[A13] A2B: conveyor belts & co. [v0.13.2]

[millenium]

honestly i would like the option to keep the teleporters unless theres a major issue in the code.

2x-3x the research cost add plasteel into the crafting recipe and increase power costs to make it so you only use them for very long rang teleportations.

[Arief]

this looks amazing! Maybe you could add drones if you are removing the teleporters. Like an MD2 Ore collector being serviced by a adrone to pick up resources. Either by a extra 1x1 loading bay or directly from the extractor. Anyway im looking foward to using this mod with MD2.

[1000101]

this looks amazing! Maybe you could add drones if you are removing the teleporters. Like an MD2 Ore collector being serviced by a adrone to pick up resources. Either by a extra 1x1 loading bay or directly from the extractor. Anyway im looking foward to using this mod with MD2.

Yeah, I doubt droids will every be added to this.  And as you pointed out...MD2 has droids, lots of droids.  A2B Conveyors + MD2 Logistics Droids = w1n.

Also, the MD2 Ore Extractor can connect and feed A2B loaders directly, no need for pawn hauling.

[Arief]

this looks amazing! Maybe you could add drones if you are removing the teleporters. Like an MD2 Ore collector being serviced by a adrone to pick up resources. Either by a extra 1x1 loading bay or directly from the extractor. Anyway im looking foward to using this mod with MD2.

Yeah, I doubt droids will every be added to this.  And as you pointed out...MD2 has droids, lots of droids.  A2B Conveyors + MD2 Logistics Droids = w1n.

Also, the MD2 Ore Extractor can connect and feed A2B loaders directly, no need for pawn hauling.

Yeah I know . But i mean actual Drones. Like the flying type that is faster  Like a drone network. AND/OR!! Have atack drones DUN DUN DUNNN...

[noone]

honestly i would like the option to keep the teleporters unless theres a major issue in the code.

I am fairly certain that the teleporters will be removed from the main mod. They are largely redundant with the undercover/undertaker system (except for going through mountains), and I was never quite satisfied with their design (as many other mod users as well).

There is also another dedicated teleportation mod by Haplo (https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=7570.0). If you really want/need long range fancy transport, I would suggest using this mod in complement to A2B.

Finally, if you are really really keen to keep the A2B Teleporters alive, why not create an add-on ? We have just had our first official add-on by 1000101 that offers 11 new selector designs. These will not be included in the main mod (see this thread a few posts back for details), but they are perfect as an add-on: easily accessible for whoever likes/needs them, without impacting the basic mod users.

Maybe you could add drones if you are removing the teleporters.

Well, I certainly like the idea, but I am also pretty certain that this won't happen ... I'm trying to keep things to a minimum in the main mod for clarity and simplicity's sakes. As it was pointed out, there's already a lot of 'droid mods' out there ... If you really feel like flying drones ... maybe you could create an A2B add-on ?

[Match]

Quick question about A2B and Temp.

Do the belts act as a wall or are they negligible in regards to temp loss. Second, would food meals stored on a belt be subject to temp decay?

[noone]

Belts are not walls anymore - so, you can't close a room with them. At this time however, any meals on the belts will be immune to decay (i.e. immune to large temperatures).

Hoping to fix that eventually ...

[Adamiks]

tel

Belts are not walls anymore - so, you can't close a room with them. At this time however, any meals on the belts will be immune to decay (i.e. immune to large temperatures).

Hoping to fix that eventually ...

One word - teleporting.

[WHiZ]

Omg when you are done with this version please PLEASE make something like this for prison architect if you are able, if there was ever a game to need something just like this for its lame delivery model it is that game. once your prison gets too large its unable to properly handle movements in a timely manor.

[Timmiej93]

I really like the new undertaker system you've implemented, but would it be possible to cut the power when you designate a part of the conveyor (or undercover) off? I used to do a teleporter with a switch inbetween, so I can cut power to parts of my conveyor, can't do that anymore unfortunately.

[1000101]

I really like the new undertaker system you've implemented, but would it be possible to cut the power when you designate a part of the conveyor (or undercover) off? I used to do a teleporter with a switch inbetween, so I can cut power to parts of my conveyor, can't do that anymore unfortunately.

That's going to be an inherent problem with the new underground system.  With the teleporter pair, I also used to create belt sub-sections with individual power feeds to control power usage too.  The problem now is the entire belt is connected and the power is handled by the core game.  Since using the underground belt will make it one net, you are left with using the sci-fi magic teleporter pair to break up the power net.  ATM, no other options really exist.

Maybe I'll have a go at an unpowered "slide" belt section which doesn't use or transmit power.  The problem is that one could make an entire belt system out of slides, so some means of placement/usage restrictions would need to be applied (perhaps a requirement to be connected to a powered belt section on the input and output).  Then we can compartmentalize the power net again.  I think the easiest solution is just use the teleporter pair though.  I don't like the sc-fi magic but it has a major advantage over any other solution - it already exists.

[Timmiej93]

Maybe I'll have a go at an unpowered "slide" belt section which doesn't use or transmit power.  The problem is that one could make an entire belt system out of slides, so some means of placement/usage restrictions would need to be applied (perhaps a requirement to be connected to a powered belt section on the input and output).  Then we can compartmentalize the power net again.  I think the easiest solution is just use the teleporter pair though.  I don't like the sc-fi magic but it has a major advantage over any other solution - it already exists.

That would be a nice attachement, but wouldn't it be possible to create something like a "switchable belt"? So basically a belt that also functions as a vanilla switch (or a switch that functions as a belt ). I think this would be easier to understand for everybody, having a 'roller' section that functions just like the belts could probably be confusing.

On the other hand, I recall reading (or made up) that you guys wanted to do more with belt wear and tear. Maybe it would be nice to have the belts wear faster if a stationary object is on top of it (so the belt's moving, but the object is blocked by something, i.e. a full unloader), and have the rollers not wear when something is stationary on top of it. It would definitely make for some interesting choices people would have to make for their system. No more resources backing up on the belt endlessly, unless you want to destroy everything

All just idea's though!

PS. I was wondering (haven't tried it yet) if it's possible to have a undertaker go under a wall? Since the undercover has to be everywhere between the two, a wall would break that up wouldn't it?

[1000101]

Undertakers are solid objects which require their own space.  That is, they can't share space with anything else be it walls, other belts, etc.

Undercovers "exist underground" and go "under" anything, walls, tables, other "surface" belts.  Note, the undercover belts are straight, they don't turn.

[Timmiej93]

So if I'm correct, a undercover should be able to go under a wall just fine?
If so, then I'm having a bit of trouble with them, since they wouldn't built when I placed them underneath a wall, and when I removed the walls, installed the undercovers, and tried to rebuild the wall, the wall won't build up again.

[1000101]

Ok, small bugfix for undercovers and placement under walls.

The problem is a small xml bug where the undercover is a non-edifice but still uses up the entire cell.

In your RimWorld directory:
/Mods/RW_A2B/Defs/ThingDefs/Building_A2B.xml

Add this line to the A2BUndercover:  <fillPercent>0</fillPercent>

For example, inserted as line 411:

Code Select Expand

[407]        <building>
[408]            <isInert>true</isInert>
[409]            <isEdifice>false</isEdifice>
[410]        </building>
[411]        <fillPercent>0</fillPercent>
[412]        <graphicPath>Things/Building/Undercover</graphicPath>

After changing this I was able to build undercovers under walls and walls over undercovers without issue.

This fix will be rolled into the next update and more testing without god-mode will be done before it's release. 

Thank-you to everyone who reported this.