Grid names hierarchy in Admin Entities List wrong
Bug description: Large grid ship/station inherits the name of docked small ships
I have a huge station made out of 8 large grids connected via connectors and landing gears and with all engines on one grid so you can control it from one control seat or cockpit when in ship mode. It works just fine this way with every grid named and visible in your grid list.
Here comes the "but"! But! When I dock anything on any docking connector on any of the grids, those grids just inherit the name of that docked ship in admin entities list. When I access any grid directly via control panel on that grid, I can see its actual name, but when I open admin "entities list" my small grid ship, docked on the grid takes over entire base/ship and Is there a way to set some kind of hierarchy, so that certain grids have name priority? It is weird when you dock to base, in your admin entities list you can see only small grid ship that appears to be built out off 300k blocks with mass of 4Mt. Also when more small ships are docked and when I un-dock that ship that has name priority for some reason, the grid just takes its name from the next small ship in random order.
Not a common issue I know! In case you have experience on the subject, please share your solution or your pain :) See pic for details. As you can see, it appears that my small grid ship, docked on the main grid took over all blocks under its title. All other ships appear normally in the list. When I un-dock that first ship, next random one takes the main grid count under its name. This is a bit of a problem on server when you need to keep track on all grids there. I have only one small custom made mod to change thruster power and battery capacity and what not via sbc files, but I have reproduced this issue without any mods on server. Also pasted all grids on new empty world and the issue remains. https://imgur.com/a/bI4h36O
I have the same bug
Hello, Engineer!
Thank you for your feedback! Your topic has been added between considered issues.
Please keep voting for the issue as it will help us to identify the most serious bugs.
We really appreciate your patience.
Kind Regards
Keen Software House: QA Department
Hello, Engineer!
Thank you for your feedback! Your topic has been added between considered issues.
Please keep voting for the issue as it will help us to identify the most serious bugs.
We really appreciate your patience.
Kind Regards
Keen Software House: QA Department
Joining my vote because this is worse than I initially thought as this naming convention issue also affects regular gameplay.
Crosspost from this thread on steam: https://steamcommunity.com/app/244850/discussions/0/1607148447823978329/
Sooo, this is way more serious than I first thought because if you're currently using the facilities of a station and a vehicle with a larger block count docks through a connector you lose access until you've selected the connected vehicle's grid in the grid selection's menu since they merged. EVEN when you were actually PHYSICALLY interacting with the station.
Practical example that just happened (screenshots included in attachment) :
Small grid mining Vehicle "Hagrid One" : 550block count
Large grid station "Protomegalopolis": 287block count
Let's say, you're currently in the production menu from the main assembler on the "Protomegalopolis" station and "Hagrid One" docks suddenly you get a message that there are no assemblers (even though you were physically directly interacting with it) and you lose access to the whole station until you select "Hagrid One" since it merged with "Protomegalopolis" in the grid selection menu and "Protomegalopolis" disappeared because it has a lower block count. Now "Hagrid One" has finished unloading ore and undocks, you lose access again because the assemblers are now back under "Protomegalopolis" (and you were connected to "Hagrid One")in the grid selection menu which you have to open to use the assemblers again. This is really unmanageable in multiplayer survival. This is made even worse because one of our friend is building a drilling station and everytime "Hagrid One" docks to it to load ore from it, it confuses him the hell out because it ejects him from the blocks menus in the middle of configuring his drillers and the drilling station (called 'Foreuse') disappears from the grid selection. It hijacks the station and he has to select "Hagrid One" to regain the controls of his own driller until it undocks... The more players there are on the server and the more unmanageable it will become
From my perspective, a small grid should never override a large in connected grids naming conventions even if the small grid has a higher block count.(Even if displaying sub-grids in the drop down lists would be ideal but that would take additional coding so I'm not suggesting it.) Priority should be given to volume over block count.This way small grid slave ships docking frequently with the Large grid wouldn't disrupt the Large Grid which is more likely to be the core of a trade hub, for instance.
How is this not a more frequently reported issue? Are most people mainly playing offline solo now? We're giving up because we can't work on the station at the same time someone is mining ore... which is BASIC survival stuff. We're not even trying to do something complicated or exceptional... just MINING. This is a crippling behaviour and obvious for anyone playing multiplayer.
As an added note, I hope that developers will give this report the attention it deserve despite the low amount of votes because there's no way such a technical and obscure bug would gather more votes despite being serious and affecting everyone on a basic multiplayer gameplay level. As a personal point of view, I don't think popularity is an appropriate indicator of importance regarding bugs.
Joining my vote because this is worse than I initially thought as this naming convention issue also affects regular gameplay.
Crosspost from this thread on steam: https://steamcommunity.com/app/244850/discussions/0/1607148447823978329/
Sooo, this is way more serious than I first thought because if you're currently using the facilities of a station and a vehicle with a larger block count docks through a connector you lose access until you've selected the connected vehicle's grid in the grid selection's menu since they merged. EVEN when you were actually PHYSICALLY interacting with the station.
Practical example that just happened (screenshots included in attachment) :
Small grid mining Vehicle "Hagrid One" : 550block count
Large grid station "Protomegalopolis": 287block count
Let's say, you're currently in the production menu from the main assembler on the "Protomegalopolis" station and "Hagrid One" docks suddenly you get a message that there are no assemblers (even though you were physically directly interacting with it) and you lose access to the whole station until you select "Hagrid One" since it merged with "Protomegalopolis" in the grid selection menu and "Protomegalopolis" disappeared because it has a lower block count. Now "Hagrid One" has finished unloading ore and undocks, you lose access again because the assemblers are now back under "Protomegalopolis" (and you were connected to "Hagrid One")in the grid selection menu which you have to open to use the assemblers again. This is really unmanageable in multiplayer survival. This is made even worse because one of our friend is building a drilling station and everytime "Hagrid One" docks to it to load ore from it, it confuses him the hell out because it ejects him from the blocks menus in the middle of configuring his drillers and the drilling station (called 'Foreuse') disappears from the grid selection. It hijacks the station and he has to select "Hagrid One" to regain the controls of his own driller until it undocks... The more players there are on the server and the more unmanageable it will become
From my perspective, a small grid should never override a large in connected grids naming conventions even if the small grid has a higher block count.(Even if displaying sub-grids in the drop down lists would be ideal but that would take additional coding so I'm not suggesting it.) Priority should be given to volume over block count.This way small grid slave ships docking frequently with the Large grid wouldn't disrupt the Large Grid which is more likely to be the core of a trade hub, for instance.
How is this not a more frequently reported issue? Are most people mainly playing offline solo now? We're giving up because we can't work on the station at the same time someone is mining ore... which is BASIC survival stuff. We're not even trying to do something complicated or exceptional... just MINING. This is a crippling behaviour and obvious for anyone playing multiplayer.
As an added note, I hope that developers will give this report the attention it deserve despite the low amount of votes because there's no way such a technical and obscure bug would gather more votes despite being serious and affecting everyone on a basic multiplayer gameplay level. As a personal point of view, I don't think popularity is an appropriate indicator of importance regarding bugs.
Fixed in v193.
Fixed in v193.
Replies have been locked on this page!