Oolite Bulletins

Arexack_Heretic wrote:

typo:
You use carneveous, for the cargohold..probably a mistype of carniverous, which has nothing todo with cargo but more with snakes.

Cavernous is the word thou seekest.

BTW: What about the typo in your location? It still reads "scoured".

It may noy be a typo if, according to context, he means to say that the religious strife has either:
-cleansed the planet of heretics;
-seeked throughout the planet for heretics
or
-caused the livestock to contract some sort of dysentery (due to religious feeding prohibitiions, worship of parasitic nemathodes, bans on antiascarithic medicines or something of the sort).

As always, in case of doubt, check the wordbook.

Still, I agree he probably means "scourged".

lolserous!

I am assailed by semantic strife!
Oh ye verily!
Be weary of the Pedantic Order of the Wrought Word!

I will (soon) look for the original sourse and correct my spelling.

Cmdr. Maegil wrote:

-seeked throughout the planet for heretics

“Sought”, since we’re being pedantic.

Cmdr. Maegil wrote:

prohibitiions

“Prohibitioons”, Shirley?

Ahruman wrote:

Cmdr. Maegil wrote:

-seeked throughout the planet for heretics

“Sought”, since we’re being pedantic.

Cmdr. Maegil wrote:

prohibitiions

“Prohibitioons”, Shirley?

Typos apart, irregular verbs (english or not) are the bane of language learning. Thanks!

Cmdr. Maegil wrote:

...Typos apart, irregular verbs (english or not) are the bane of language learning. Thanks!

...have you looked at Hungarian nouns...?

(On topic)

The Keelback would probably have to be a lot bigger in order for it to have working docking bays, I think.

Why is that?
Surely a ship like this would have docks just large enough for only it's attending (jump incapable) craft.
There would be little need or desire to dock anacondas and their ilk.
Not sure whether ships determine whether they are able to fit into a dockingbay.... I only used smallish docks to prevent illegal docking of humans with alien ships. Which was a tiny possibility at all as the aliencarrier had multiple turrets around the dockingbay approach.
(Never released)

Arexack_Heretic wrote:

Why is that?

Don't know. I just remember someone attempting to make smaller docking ports on some ship and not being able to get it to work.

There appear to be two ways to specify the dimensions of a docking port. The first is to use the port_dimensions key, specifying the size in three dimensions separated by ‘x’ (the default being ‘69x69x250’). The other is to use a subentity for the docking bay (which is the reccomended way and the way used by the built-in stations), in which case the dimensions of the docking bay model will override any port_dimensions key. Any subentity with ‘dock’ in its name is assumed to specify the docking bay (There Can Only Be One™).

I used a dock_subentity.model they can be any size and collisions are determined according to which walls are there, so multiple approaches are possible. (like a tube open on both sides of the carrier/station)

(I used an open dock on one lightcarrier, it worked....sometimes....problems were that sometimes collision was nullified and a ship entering the dock 'vertically' could pass through into the ship_model. probably due to being halfway inside the dock_subentity and passing out again on the topside before dockingsequence could be triggered. Another problem was: launched ships appearing from thin air empty vacuum.)

Multiple instances of dock_someentity on one carrier/station did not work.

===

So how exactly does port_dimensions work ?
it is used in a subentity instead of using name *dock*?
If so, it is defaulted to the Z+ front of that model?

You still have to create a model with an inside.
....?.....what is the benefit of this method.
Aside from being able to add a dock without modelling it seperately.....
AH!
This would make practical frangible carriers and stations.

(ps In one particularly complex carrier I encountered strange moving subentites, when turrets were placed on(in) subentities. All subentities would rotate around the mainmodel and its turrets as a single linked mass of entities.)

Arexack_Heretic wrote:

Another problem was: launched ships appearing from thin air empty vacuum.

Just like any other dock, then. :-)

Arexack_Heretic wrote:

So how exactly does port_dimensions work ?
it is used in a subentity instead of using name *dock*?
If so, it is defaulted to the Z+ front of that model?

port_dimensions is specified in the parent entity. The front of the dock is (it seems) port_radius (default: 500) metres away in +Z. The orientation cannot be modified without using a subentity.

Arexack_Heretic wrote:

(ps In one particularly complex carrier I encountered strange moving subentites, when turrets were placed on(in) subentities. All subentities would rotate around the mainmodel and its turrets as a single linked mass of entities.)

Have you got an OXP demonstrating this problem?

Ahruman wrote:

Arexack_Heretic wrote:

So how exactly does port_dimensions work ?
it is used in a subentity instead of using name *dock*?
If so, it is defaulted to the Z+ front of that model?

port_dimensions is specified in the parent entity. The front of the dock is (it seems) port_radius (default: 500) metres away in +Z. The orientation cannot be modified without using a subentity.

I remember that port_radius didn't do anything in 1.65 and before. Has that changed since?

It’s supposed to be fixed in 1.68. I’m still waiting for you to confirm this. :-)

Well on a side note... i got the Rock Hermit Beacon basic scripting working, I will call it the Rock Hermit Locator in Equipment...

it functions by having a AI script perform Equipement Check, where after it atm broadcasts a message to the player IF the player is in range..

The message will be replaced by launching a beacon instead, OR spawn one quite near the Rock hermit that will be targetble by the players Space Compas..

I´m open for other names instead of "Rock Hermit Locator", i think the price will be in the region 2000 - 3000.. Remember you can get goods cheap there...