TL;DR
Allow a circuit signal to force rocket to launch to a specific platform, based on that platform's surface ID, and allow reading surface ID's to the circuit network.What?
When the player connects a Rocket Silo to the circuit network, provide an option (unchecked by default) called something like "Launch to Specified ID" which overrides the current rocket silo behavior and replaces it with the following logic: Every platform should have a unique ID (since each one is its own surface). When the signal specified in "Launch to Specified ID" has a value equal to the surface ID of a platform in orbit of the planet where the rocket silo is located, the rocket silo will launch to that platform regardless of its contents. If the ID does not match any orbiting platform, the rocket will not launch. If "Launch to Specified ID" is not enabled, the default behavior does not change at all. For this suggestion to be worthwhile, one other small change needs to happen: Space platform hubs would need an option to output their surface's ID to the circuit network.For completeness' sake, if the devs make this change they might consider a similar change to launches from platforms to planets. This would involve letting a planetside cargo hub output the planet's surface ID just like the space platform hub, and an option for the space platform hub "Launch to Specified ID" which launches all contents to the planet below if and only if the specified ID matches the planet's ID. Again, default behavior would not change unless this option is selected by the player. This is less useful than the change to rocket silos, but it gives every surface symmetric behavior, whether it is a platform or a planet. (It also just might allow modders to enable platform-to-platform cargo transfers...)
Why?
There has been a lot of discussion about perceived problems with rocket logistics in Space Age and how to address them in several threads like this one viewtopic.php?f=6&t=118510 and this one viewtopic.php?f=6&t=116498 and this one: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=121440. I personally agree that something needs to change in order to improve flexibility and precision, but I also sympathize with the competing desire not to make the default behavior more complicated than it already is. Also, some of the above threads already contain multiple suggestions which the moderators of this board advise against, so I posted a specific suggestion here which I think would solve many problems and hopefully not make things overcomplicated by default.I intend to make another related suggestion that will tie into this one about how the devs could allow even more convenient automation, and I will try to link it here once that is done. EDIT: That time is now, and the related suggestion is viewtopic.php?f=6&t=121797. But I want this suggestion to be as specific as possible.
