Is this dock configuration safe?

[mr.WHO]

The station plan let me build the dock close to eachother yet the "approach path visualisation (orange lines) overlap each other - I wouldn't want some kind of strange collison avoidance shenanigans once the construction is finished:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/ ... 1664691507

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

I am not certain... personally I never allow the capital docking volumes to overlap... just in case.

However, if the plotting allows you to do it then the reasonable assumption is that it is safe - otherwise it is another bug for Egosoft to add to their list.

[pref]

Yeah, i'd put 3 verticals between each to be sure.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

Yeah, i'd put 3 verticals between each to be sure.

I typically do 4 Argon M Habitat modules plus 3 connectors (in an alternating chain) between E-Docks.

[pref]

I typically do 4 Argon M Habitat modules plus 3 connectors (in an alternating chain) between E-Docks.

With 3 you have no overlaps, and AI manages fine even with many L ships around. As you can extend beyond plot boundaries you can go for greater distance, but then docking takes longer from the rally point.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

I typically do 4 Argon M Habitat modules plus 3 connectors (in an alternating chain) between E-Docks.

With 3 you have no overlaps, and AI manages fine even with many L ships around. As you can extend beyond plot boundaries you can go for greater distance, but then docking takes longer from the rally point.

Not so sure about that, for that to be true the gaps between the bounding boxes would have to be at least the height of an Argon M habitation module - which is not the case IME (based on building lots of stations using the 4+3 formulae.

I would agree however that the system allows for them to be placed closer vertically than the displayed bounding box implies is allowed.

[mr.WHO]

Aparently at least in OOS (haven't tried it IS yet) they are safe to use:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/ ... 1665723741

[Nort The Fragrent]

I have made a large Ship Parking Lot, 32 single docks. All facing the same way, 8 side by side, 4 layers, stepped back at each step. Ships dock fine.
Go to a free sector, get the largest plot allowed for free. Design your large station, ( But Do Not Build It ). Save your plan.
Now go to the sector were you want your large station, Buy the smallest plot 1,1,1. Then load in you plan.
Da Darr.
One very large station in a small plot right next to a highway if you like!
It works, It’s cheep, and your large ships dock just fine.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

I have made a large Ship Parking Lot, 32 single docks. All facing the same way, 8 side by side, 4 layers, stepped back at each step. Ships dock fine.
Go to a free sector, get the largest plot allowed for free. Design your large station, ( But Do Not Build It ). Save your plan.
Now go to the sector were you want your large station, Buy the smallest plot 1,1,1. Then load in you plan.
Da Darr.
One very large station in a small plot right next to a highway if you like!
It works, It’s cheep, and your large ships dock just fine.

That sounds like a major exploit, plans should at least be prevented from loading on plot sizes smaller than they were created on. Perhaps the act of doing as you suggest should result in a drop in reputation as you are massively exceeding the agreed plot boundaries.

[Nort The Fragrent]

There has been no consequence conflict or drop in Faction rank. All seems sweat and every one is still happy. My Rank is still 30.
However, Dumping a huge plan into a micro plot is clearly a fault, that for the moment I shall exploit.