CLS2 - in fact, it's the only one I know of (among vanilla scripts, at least - there may be something else in "mod-land", but I don't visit there) that handles deliveries both to and from TLs with equal aplomb.


_________________
-
The unholy one is curiously free of illegal cargo.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Reven





Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Posts: 1089 on topic
Location: HMS Indomitable
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Tue, 14. Nov 17, 18:21    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

RAVEN.myst wrote:
Fair enough - and yes, they DO make odd-looking messes! One way around this is to place the stations atop each other (I mean, literally occupying the exact same space)


In the past, safe placement would kick in if you tried to put a factory too close to another factory. Can you actually superimpose them in X3AP? Do they not mutually destruct? I may have to try this.

And thanks Timsup2nothin for the tubeless complex mod tip. I will definitely be playing around with the complexes and trying these out. In the past, I spent hours with a repositioning script getting the tubes to line up so in order to satisfy my quest for order (I'm not actually that compulsive IRL, but I hate having a less than optimal result in the game), and I just don't have the time to do that with the size of the complex I'm building.

In the mean time, I have made some changes to the CLS1 script so it will also pick up from a ship. Right now there is still the requirement that you have to physically be able to land on the ship you are picking up from, so for a TS you would need an Aran or an Ozias, but I can probably remove that limitation too. I'll post more on this in the mods forum - I may see if I can get this patch approved so it will go in the official signed version.


_________________
Ex Turbo Modestum
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 2335 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Tue, 14. Nov 17, 18:39    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Reven wrote:
RAVEN.myst wrote:
One way around this is to place the stations atop each other (I mean, literally occupying the exact same space)


In the past, safe placement would kick in if you tried to put a factory too close to another factory. Can you actually superimpose them in X3AP? Do they not mutually destruct? I may have to try this.

In X3R, superimposed factories would grind each other up, but as of X3TC, they do so until you connect them with tubes (visible or otherwise, I *assume*), at which point it becomes effectively a single station and no more mutual damage. (By the way, a tip in case you decide to do this: if you have to wait while you send away your TL or TLs to fetch some tubes, SETA will mitigate the damage - it accelerates the shield recharge but not the damage rate, so the shield recharge can even keep up. Alternatively, if you go out-of-sector, the damage will stop while you're elsewhere.)

If you decide to give complexes a try, here's an important tip should you build large complexes: This is a method developed by a forum user called 'glenmcd', and it addresses performance degradation of large plexes. The principle is that instead of bolting on factories sequentially (resulting in a more or less linear internal arrangement), instead you connect them as a 'binary tree': connect factories in pairs, then connect those pairs to each other in pairs, then those resulting ones, etc. What happens under the hood is that instead of internal processing taking place linearly, it follows a branching and thus much shorter path. For example, a plex with 128 stations done the conventional way would cause internal processing to follow paths up to 127 steps long, while a binary tree arrangement would make the depth of the path only some 7 or 8 steps - a huge reduction in processing load. I'm not in the habit of building large plexes (I tend to rely much more on extensive trade than on heavy industrialisation), but even in moderate-sized plexes I notice a modest reduction to frame-rate drops. The "perfect" case is to build your plexes with factories numbering in powers of 2, but it's not strictly necessary.

Reven wrote:
In the past, I spent hours with a repositioning script getting the tubes to line up so in order to satisfy my quest for order (I'm not actually that compulsive IRL, but I hate having a less than optimal result in the game), and I just don't have the time to do that with the size of the complex I'm building.

I wouldn't call that "OCD", I'd instead say that you have a proper aesthetic sensibility. Smile

Reven wrote:
In the mean time, I have made some changes to the CLS1 script so it will also pick up from a ship. Right now there is still the requirement that you have to physically be able to land on the ship you are picking up from, so for a TS you would need an Aran or an Ozias, but I can probably remove that limitation too.

Quite likely - the CLS2 script leverages transporter devices when installed, and failing that, transfers while both ships are docked at the same station. I reckon you could likely get CLS1 to operate similarly.


_________________
-
The unholy one is curiously free of illegal cargo.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jlehtone



MEDALMEDALMEDAL

Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 16864 on topic
Location: GalNet BBS
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Tue, 14. Nov 17, 22:18    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

RAVEN.myst wrote:
The principle is that instead of bolting on factories sequentially (resulting in a more or less linear internal arrangement), instead you connect them as a 'binary tree'

Do you mean:

Sequential:
Code:
1. A B C D
2. A B c-d-H
3. A b-c-d-H
4. a-b-c-d-H

Binary:
Code:
1.   A B C D
2.   A B c-d-H
3. K-a-b c-d-H
4.   a-b-c-d-H


I have followed neither, exactly. I build first, say 20 Stations*. Then I link some pairs to create temporary hubs. Then link the rest of Stations to those hubs in semi-random order. Finally, sequentially link hubs until only one remains:
Code:
1. A B C_D
2. A B_C
3. A_B
4. A



[*] I did try the "all superimposed" and they did blow up before I got them linked. If I would build just some and link them, then there would be no object to snap on and perfect superimposement of the next batch would be in jeopardy.


_________________
Goner Pancake Protector X
Insanity included at no extra charge.
There is no Box. I am the sand.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nanook
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)



Joined: 15 May 2003
Posts: 25830 on topic
Location: In the X-Universe spanning two millenia
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Wed, 15. Nov 17, 00:45    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

RAVEN.myst wrote:
Reven wrote:
Complexes don't interact with my OCD well.

Fair enough - and yes, they DO make odd-looking messes! One way around this is to place the stations atop each other (I mean, literally occupying the exact same space) and quickly link them - you then have a plex that looks like a single factory, which is either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on personal preference. Of course, this only works for multiples of identical factories....


Wrong! Razz Collision damage stops as soon as you connect overlying stations to a hub. I've built complete complexes of many different overlapping station types many times with no ill effects. I've even enclosed complete complexes inside of a mine, with only the odd bits poking through. The results of these complexes look a lot more 'industrial' than any of the individual stations in the game. Very Happy


_________________
Having an Acronym Attack? See the Ego FAQ. Also now for Terran Conflict and Albion Prelude.
NOT an Egosoft employee.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Snafu_X3





Joined: 28 Jan 2009
Posts: 3827 on topic
Location: London, UK
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Wed, 15. Nov 17, 02:13    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Nanook wrote:
Wrong! Razz Collision damage stops as soon as you connect overlying stations to a hub.
..or leave the sector. So first tow your mine(s) to appropriate spots, then start building on top of them (I find 4 stations + links adequate) while parked next to a gate before you leave the sector

Make sure your plex hub is within range of a friendly patrol; I've lost many 'plexes like these to random hostiles shooting up the area: "defend station" doesn't work adequately for 'plexes (it's prolly not been adapted to TC/AP plexes) & 'defend position' has a small radius & tends to be drawn out of.. err, position Sad

For the TC HUB plot I tend to drag the 5 highest producing Si 'roids near to the gate in US7,16 then set up my uChip/xtal processing there. Occasionally a pirate base spawns IS or nearby, but this is of little consequence as a patrolling Disco or similar triplex scout will spot it within few minutes; after that I can deal with it as necessary


_________________
Wiki X:R 1st Tit capping
Wiki X3:TC vanilla: Guide to generic missions, Guide to finding & capping Aran
Never played AP; all X3 advice is based on vanilla+bonus pack TC or before: AP has not changed much WRT general advice.

I know how to spell teladiuminumiumium, I just don't know when to stop!

Dom (Wiki Moderator) Cool DxDiag
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 2335 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
modified
PostPosted: Wed, 15. Nov 17, 03:15    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Nanook wrote:
RAVEN.myst wrote:
Reven wrote:
Complexes don't interact with my OCD well.

Fair enough - and yes, they DO make odd-looking messes! One way around this is to place the stations atop each other (I mean, literally occupying the exact same space) and quickly link them - you then have a plex that looks like a single factory, which is either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on personal preference. Of course, this only works for multiples of identical factories....


Wrong! Razz Collision damage stops as soon as you connect overlying stations to a hub. I've built complete complexes of many different overlapping station types many times with no ill effects. I've even enclosed complete complexes inside of a mine, with only the odd bits poking through. The results of these complexes look a lot more 'industrial' than any of the individual stations in the game. Very Happy

You misunderstand me: I meant that when the stations are of the same type the result is very neat-looking: you see just the one factory (that's what I meant by "it only works etc." - that perfect neatness) - I didn't mean that overlapping can't be done with mismatched types for whatever reason. Wink As you mentioned, one can hide the 'plex in a 'roid, or can stack matching factories on top of each other in separate groups and then interlink them, or overlap in any which way desired.

As I mentioned elsewhere, once the stations are connected to each other collision detection stops (as of X3TC - if I recall correctly, this does NOT work in Reunion.)

jlehtone wrote:
I did try the "all superimposed" and they did blow up before I got them linked. If I would build just some and link them, then there would be no object to snap on and perfect superimposement of the next batch would be in jeopardy.

All I can assume is that you left them up a long time before linking them - which is understandable if you built 20 stations before starting interlinking. The ways around that are, as previously described, to do all waiting in SETA (slows down the damage dramatically, but may not be enough - and may be system-dependent in some way, possibly) or to go OoS (thus disabling collision detection altogether) for any waiting intervals.

As to what I mean by the binary tree (which is quite hard to put into words, hehehe), I'll try to show it similarly(ish) to how you did. Letter groupings indicate pairs (and then quadruplets, etc) of factories linked and with their own hub:

A B C D E F G H
AB CD EF GH
ABCD EFGH
ABCDEFGH

The result is, instead of 7 linear links, a tree with 4 layers and therefore maximum link depth of 3 (the benefit increases exponentially with greater factory numbers.) Now, in the above, should one want to expand this complex with the addition of say another 8 (or fewer) stations, one would then treat the new stations the same way, then connect the two complexes. If adding a larger number of stations, it depends - let's say we want to add another 24 stations (yes, I'm using "perfect" numbers for the example, but approximate numbers work OK), then we would build 8 of them and then link them with the existing 8 for a binary plex of 16, make another binary plex of 16, and link them together - the resulting 32-station plex would have maximum link length of 5 instead of 31.

What you described you did sounds to me like a partial implementation. Although not mathematically optimal, it would certainly give partial benefits (with a 20-factory plex it may well not be noticeable unless you have several such plexes, though.)

As for the "no object to snap on" issue: yes, I understand that, and what I've done in the past to get around that has been to build in a matrix, starting a new layer before interlinking an old, to give myself a new point of reference; also, in smaller plexes, I use the placement of the hub as a snap-to reference point - thus, I place the hub with displacement in only one axis, so that I have its location to help me line up subsequent (eg. if I build a small 2-SPP plex, I will extrude the hub directly down - then, when adding to the plex later, I can line up additional stations on it and only have one dimension, the vertical, to get right visually, with lateral placement already taken care of.)


IMPORTANT NOTE: When linking two hubs together with a CCK, the first hub selected will be the one that is "kept", while the other disappears to be replaced with the necessary tubing. This makes it simple to plan and predict where the final single hub will be.


_________________
-
The unholy one is curiously free of illegal cargo.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff


Last edited by RAVEN.myst on Wed, 15. Nov 17, 03:27; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Timsup2nothin





Joined: 22 Jan 2009



PostPosted: Wed, 15. Nov 17, 03:24    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

RAVEN.myst wrote:

You misunderstand me: I meant that when the stations are of the same they the result is very neat-looking - I didn't mean that overlapping can't be done with mismatched types for whatever reason. Wink


I overlap them for aesthetic reasons... or perhaps I just miss playing with blocks. Connecting wheat farms into sky dominating fields of hexagons is cool. Building factories "on the surface" of an asteroid is cool. Linking the tanks and tubes of various Boron stations into a giant hamster trail construct is cool. I went from OCD about how the tubes would lay themselves out to OCD about imagining how various materials would be moved around in these huge constructs.

Anyway, just to make sure it is clear to all:

When you leave the sector the collision damage stops, and shields will start recharging. You can stack stations until the shields on the first one get low, then jump out. Wait until the shields are fully recharged, and go back in to stack up more. Rinse and repeat as needed, then you can connect away and all will be secure.


_________________
Trapper Tim's Guide to CLS 2

On Her Majesty's Secret Service-Dead is Dead, and he is DEAD

Not a DiD, so I guess it's a DiDn't, the story of my first try at AP
Part One, in progress

HEY! AP!! That's new!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 2335 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Wed, 15. Nov 17, 03:49    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Timsup2nothin wrote:

I overlap them for aesthetic reasons...

Yup, same here - the only reason for me to do so (or perhaps it's the blocks thing for me, too.... Razz )
I also used to get creative with placements, going for particular effects: one chip complex for THE HUB (TC Hub plot, which merits capitals for ALL its letters, not just the initials!) was a "CPU tower" - quite simply, a fairly narrow horizontal cross-section and very very tall. I've also built some plexes (most often with Terran stations, in X3AP where one can build essentially all stations, and right from the start as with other races) where stations were built protectively around the docking hub, so the hub was recessed somewhat (though not so much so as to become a navigational hazard - then again, I usually spend my time out of sectors where my assets are concentrated, in any case.) Some stations have bits that can be nicely lined up, or which almost seem to slot into each other, if placed a certain way, resulting in fairly appealing (relatively speaking!) effects.

But, lately, I've spent less and less time building complexes, and focusing more and more on bridging supply-demand via distribution rather than by production. Of course, some wares ARE actually in insufficient supply even after being moved around, but there I tend to keep an eye out for NPC wanting me to build those particular stations for them. I think that, just for the hell of it, my next major industrial development will be a sector packed with factories and CLS1 freighters (not all that many of the latter are even required - the script is really quite efficient, especially when working intra-sector) - in fact, I'd like to see how this compares performance-wise to a large complex...


_________________
-
The unholy one is curiously free of illegal cargo.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Reven





Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Posts: 1089 on topic
Location: HMS Indomitable
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Wed, 15. Nov 17, 21:50    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

I did a stacked complex - I'm quite happy with the result in general, though I am limiting myself to a few stations per stack.

I still want to use a ship I can't necessarily land on as a storage warehouse (the Atmospheric Lifter just begs to be used that way and its medium ship docking is broken), so I employed CLS2 but I just discovered that CLS2 doesn't honor the maximums set with dockware. CLS1 will deliver only up to that point, but CLS2 seems blithely unaware of it. I don't know yet if this is by design or a long-standing bug.


_________________
Ex Turbo Modestum
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
jlehtone



MEDALMEDALMEDAL

Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 16864 on topic
Location: GalNet BBS
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Wed, 15. Nov 17, 22:18    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Reven wrote:
I just discovered that CLS2 doesn't honor the maximums set with dockware. CLS1 will deliver only up to that point, but CLS2 seems blithely unaware of it. I don't know yet if this is by design or a long-standing bug.

That is definitely a "known feature" that has existed on X3R, X3TC, and X3AP versions of the scripts.

A CLS1 that delivers to PHQ does check the Dockware limits.
A CAG working for PHQ does check the limits too.

A CAG of some other station does not check the limits, when it is selling products to the PHQ.
A CLS2 does not check the limits.

The CLS2 is configurable. Player can set it to unload whatever amount. Player can implement limits with the waypoints. Therefore, CLS2 does not need the Dockware.

Does it, Tim?


_________________
Goner Pancake Protector X
Insanity included at no extra charge.
There is no Box. I am the sand.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic Reply to topic Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
Control Panel
Login Data
The time now is Sun, 19. Nov 17, 04:56

All times are GMT + 2 Hours


Board Security

Copyright © EGOSOFT 1989-2017
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Template created by Avatar & BurnIt!
Debug: page generation = 2.68801 seconds, sql queries = 29