[Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

[Pendra37]

Facilities have the "crafts" value to set how many crafts the facility can hold. So far so good.
How about giving crafts a "size"? With this, you could set a hangar's capacity 2, and the small interceptor size 1. You could hold 2 interceptors there. Or make a heavy fighter size 2 so only 1 such craft could he housed in the hangar.

XCom Files come to my mind where this could be very helpful. Now you can park a single car in a massive hangar. After this, the hangar could be set to craft = 8. And the car is size 1, the van size 2, the tank is 3 and the actual planes like 6-8. 

[remiz]

and it could be useful for Piratez and other mods

[Meridian]

I will be adding craft/hangar slot types.

I will likely not be adding craft/hangar size.
(at least not until I see how the types features will work out)

[Ethereal]

I will be adding craft/hangar slot types.

I will likely not be adding craft/hangar size.
(at least not until I see how the types features will work out)

This is exactly what I wouldn’t want. It would make sense if it were possible to increase the total area of ​​the base, but within the boundaries that exist it will only create a lot of inconvenience.
"CraftSize" is a completely different matter. I've been waiting for this for a long time.

[Juku121]

What exactly is this inconvenience? You'd still be able to put multiple craft in one hangar, so in theory one hangar could fit an armada of 100 fighter jets, while no hovercars are allowed - if you so desired.

[Ethereal]

What exactly is this inconvenience? You'd still be able to put multiple craft in one hangar, so in theory one hangar could fit an armada of 100 fighter jets, while no hovercars are allowed - if you so desired.

The inconvenience is that you will have to put an additional hangar in place where there could be radars or defensive structures. I understand that no one builds a defense by fighting back with ships, but in my TFTU the situation is different. No ships will help completely secure bases from attacks.

[Pendra37]

The craft size is somewhat more generic of a solution. You have a hangar where you can fit a chopper for 6 space and a van for 2. Meanwhile the type solution would make you build a parking lot for the two cars and a hangar for the chopper. You would not allow cars to a hangar even if it is empty.

The size solution would still allow types. Such as make a "parking lot" 4 space and make the smallest flyer 5 size.

[Meridian]

Type is IMO more generic solution than size.
(You can have hangars with all kinds of different slot types, no problem combining choppers and vans.)

Whereas size solution fails already at the simplest use case of separating submarines from aircraft.

[Ethereal]

The hangar can be made universal. But the size can't be helped. Yes, you can use small hangars only for small crafts, + a universal large one, which means both functions are needed.

With types, it turns out that transport ships must be divided into at least 4 types - small, large, small space, large space. And if you divide them into underwater/surface, the number of types increases to at least 8.

It seems to me that the ships shown below are slightly different sizes, but of the same type.

[Pendra37]

Size can have two "types". Above water with a +sign and below water with a - sign. Facility with -4 capacity can hold only below water crafts.
If we go purely type, you can go pretty nuts twisting the system to have some consistency.
You either have a large number of different facilities which would not allow cross parking. Or you allow cross parking, say a van can park a hangar but an interceptor cant be placed into a parking lot. Then you will be back to square one because only 1 craft can be in s hangar regardless of craft size.

I was thinking an analogy and the General Stores came to my mind. Now there are 2 types, general and live storage. Imagine if you added like general, gun racks, blast proof, refrigirated, live psionically shielded, live reinforced, live because a dead muton is like 6x the size of a heavy plasma but instead of assigning it a size of 9, you just want to count it as 1 since it is one piece of stuff. No, we happily accepted the typeless nature of stores if favor of size. Why is it an issue to have the same logic applied to crafts?

You may say like you can build 3 separated parking lots and then the sum capacity would allow a heavy transport plane to land. You cut the big craft into 3 parts or what? That would be  weird. I agree on that, so just fill craft size descending order into facility capacity ascending order.
You have a transport 7s, interceptor 5s, 2xAPC 3s, 2xVan 2s, 3xCar 1s. And you have 2xHangars 8c, 3xParking lots 4c.
Transport check parking 1-2-3 doesnt fit. Hangar 1 fit. Hangar 1 capacity is 1 now.
Interceptor, Hangar 1-parking 1-2-3 doesnt fit. Hangar 2 fits, cap is 3 there.
APC1 goes parking 1.
APC2 goes parking 2.
Van 1, 2 goes to parking 3.
Cars go hangar 1, parking 1, parking 2.
Hangar 2 has 3 more capacity for crafts.
Subs do this but they do everything with Abs()

[Ethereal]

Something is too difficult.   
There is a small single hangar for small ships, and there is a large one with 4 places, where you can place 4 small ships, or 2 large ones. This requires division into types and at the same time different sizes of ships.

And all these underwater/surface - in TFTD, all ships could fly over land, which means their hangars were not very different in equipment from conventional aircraft hangars.

By the way, about vans, APCs and other land vehicles - it’s very funny to watch them drive on water. It’s just that this type of equipment is alien to this game and its mechanics are not designed for such things. I don't use this and don't plan to.

[Juku121]

Size can have two "types". Above water with a +sign and below water with a - sign.

And when the modder wants spacecraft and tunnelling craft that are different from either (real example, these already exist), what then? Complex numbers and then quaternions?

Then you will be back to square one because only 1 craft can be in s hangar regardless of craft size.

No, why? Hangar size is going to be independent of hangar/craft types, as I understand it.

[stores]

Why is it an issue to have the same logic applied to crafts?

Because we want to differentiate between crafts, but do not care about what exactly is getting stored. If we didn't, this whole feature would be close to pointless, since we already have stores-like hangars. AFAIK, people who want hangars based on whether the crafts are fighter jets, submarines, cars or space shuttles considerably outnumber those who want to build 7 garages and then store their fighter jets inside.

What you're proposing is having both stores-like and type-based hangars at the same time.

You have a transport 7s, interceptor 5s, 2xAPC 3s, 2xVan 2s, 3xCar 1s. And you have 2xHangars 8c, 3xParking lots 4c.

As I understand it, even the types version is kind of a pain in the ass to implement, both due to performance and all sorts of corner cases. Look at WarStalkeR's attempt at craft sizes.

When we have type-based hangars and Meridian has a better idea of how things shake out, then we can have a proper discussion of whether to try craft sizes, too.

[Pendra37]

Hm, how about doing some old timey range divisions? Take the size and divide by 16. Integer part is type, remainder is size.
Size 0-15 is type 0. Size 16-31 is type 1 etc. Size 0 is type 0, size1. Size 18 is type 1, size 3. Simple no quaternions or whatever.
If you dont care about size just type, use 0, 16, 32 etc. If you do care, go for other numbers. Size can be type but type cant be size. Unless you want a different facility for different types/sizes. Also, it still doesnt solve the issue of allowing 1 tiny craft in a massive hangar. Unless  you also add another value say can hold 4 type 1 crafts or 2 type 2 crafts or 1 type 3 craft. At this point you implemented craft size, just not from the craft's perspective but from the facility's.

I don't care about type, I still dont. The alternate proposal was called a compromise. Meridian pointed he would prefer type. Instead of bashing type as stupid and pointless idea, because size is the only true way, I merely mentioned, why not both? It is not that they are mutually exclusive or something. Being a dev and a software architect, I picked up a few ideas how to propose features in a non aggressive way.

[Meridian]

Yes, both can be implemented.

I just said I will do type first and then reevaluate.

[Pendra37]

Land vehicles over sea, well I consider the agents buy plane tickets. Then drive to an airport, get on a plane, fly to the other continent and rent another car.
For the APCs, they fly as cargo on a chartered C130 or similar slow plane.
An underwater base with a car driving out would be some wild James Bond stuff like the white Lotus.