Replace block, coordinates and number logic in general

[The_Dark_Jumper]

To explain the problem: I have a 2x2 Block that I use as a connection hub, but it turns out that I need more energy, so it seems obvious to replace it with a 2x2 large battery. However I can not delete the 2x2 without deleting all connected blocks and reconnecting/rebuilding is a pain.

I though about how to realize a replace function (I don't want ask for impossible stuff) and I think the most intuitive way with the current building mechanics would be as follows:

1. Lets say I want to do what I described in the example...
2. I select the Large Battery
3. I connect it to the Large Block
4. I press R (or any other hotkey)

As a result all connections to the block I connected my block (Large Block) to will be reassigned to the block I selected (Large Battery), also the Large Block's transformation will be applied to the Large Battery and the Large Block will be deleted.

 

Secondly, I'd like there to be a way to determine the altitude and angle from the spawnpoint of the camera. Additionally the storage of such data and numbers in general.

The number logic should be able to determine whether a number is:

• greater/smaller than another a>b or a<b
• equal to another with adjustable tolerance a = b ± tolerance (basically "if( a > (b-tolerance) && a < (b+tolerance) )" )

Also it should be capable of basic number operators as

• + , - , * , / , % (add, sub, multiply, divide, modulo)

Forthermore: more options for the sensors such as:

• "resources" as an option for the distance tracker
• "full"-state of ressource tanks
• "coordinate" for turrets / directional sensors
• adjustable altitude for the altimeter (although I suppose it would become obsolete with the number operations)

[ZeroGravitas]

+1 for simple block replacement. It would be a hughe QOL improvement; it's such a headache unpicking the spaghetti to change out core parts.

I'd suggest using one of the keyboard modifiers [Shift], [Ctrl] or [Alt] for this, so you just drag a new block over the top of the old, and instead of attaching, it swaps it out (show different symbol there, of course).

I think you should have made the rest a separate thread, to keep things simple and avoid clouding the discussion/voting. (Maybe a moderator could split the post if you agree.😉)

[D.Mentia]

Also +1 for replacement, however it's implemented, and also agree that the second bit should be its own suggestion.  That's basically an overhaul of the logic system, it currently can only send 0 or 1, so allowing it to send actual numbers and compare them doesn't seem all that likely.  I mean I'd love it, I just imagine they already considered the idea and intentionally went with a boolean-only logic system

[Lurkily]

The problem is coming up with a mechanic that's easy and intuitive to explain to a user; a more complex or awkward mechanic might be worth it, if it's easier to explain.

[Zixtis (Zixt)]

+1

Another option that would be a partial help, and possibly more intuitive, would be to connect parts to an edge instead of the center; you could then "pluck" connections from one block and add them to another. You could then use Ctrl/Shift modifiers to select additional or more connections at once, respectively.

This would require making linkages selectable and moving/making additional linkage points, which would likely be too complex to implement easily though.

[Entity]

+9*

 

I don't know how many times I untangled my drones just to replace a block.

 

*) still only +1 due to vote limitations. sorry.

[The_Dark_Jumper]

On 10/8/2018 at 1:38 PM, ZeroGravitas said:

I think you should have made the rest a separate thread, to keep things simple and avoid clouding the discussion/voting. (Maybe a moderator could split the post if you agree.😉)

Initially I wanted to do another thread, but decided not to because I didn't want to spam...although it would make the voting less obscure

On 10/10/2018 at 12:52 PM, D.Mentia said:

Also +1 for replacement, however it's implemented, and also agree that the second bit should be its own suggestion.  That's basically an overhaul of the logic system, it currently can only send 0 or 1, so allowing it to send actual numbers and compare them doesn't seem all that likely.  I mean I'd love it, I just imagine they already considered the idea and intentionally went with a boolean-only logic system

I think there should be at least some sort of change to the logic.

I don't mind working with booleans and binary if I want numbers, but that does not only go WAY to big very easily, but my main problem is the limit of buttons on a keyboard. It's essentially a hardcoded limit to the logic complexity as you'll eventually run out of mappings.

Edit: I just learned what tags are for...that resolves the mapping issue...yet still...number logic being the size of planets certainly does not feel reasonable

[The_Dark_Jumper]

Also: I feel like I should add that number logic really isn't that far fetched with the dynamic thrusters ranging from 0-30.

And I think you could do a fair bit more with it if you could read the current power state / set it to a specific state instead of slowly increasing/lowering it

[ManTheMister]

PLEASE separate all suggestions into multiple posts. I like the main point of the post, but I kind of like only having booleans and not number variables.