Lighting sensor, Sensor resistor, Pressure sensor, logic gates...

Instilling programming skills in players is a good thing, but where is mechanical engineering? Why can't a player create alternative mechanical-electronic circuits to programming? The game has a Timer, but there are no logical ventels. Of course, it is possible to pervert using control panels and the like, but it is as abysmal as using an Oxygen truss or Solar panel as a lighting sensor using C # scripts.

When will Space Engineers have an illumination sensor? Forcing players to use programming and tricks in the form of an oxygen farm or solar panel together with C # scripts is of course resourceful, but extremely cruel.
Also in the game I would like to have logic gates such as: AND, OR, NOT, NAND, NOR, XOR, XNOR
and also mathematical blocks: +, - , * , /. Also a block in which you can specify a numeric value.
Where's the Sensor Resistor? Players could build interesting things using a touch resistor. For example, by creating a circuit from a sensor resistor that would record the pressure of any object indicated on it under the influence of gravity (artificial, planetary) or in connection with the presence of an object on it. It would be possible to automate mechanically processes such as the start of reverse engines or the activation of other elements (pistons, rotors, etc.).
I am not talking now about the Motion Sensor, which is already in the game (for those who did not understand).
This would really be engineering to the full.

A Gas pressure sensors is also needed. I understand that you can use "Air Vent" as a pressure sensor and navigate the readings that are displayed on "Air Vent", but you know - it is somewhat stupid, from an engineering point of view, to put a fragment of the ventilation system, namely "Air Vent", to understand whether there is air in any compartment or not. Why would the player use C # programming to automate the closure of the compartment doors if depressurization occurs, for example? A pressure sensor is quite a mechanical thing in real life. In the game having such a sensor, the player setting critical, for example, one of the four pressure levels in its properties (suppose it reacts as much as "Air Vent") could simply connect to the door and in the case of a pressure reduction ( Oxygen or hydrogen based on game mechanics) in the room lock the door or turn on the ventilation for air injection or vice versa start for pumping, etc. Why is this not in the game in which design is stated in the foreground? By the way, a gas pressure sensor is definitely necessary for detecting hydrogen in a room. For example, a player has destroyed several hydrogen storage facilities in a room and an urgent need to block the compartment.

Please implement these things in the game. Players need them to enjoy really designing, not just programming.
N.B. Forgive my bad English language

 

So many things needed. I still don't have a popcorn machine. And I still can't take off my spacesuit to poop. When will Keen finally give me what I want!?!

 

Your irony is inappropriate.
I have enough programming at work.
The "popcorn machine" in the game is in the form of the DLC "Decorative Pack." There's even a toilet. In the last DLC dancing disco engineers added. Everything is there, but specifically I do not see deep engineering for my money spent. Most of all, it upsets me that the "Gamecraft" that I got for free (as a participant in pre-alpha testing) in some mechanics is superior to the previously bought "Space Engineers."
I mean, if the game says that it allows for wide and deep engineering, then it should have appropriate mechanisms. Yes, Space Engineers are good, but without some things, the game looks incomplete. This looks now like a designer of a car model and at the same time it does not have for example parts "steering wheel," "transmission," but there are many stickers on the body, and headlights of different colors and shades.

 

Prepare yourself for disappointment then. My point is that many, many people come to this game believing it should be the way they envision it should be, and everybody's individual vision is different. Make your request(s) the support site and see what happens.
--- Automerge ---
Additionally...

As a real-life engineer for many years, I have learned to work with the tools provided to me, whether it be specific hardware I can use, analysis and/or design software I can use, or whatever. I sometimes request new tools because I see a benefit in their use, but more often than not my requests are denied for various reasons (mostly budgetary). So I've learned to work with the tools available to me to the best of my ability. Sure, I'd love one of those really spiffy 3-D printers for prototyping my designs, but that simply isn't going to happen. Not today, but maybe tomorrow, so I occasionally ask again.

My point is that the game is what the game is, and as in real life we don't always get everything we'd like. So learn to work with what you've got. It's amazing what you can do with a little planning and innovation.

OK. That's all I'm going to say about that.

 

I understand everything very well, but I have to admit that, frankly, I am infuriated by the lack of the ability to create a full-fledged analog system. Programming in life, programming in the game is too much. I still remember Colobot and programming engineering calculators like МК-61. The last time I started a game was when it was version 187 or 188 (family, children, work) and what was my disappointment... to code for elementary things... Lord! Well, why is there a Timer and there is no normal logical ventel and there are no analog elements of the simplest mathematical operations. My child has already assembled his own analog calculator at Gamecraft, and I in Space Engineers must program for this on C #...

--- Automerge ---

Do you know what this looks like about the game situation?
- Boy want to play in the sandbox?
- Yes!
- Give me $15
- Take...
-CREATE IT!


Regarding engineering work in reality. Is your company so greedy that even the digitizer did not acquire for the design technologist? Horror...

 

I saw this in the morning, but couldn't post without sounding really mean.

So why is this a poll and in the main view? It should be in feedback like everything else....
like (21 months ago with 6 votes & 11 months ago with 4 votes...)
https://support.keenswh.com/spaceengineers/pc/topic/more-logic-blocks-codding-sux
https://support.keenswh.com/spaceengineers/pc/topic/simple-logic-blocks

 

Thanks for pointing out the links. I registered and supported both topics.
But I see no reason to attack me with any claims.
I got the game long enough. But I have a family, work and I do not devote much time to the project. So it's no surprise I didn't find these topics. What's my fault? I can't understand.
My proposal is quite independent and natural that it is similar to the proposals of other people since it is quite logical that there should be these elements in the designer and many people understand this. I went to the forum. I entered the search query "lighting sensor" and did not find a similar topic. Since I didn't find it, I created it. What is the essence of the claim against me?
I understand my fault is that I didn't write in technical support?
And why should I write offers in technical support? The main task of this unit is to respond to reports of breakdowns, and not to receive offers from players. A forum has been established for this purpose.

 

That was my "not sounding mean" text (3 flippin' sentences) and I think you are misinterpreting a lot and blowing it out of proportion.

as such...

I kind of object to the poll concept, which is why I asked why there is a poll there. My opinion is its a silly poll, because of course most players _want_ those things added to the game. I admit I would like those added as well, and I'm a programmer.

For logic blocks : But if I were a developer, I'd probably say NO right off the bat or at least need to think about it for a good long time. It raises questions like how often the logic blocks need updating and there's always going to be players wanting the updates faster to the point where it is less Space Engineers and more Logic Block Simulator. Also there is no event system, so there is going to be a lot of players that will then want non-stop updates from blocks to feed the logic system, but most blocks don't say what their status would be. Its a giant can of worms that I can see developers wanting to avoid completely. I check now and it doesn't look like anyone made a mod for logic blocks, which I would think there should be many mods by now.

 

Your logic is impeccable.

 

I can think of some uses for a light sensor... that would be pretty cool.

 

Machine translation problem
Did I get the translation right? Do you claim that if logical valves appear in the game, then this will cause serious problems?

Since I have no other similar alternative, I will take a close game in terms of mechanics. My son, who is eight years old, plays it. By the way, I asked him to create something in the game with logical valves and hinges.

Okay, okay, I really told him something. I told him about multiplying by -1
Now my child in the second grade knows about Cartesian coordinates and knows how to mathematically operate with negative numbers

Now let's try to solve a similar problem in Space Engineers. Just don't cheat! No scripts!

Imagine two suitcases with locksmiths. In one of the suitcases there are screwdrivers and wrenches, and in the second suitcase there are only wrenches and there is still a machine for cutting threads. Space Engineers is the second suitcase. 2020-2013 = 7 years. After 7 years, the game, in which engineering is part of the gameplay, finally appeared hinges...
And you know, what makes it even more upsetting that Gamecraft is made by indie developers. Thus, it cannot be said that Gamecraft developers have more opportunities...
Regarding the "can with worms." By programming the C # script, you can contribute significantly more errors and problems.
--- Automerge ---

I looked at the API and I can immediately say why no one in 7 years has made a lighting sensor.
Based on the available APIs, it will first be necessary to add all the found sources of artificial lighting to the data array. Then, by going through an array of artificial lighting sources, find out from them the type of attenuation and, of course, the brightness, as well as the radius of lighting. Besides that, I never found anything in the API to do with lighting (property - illumination?..Difficult to explain through a translator...). So everything that I say above will still have to be linked to the available functionality of the motion sensor. The point will be that. We have a sensor, from it to calculate the coordinates to the object and calculate its normal relative to the light source that is in the array. Anyway, that nonsense.
Natural lighting has a separate class and the easiest way is to use the code of solar panels or an oxygen farm to create a natural lighting sensor.
As a result, we will have two sensors in fashion. One for natural lighting, the other for artificial lighting (Of course, it is possible to plug in one sensor, but then it will be necessary to multiply the obtained brightness from a natural source by the brightness from an artificial one). By the way, there is no point in sensors of special importance without logical ventels, except as a direct reaction to an event. In any case, even if there were a lighting sensor, players would have to write the C # script again for more less adequate automation, rather than a simple on/off response to an object.
I am very sorry that in Space Engineers such a trouble with logic...

 

Space Enginners cannot handle the physics object calculations for just rotors and pistons in multiplayer, it is also why vanilla ore detectors are such a short range and you want to add even more calculations?

A reasonable sized ship build can soon hit 10 or more vents if you want the ability to have interior spaces seal in the event of a hull breach in one area. Now multiply that by 16 or more for a server.

If you are wanting that level of complexity in your builds and are just after the challenge of completing that build then check out Stationeers. I'd love to have that level of complexity in SE but it simply wont work. SE2 if they ever make it, maybe.

 

Remember the olden days of being told the Hing block was impossible to implement... haha.. yeah.. good times.

 

If it really is such a big hit to processing, then they can allow it to be disabled in the world options menu. I can see the business issues for working on a feature that potentially a lot of people will leave disabled to save processing power, but a lot of people don't use meteors or pressurization. One of the special things about space engineers is the vast world customization options. Gees, there are probably a lot of people like me out there who never even play on planets.

 

Are you joking right now? Based on the fact that you wrote it turns out that both scripts and modifications in the multiplayer should be prohibited since they heavily load the processor (mathematical calculations on the processor side are performed).
If you look objectively, then no one prevents the server owner from limiting the available number of CPU. I think you should not justify the absence of elementary blocks of design by flights from the server and supposedly a large load on the server. From your words it turns out that if suddenly a ship with two logical ventels flew to the server instead of ten timers, armageddon would come.

Yes, it really was such stupid statements that I was even tired of laughing.

I agree. This is a possible solution for those with a mediocre computer.

 

Additional sensor types, or at least additional sensor options is something I'd love to see, the depressurisation sensor is technically in the game already as previously noted, so adding that functionality to the sensor block shouldn't be an issue to either coding it into the game or be a performance issue (as it already exists).

Logic gates is a big ball of no from me. It would be nice but it's such a neich item, plus it doesn't really fit into the SE style. Logic gates and the things you do with them quickly become complicated and in SE complicated means big.

Can you imagine having a space ship with a logic gate bigger than the ship? It's stupid, especially when such things are better controlled through programming.

Functionality is good, complication is bad. Just ask any engineer about the KISS principle.

 

There is rational grain in your words.
However, I can assume that nothing prevents you from doing something like a nod system in a game using logical ventels. Although I personally believe that logical gates, even if they were made the size of one cube (like a Timer), when used, the occupied volume would be less than when players avoiding programming on C # use Timers for automation.

 

True, but timers don't require direct connection that logic gated circuits do.
If you want logic gates without direct connections then you need to use programmable blocks, which makes the logic gates redundant.

 

Why would logic gates need to be connected?

 

The Easy Automation Script 2.0 gives you the option to use some of the Logic Gate function if I remember correctly.

 

For example, as in this game (this is not advertising, but simply as an example of implementing logical ventels in the form of blocks)
Do you see programming using C # or another programming language in this video?

Not a small part of the players just copy pieces of code from the Internet for Space Engineers, not teach C #. The presence of blocks of mathematical operators and logical ventels benefits from the fact that it allows players to visually see the logical chain when compiling it and not rely on primitive copying of someone else's code without understanding the essence of the process. The opportunity to have an alternative for players should be that they can implement their ideas relying not only on knowledge of a specific programming language, but also on universal logic. This visual approach primarily forms a person's ability to compose algorithms. The programming language is not important - it is just a syntax. The programming language dictionary only allows you to more accurately describe the potential queue of processes of timely status On/off billions of analog function blocks in the processor and nothing more. Units and zeros are important. If a person does not have an understanding of compiling an algorithm for actions, he cannot build a logical chain of causes and consequences, and therefore cannot program. Even on Basic.

I didn't understand the same thing. It seems to me that he does not quite understand why to use logical circuits and how to use them in the game at all if there is a programmable unit.

Yes. Logical C # statements are used in the programmable cube.

 

Sadly your sim speed would drop to the netherworld in SE if we had the blocks in the video you linked.

 

You're too flattering the physics engine of Space Engineers. I do not want to engage in desecration, but when in Space Engineers it will finally be possible to connect the platform with two pistons, then it will be sense to talk about an excellent implementation.

 

Your first post in the first sentence talked about mechanical solutions.

A mechanical logic gate requires a direct connection.
A block that uses programming to imitate a mechanical logic gate without direct connection already exists, it's called the programmable block.
Now I do agree that most people use code snippets rather than learning to code themselves, the code for logic gates is out there for people to use already so I feel your argument in that regard is spurious.

A purely mechanical solution would be huge due to the nature of the grid sizes that SE uses. A programmable solution would be much much smaller but since you were asking about a mechanical alternative to that...

Anyway I'm not going to persue this any further as I believe I've answered your original post and I have no desire to get into an argument over it.

 

“You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.” –John Lydgate

 

Where are the mechanical logic valves in my original post?
Are you talking about this line?

And when you connect the piston (mechanics) to the software unit, isn't it a mechanical-electronic system?
Did I not explicitly indicate in what form a logical block would like to see mathematical operators in the game?
I specified.

So maybe you can tell me where I say about the mechanical solution of the logic block in the form of a mechanical unit similar to a piston or rotor? Although I think and hedgehog it is clear that a game block with fixed properties of a logical ventel is intended and in a game implementation it will also be no more mechanical than the same timer. I think that for such umpires as you, you should remove the Timer block from the game and make you constantly use the For or While or While Not loop in the programmable block to count to ten

Based on the huge number of critical posts, especially after updating the "spark of the future," he came to the conclusion that in 2020 they do not satisfy many at all.
There is such a phrase: "The mice were injured and cried, but continued to gnaw at the cactus.." I hope the allegory is clear. I feel like this mouse, which until a certain time gnawed a cactus called "Space Engineers.". Physics makes you cry, but we will roll out DLC with dancing astronauts and shoot a wonderful video with them in the pool... And laughter and sin...

 

That's your opinion with no basis for fact. Provide proof that "they do not satisfy many at all" instead of just tossing out rancor. Now here is my opinion: All you do is blubber about not having what you don't have and dismiss anyone who has a different opinion or view than your own. Get over it already.

 

This is not to mention Stime.You can look for the rest yourself
When an elementary hinge is introduced after 7 years, I have every reason to carry a negative. I don't like fans - they can't look at things objectively.
The moderator can close the topic because I have already removed the game from Steam and the hard drive. Damn it with the money. I'm sick of this cactus

 

If that's honestly the case then why are you spending time on the forums being argumentative?

Surely you have better things to be doing than hanging out where the SE fans loiter if you dislike fans and have uninstalled SE...

 

There are a lot of great things you can do with a programmable block. But that requires knowledge of C# and is a big ask of your average player. Logic blocks and others that offer gameworld analysis, reaction, and exact settings, is the nice middle-ground, sweet spot, that would allow slightly advanced players to do some engineering rather than just playing with blocks.

For me... HOW would a brand new block (say a logic block) be able to analyze one or more target blocks in a grid in a GUI friendly way for the user without being too much of a drain on the CPU (especially for a dedicated server). There would also have to be controls on how many of these types of blocks can be allotted to a player/faction... as too often people will build to the limits of the game despite the impact it has on other users (on a server).

Having to break out a programmable block to manage a simple comparative operation and set a parameter excludes a lot of players. But something simple like creating a flashing light when your cargo block is full could be done with one or two simple logic blocks... if a system for accessing some of what's available to the programmable block is available.