Tried & Tested in Complex Building

[phantomrock2]

First deploy a Advanced Sat in the sector
However you bring in your stations in is up to you
Of course you drop the station right
Now the fun parts
You want to build on top & in rows going up or down
In order To do this ROTATE THE MAP AXIS each time you drop that stations
Make sure you have Salvage Insurance

Click K to turn on the camera in the sector. If you do not when dropping multiple stations it will be a lesson in immense futility. However. I would not turn on the camera until I have snapped to the station that is near the one you plan on dropping.

Click K. Then using the numbers on the keypad move the next station to the closet one you just built. NOW click 5 (YOU MUST PRESS 5 on the number keypad) on the num-keypad this will snap that would be station to be built to the closet one. Now ZOOM IN with the HOME key with the camera on. Move that station to be built over if you do not you will soon learn why. Not too far though. If you hear clanking sounds it means the stations are too close & will eventually deplete in shields UNLESS YOU connect them. This is why it is important that we watch closely to make sure the stations do not touch each other. Depending on other variables you might have time to connect them before hull damages starts to set in. So therefore there's no need to throw anything across the room or hit ALT+F4

After all that now you are ready to tie them all together. This requires the utmost skill & planning. Why? You do not want tubes that the mindless NPCs will run into costing reputation losses. Pay attention to how you have just built. The first two stations close to each is your starting point. CONNECT them BUT pay close attention to the docking point. YOU will have to snap it to the first two station being connected. Make sure you connect in succession as in do not skip a station in a row to connect or you will run the risk of having two tubes close to the docking point. Bad! Really Bad because the NPC traders will run into this when you're in the sector. You want to see one tube. Any more than one stop & reload the last save or dock & self-destruct. If you run into the scenario where you keep seeing the two tube effect try another connection start point. IF you see a docking tube that's too long it's in your best interest to start over. Besides the complex construction kits are not expensive.

With Solar power plants you will have to orient them so that they are not touching ANYTHING. & in my experience it's the last station that should be added to your complex lineup.

[delray]

- Buy stations and load onto Atmo Lifters
- Jump Lifters into sector
- Complex Cleaner: Drop
- Complex Cleaner: Crunch
- Connect with Hubs
- Homebase freighters
- CAG: Load Data: Complex Filler
- Done

[AL'42]

Or just dump them vertically at 1.5 - 2.0K separation. Drop station, num 5 to snap into position, separate vertically, connect, repeat .... the tubes drop neatly down with small complex footprint.

[Timsup2nothin]

Dull.

Not dull.
http://i67.tinypic.com/2n6dqgi.jpg

Choose.


{Images posted directly to the forums should not be greater than 640x480 or 100kb, oversize image now linked - Terre}

[jorganos]

Dull.

Not dull.

Choose.

Sure looks nice (almost like I thought complex building would work when I first read aboud X3 Reunion), but doesn't that configuration trigger collision damage every time you're in system?

I'm afraid my complex building is function before looks. I usually plant my complexes near gates, and I keep out of the way of traffic routes, so:

Step 1: when placing the first factory (either by chatting to the hired TL captain or picking it from the freight list of a personal TL), I press 5 on the numerical block and select the gate I want my future traffic to use.

Zooming in until the grid has three to five squares to the side of the targeted gate, I move to the side I want to start (using 2468 keys on the numerical block), then I switch to the vertical view and move one grid square up - most stations dock from beneath, so I save maneuvering time for ships arriving through the gate.

Next consideration is whether I plan on building just one of each factories for a product line, or several of each. In case I plan to build several, I leave the first grid plane up from the gate empty so I can place a complex hub there later.

Until I start linking factories of the same type, I use a vertical distance of a full grid square to avoid most of the collision alerts for higher up stations. For my own convenience, I name factories in the first level upward from the gate alpha, in the second level gamma, in the third level epsilon. Beta and delta are reserved for the half levels I only start populating when I have the complex connectors ready - if I plant them already during build-up, collisions will happen as soon as I revisit the system to expand the building site.

If I use mineral resources, the mines will be towed in below the factory levels (indeed below the gate level), with their docking protrusions facing upward. I usually go for diamond-shaped distribution, or somewhat stretched diamonds resembling a hexagonal densest sphere package in case I have to deal with lots of mines (e.g. in Barren Shores) - although I have sworn off megacomplexes, and rather build smaller ones dedicated to different products at different gates. When doing so, I try to avoid having to transport stuff between two complexes in the same system, and rather trade with the complex on the corresponding gate in the neighboring system (or a few sectors away once my CLS2 pilots have access to jump technology).

I tend to ignore the actual position of the sun, even though solar power plants and farms really should be oriented towards maximum solar exposure - if I had a way to align the system map perpendicular to the insolation, I would do it, but I rather hunt potential captures than finagling with each and every station orientation.

I do use the "k" option with advanced satellites to check whether there are overlaps with neighboring factories - some of the commonwealth L bio plants can come into conflict unless rotated, even using this generous grid. Don't let me start about Terran factories, collisions during docking, etc. - I plan to buy these only in pairs or more, and use complex hubs for approaching ships.

When finally connecting factories of the same kind in a tower, I place the complex hub below, then rotate it so that both docking branches turn down, away from the tower above, just a bit above the traffic plane at gate level. If I plan for a larger presence from the start, the hubs get to be at alpha level (one grid square above the gate level).

Populating the intermediary levels (beta, delta) doesn't usually cause overlaps of the factories but makes individual docking at these factories impossible when in system. Placing a vertically oriented hub half a level away from the factories doesn't work for a number of factories - the hub jumps away rather than providing a Z-shaped connector tube. That means the lowest factory level gets to be gamma level (two grid squares upwards of gate level).

My usual approach is to have the energy hub closest to the gate (as it will be the most visited), then the bio hubs (or single factories) in a row, then the food hubs or factories, finally any tech hubs. Rather than having several rows of tech hubs, I rather stack them in a wall facing towards the gate, below the hubs for energy, bio, and food, to keep ways short. Bundled mines will gain hubs reaching into the traffic level from below.

(I did try to build a wall of L-sized mines with their docking assets pointing towards the approach area once, but that approach failed miserably - I get much denser packaging by orienting them parallel to the normal grid plane.)

Using CLS2 traders and corresponding gates, not all factories (or factory bundles) of a "complex" need to be in the same sector. CLS2 traveling through the gates don't need substantially longer if their destinations aren't too far from the emergence area before the gate.

The actual emergence and approach area of the gate should be kept free if you want to avoid capital ships in traffic jams, the AI ships all but freak out if their preferred approach lane is blocked by a big object. Possibly even OOS - I have observed this when the God module rebuilt Flower Farm Alpha in Ceo's Doubt too close to the exit path from LooManckStraat's Legacy even after having reached Spaceweed Grove at 230 speed.

[RAVEN.myst]

Sure looks nice (almost like I thought complex building would work when I first read aboud X3 Reunion), but doesn't that configuration trigger collision damage every time you're in system?

Once the constituent factories are linked with tubes (whether visible or not), the collision stops being tested for. I used to use an overlapped approach before, in the hope that it would reduce graphical load - I would place identical stations precisely on top of each other (ie. occupying precisely the same space) and link them (the idea being that it should result in just the one model needing to be rendered instead of multiples of the same - however, this doesn't work in terms of saving GPU power.) The result WAS, however, very compact and less cluttered than some - however, I lost all visual indication of a complex's magnitude - 1 factory or 100 of that factory would look identical (except for a short stub of tubing, somewhere, with any number >1.) By the way, here's a trivium: as long as a station is linked to any other station using CCK, it will not be subject to nor cause collision damage to other such stations; ie. you can have separate overlapping complexes without them damaging each other.

[Timsup2nothin]

As RAVEN said already, factories in a complex are not subject to collision damage with each other. And by having the docking facility at the end of some reasonably extreme tower it keeps the transports from getting confused. In that one the docks are at one end of the spindle of cahoona bakeries.

RAVEN...by far the best way to reduce graphic load is to use invisible tubes.

[Nanook]

If you want to reduce graphical load with the overlap method, start with an ore or silicon mine. Most of the small amount of tubing thus used is inside the asteroid and hence invisible.

[jlehtone]

As RAVEN said already, factories in a complex are not subject to collision damage with each other.

The logical next step is to invoke some "activity" such as assassination, Xenon patrol, or otherwise insulting behaviour that inspires sufficient idle NPC turret/missile ordnance to demolish the Complex Hub while you are busy elsewhere in the sector. We love the sound of hundreds of overlapping unconnected stations in the morning.

Incidentally, I have not built a "real" Complex after X3R.


Nevertheless, lets suppose that you do choose to build a wide-spanning Complex. So large that the Hub is not near (<20km) all Stations. You must first connect subclusters of Stations into temporary Complexes that have their Hubs "close enough" to connect. The temporary Hubs are like pearls on a string / or nodes of a rooted tree.

When merging two Hubs, the second selected Hub vanishes. Name then neatly. For example: A, B, C, D.
Lets say that A and C are "near B", B and D are "near C" and you want the D to be the Hub of the final Complex.
1. Connect B and A. (A vanishes)
2. Connect C and B. (B vanishes)
3. Connect D and C. (C vanishes)
4. Rename D.


One cannot "snap on object" (with Num5) into an already connected Station.

[Timsup2nothin]

Well, I generally only build complexes with a few stations, not hundreds, but I can certainly imagine that sound!

[RAVEN.myst]

As RAVEN said already, factories in a complex are not subject to collision damage with each other.

The logical next step is to invoke some "activity" such as assassination, Xenon patrol, or otherwise insulting behaviour that inspires sufficient idle NPC turret/missile ordnance to demolish the Complex Hub while you are busy elsewhere in the sector. We love the sound of hundreds of overlapping unconnected stations in the morning.

Hahahaha - indeed! I've had this sort of thing happen. I don't overlap my stations anymore, but not for this reason - simply seems inelegant to me, somehow (though Tim's architecture proves otherwise!)

One cannot "snap on object" (with Num5) into an already connected Station.

Yes, this is a serious PitA for me, and leads me to build my initial plexes (which grow over time as finances permit, as opposed to being thrown up all at once as singular monolithic projects) with the docking hub (the only "snap-to-able" element after linking) as the sole reference point - so that plex usually ends up with the docking hub as a true centre-piece, with complex phases radiating out in 5 directions (up, down, left, right, and back) - some of them have ended up looking quite interesting, even pleasing; others... less so.

Well, I generally only build complexes with a few stations, not hundreds, but I can certainly imagine that sound!

I'm also not a fan of megaplexes - mine tend to be small and specialised, and since they usually (especially my first one) serve more as stock handling sites (for CAG/CLS2 hybrid trade networks) than as production facilities, they need never be huge - they usually only get to 8 stations, sometimes 16. Why the powers-of-2? Because I use the binary-tree linking method explained by Glenmcd (if I'm remembering his handle correctly), which greatly reduces the performance hit from plexes (though it benefits larger plexes much more.) This (my not building huge plexes anymore) is another reason why I no longer overlap my stations - I simply don't need to, neither for space constraints nor for performance considerations.

[Timsup2nothin]

I only do it for aesthetics.