<array>
<integer>1</integer>
<integer>4000</integer>
<string>Large Cargo Bay</string>
<string>EQ_CARGO_BAY</string>
<string>Retro-fitted hull extensions permit the enclosure of a few extra tons of cargo capacity.</string>
</array>
Hull extensions sounds external to me. (I always imagined it like blisters all around the ship .)
As for seeing the model of the ill-fated Cobra Mk 2, yes please. After doing the manual I am planning to try my hand a writing a mission set featuring Uncle Bob Second Hand Shipyard. Some of the mission involve the recovery of the only functional Cobra Mk 2 in existence which may or may not legally owned by Uncle Bob.
Hmmm... interesting - though a CM2 would have value as a classic - like the Ford Pinto.
Actually there were only three of the cm2 ever built so it's about as rare as you can get. Not to say that Uncle Bob's rivals, StarStreamer Inc haven't reverse engineered a reproduction of it which is available at a price. How they were able to do that is part of the plot.
Oh, here's a challenge. According to EF:FE manual, the mark 2 hulls were built out of plastiglas which is why it was a failure. Feel like designing a ship that looks like shiny plastic toy?
Enjoy Waiheke, because you deserve the rest after the effort you put in.
Can anybody tell me while we're at it where exactly does the Cargo Bay extension go? Is it internal, external or a combo of the two?
The cargo bay extension is internal - IIRC: it involves cutting girders etc.
Allow me to disagree on grounds of what it actually says on the tin ....
Hull extensions sounds external to me. (I always imagined it like blisters all around the ship .)
Actually the original BBC game never said if the extension was internal or external. The external definition came from the 16-bit versions of the game where it was shown as two blister between the main thrusters of the cobra. I agree that the Oolite version describes it as an external, unfortunately it never shows on the ship in flight during the game.
It's too much of legacy to be able to rewrite history. So how about we call it this.
The cargo bay extension is classified as external. The hull of the ship has to be cut to to make room for the modification. Replacement hull sections with modified internal configurations are installed. Visually the external shape of the craft does not change with this upgrade.
Hopefully this is a explanation that solves the legacy issue.
The cargo bay extension is classified as external. The hull of the ship has to be cut to to make room for the modification. Replacement hull sections with modified internal configurations are installed. Visually the external shape of the craft does not change with this upgrade.
Hopefully this is a explanation that solves the legacy issue.
That would work as a temporary solution, but what about when we finally get the functionality in the code that we can model all external attachments to the ship and make them dependent of whether the player has bought the extension or not?
For example, the Cobra Rapier already has a tentative model of a cargo bay extension included, but, at the moment, it only shows up on some trader versions of the ship.
[mesh.load.failed.tooManyFaces]: ERROR - model neoboa2.dat has too many faces (model has 883, maximum is 800)
[ship.sanityCheck.failed]: Ship <ShipEntity 0x121847b8>{"Orbital Shuttle" ID: 0 position: (0, 0, 0) scanClass: CLASS_NOT_SET status: STATUS_IN_FLIGHT} generated with missing subentity shuttle-wings!
[files.notFound]: ----- WARNING: Could not find texture file "neomoray_auv2.png". Used default no textures material instead.
Thus I do not see the BCC. To me, most models look even better in preview than on the images you did post here!
Happy relaxing Simon
Wouldn't expanded cargo bays only show up on smaller vessels? I always thought with the Cobra 3 that it's size was partly due to innefficant but more affordable use of it's internal space, a bit like when you have your loft converted and you pay for the specialised structure enforcement.
However on much thinner ships such as the C-Rapier (which is more of a fighter than trader in build) you would see external evidence.
Is it not possible to have a sub-entity that only shows up under certain conditions? (I'm guessing this is what you mean)
Boa:]
Redux: 65.0 x 60.0 x 115.0 vol: 130430
Neolite: 53.1 x 34.4 x 124.4 vol: 88276
Boa Class Cruiser:
Redux: 65.0 x 60.0 x 115.0 vol: 110565
Neolite: 43.8 x 61.5 x 154.2 vol: 127591
Some of these stats were a big surprise! I always figured the cruiser as a bigger ship than the regular boa! It's dimentions are identical, and it is more pointy - so it is smaller - yeah - that tracks.
Hi Simon
Not being picky but there's a minor error in the volume calcs
Both the Boa & BCC Redux calcs have the same dimensions Width 65m x Height 60m x Length 115m but your volume calcs show a difference of 20,000 cubic metres??
It was quit an interesting experience
And after that i had to close oolite by pressing ctrl-alt-del and end task
...it looks like the messages from the previous preview version that Simon had on his homepage, not the current one he linked in this thread.
I did encounter those ships in space and it looks great! However, the game sometimes stopped responding after witchspace, probably because of the defunct BCC model?!? I took the oxp out and didn't have the crash yet again. Maybe I should edit the BCC out and have fun with that oxp until he's back.
Wouldn't expanded cargo bays only show up on smaller vessels? I always thought with the Cobra 3 that it's size was partly due to inefficient but more affordable use of it's internal space, a bit like when you have your loft converted and you pay for the specialised structure enforcement.
Its not so much a case of inefficient but over design in the cm3, so there is redundant space in the design.
Actually, there might be two more reasons why the cargo bay expansion doesn't alter the structure of any ship. All of these vessels are mass-produced boxes like modern cars and trucks. Firstly, unless they are the GTI version, they will be built with the cheapest and therefore generally bulkiest but most reliable support tech available to do the job. (Hmm, Cobra mk 3 GTI now there's a idea. <thoughtful grin.>) Secondly there is no doubt multiple redundant backup systems to most of the ships functions. The upgrade replaces the older tech with new smaller stuff and the number of backups are reduced, freeing up large amounts of internal space.
The old tech and redundant systems have historical precedent. NASA's operating procedure is to use old, and therefore proven reliable, technology in their vessels. That's why the International Space Station is powered by specially shielded versions of 486 & Pentium 1. They also have mandated that where possible to have between two and seven backups of vital ship system. It's quite possible that these habits have remained with ship designers well in to the 32C.
ZygoUgo wrote:
However on much thinner ships such as the C-Rapier (which is more of a fighter than trader in build) you would see external evidence.
Is it not possible to have a sub-entity that only shows up under certain conditions? (I'm guessing this is what you mean)
That would be the most logic solution to this issue if the game engine allows for it.
However on much thinner ships such as the C-Rapier (which is more of a fighter than trader in build) you would see external evidence.
Is it not possible to have a sub-entity that only shows up under certain conditions? (I'm guessing this is what you mean)
That would be the most logic solution to this issue if the game engine allows for it.
I've been thinking about this whole issue of the cargo bay expansion.
Do we really need it?
After all, the only reason it exist is to make the Cobra mk 3 a bit better trader. It more of a kludge since you were stuck with the cm3 for the your career in Elites 8 & 16 bits games.
Since we can change ships in Oolite, the need for it is redundant. If you want to be a trader you buy a Python, you want to be a fighter you buy a Fer-De-Lance.
Removing the cargo bay expansion from the game is not without precedent. Elite A dumped it in favour of an IFF system since you could buy other ships in the game. I would find something like a witchdrive turbo charger, witch cloud analyser or star dreamer system far more useful than a slightly bigger cargo bay any day.
Perhaps we should run a poll so see if people want to keep the cargo bay expansion?
Perhaps we should run a poll so see if people want to keep the cargo bay expansion?
I do want it. It is fairly important at the start of the game if you stick to a Cobra Mk3 for a little while. It makes the difference for smaller ships between just being able to scoop debris and to trade somewhat seriously.
It takes quite some time to be able to buy a python, especially if you want something more than a rusty old python with a bull's eye painted on it.
On the whole it would be nice if a few bits of equipment would have standard subentitities to be added on the outside: cargo bay extension, fuel scoops, various different lasers (not missiles).
But the game does not allow for that and the models are not set up to deal with that. I suspended my disbelief some time ago .
.)
.
