Semi-Official 7.x Suggestion Thread

[RikerPicard]

-"Permanent assignment" check box for officers, making them invisible to search by ability or location, similar to obsoleting tech, but you can check another box to show officers with permanent assignments.

-Scrap orbital habitat from industry(or if that doesn't fit the fluff, the assembled habitats are too big to bring down to the surface, let ships with salvage modules do it in space). 

-Dedicating a % of industry to "build components to order", and assigning it to any shipyard with current build orders, reducing the time needed to complete them. Less effective than prebuilding individual components.

[Iranon]

I'd greatly prefer it tractor links would not break whenever a lightbulb burns out.
Maybe tractor beam could do with some limitations, but making them too annoying to use in numbers seems the wrong way.

[83athom]

A fighter sized fuel tank. 1 ton, carries 1000 Liters and costs .3 Boronide.

[Bughunter]

What about an option to do increment X ignoring interrupts no matter what happens?

[linkxsc]

A fighter sized fuel tank. 1 ton, carries 1000 Liters and costs .3 Boronide.

Id be down for that. But at the same time I kinda wish you could build "drop tanks" to go in box launchers. Incase you want to send your fighter on a particularly long range mission, but dont need its normal full armament. "Firing" the fuel tank will add the fuel from that missile to the fighters current load.

Course that might be a real annoyance to code. And the idea that some of your ammo storage is now fuel storage is a bit meh.

[Iranon]

I'd really like more control about general game flow.
Maybe an adjustable "urgency rating" for any type of event, with associated settings like "display all events of urgency 3+, interrupt turns for all events of urgency 6+". Combined with nice defaults, this would be a great convenience feature imo.

[RikerPicard]

Not sure if this is exactly what the previous poster was talking about, but I'd like to see the following events interrupt increments;

completed research
production of a single research lab
production of shipyard
completion of shipyard operation
production of ship/ground unit

I also don't think dropping off teams warrants an interrupt.

[83athom]

Not sure if this is exactly what the previous poster was talking about, but I'd like to see the following events interrupt increments;

completed research
production of a single research lab
production of shipyard
completion of shipyard operation
production of ship/ground unit

I also don't think dropping off teams warrants an interrupt.

There are differences between Turn interrupts and Auto-turn interrupts. The first stops turns mid way and is more taxing for the program, the second just stops the auto-turn cycle until you increment time again.

The complete research, production of shipyard, completion of shipyard operation, and ground unit training are all already auto-turn interrupts. While completing research labs would be a handy interrupt, it would get really annoying and tedious quickly at the rates of production you should have (and idle labs are already an interrupt).

While Turn interrupts seem more useful than auto-turn interrupts, they are more annoying and counter-intuitive when you are supposed to be queuing these things so nothing is wasted.

[RikerPicard]

There are differences between Turn interrupts and Auto-turn interrupts. The first stops turns mid way and is more taxing for the program, the second just stops the auto-turn cycle until you increment time again.

The complete research, production of shipyard, completion of shipyard operation, and ground unit training are all already auto-turn interrupts. While completing research labs would be a handy interrupt, it would get really annoying and tedious quickly at the rates of production you should have (and idle labs are already an interrupt).

While Turn interrupts seem more useful than auto-turn interrupts, they are more annoying and counter-intuitive when you are supposed to be queuing these things so nothing is wasted.

Didn't actually realize those things interrupt increments, I usually just start doing 1 day forward when something important is almost done.

[smoelf]

I don't know if this has been suggested before or if it is even possible, but speaking of interrupts, I would love if it would be possible to distinguish between NPR's and PR's when determining an interrupt. This would especially pertain to battles where two NPR's are involved, and the player is not, but because you have a ship in the system, you are doomed to the inevitable 5-second turn interrupts every time an explosion is detected. And because this is a turn interrupt, you can't simply auto-turn your way out of it, but must sit there to click the turn button every time someone fires a weapon.

However, if it is was possible to distinguish between NPR's and PR's, you could do the following:

1) For any event where a PR ship is involved, you would stop the turn as per usual.

2) For any event where no PR ship is involved, but only NPR ships are involved, there would be no turn interrupt.

This should be able to be toggled on and off, as sometimes you might want to be able to react to the information given through those events, but once you know that there is a battle going on, and the movement of your ship has no bearing on it, you might as well set those kind of events as non-interrupting, and continue on your way. Naturally, if one of the ships fire at you, or activates an active sensor close to you, that would mean an interrupt, as your ship is directly involved in that event.

[SwordLord10]

I think it would be a good addition to add different kinds of missile systems, like radar-guided and heat-seeking missiles of today. You could use a normal active sensor, and that wouldn't change from how it works now, but you could also implement a system allowing for missiles to have thermal sensors, so they target the largest thermal source they can detect on their target, or EM sensors, to target either sensors or shields. That would also add a new counter-missile system in decoys, which could use "noisemakers" which send out EM signals, or "flares" which clutter thermal sensors, attempting to draw them off target.

[83athom]

I think it would be a good addition to add different kinds of missile systems, like radar-guided and heat-seeking missiles of today. You could use a normal active sensor, and that wouldn't change from how it works now, but you could also implement a system allowing for missiles to have thermal sensors, so they target the largest thermal source they can detect on their target, or EM sensors, to target either sensors or shields. That would also add a new counter-missile system in decoys, which could use "noisemakers" which send out EM signals, or "flares" which clutter thermal sensors, attempting to draw them off target.

Technically that is already a thing. EM sensor equipped missiles will seek out enemy active sensor sources and thermals target largest thermal contact. However these only take effect if active contact is lost and the missiles sensors pick up the target on its own.

[TCD]

I think it would be a good addition to add different kinds of missile systems, like radar-guided and heat-seeking missiles of today. You could use a normal active sensor, and that wouldn't change from how it works now, but you could also implement a system allowing for missiles to have thermal sensors, so they target the largest thermal source they can detect on their target, or EM sensors, to target either sensors or shields. That would also add a new counter-missile system in decoys, which could use "noisemakers" which send out EM signals, or "flares" which clutter thermal sensors, attempting to draw them off target.

It's a cool idea, but how does it work with the current generalized armor? Can you hit the sensors/shields bypassing armor? If not, then why are all your targeted missile strikes splashing against armor across the length of the ship, then suddenly all hitting the engine as soon as the armor is breached? I think for this to logically work Steve would need to move more towards localised armor, which opens a huge can of worms.

[SwordLord10]

It's a cool idea, but how does it work with the current generalized armor? Can you hit the sensors/shields bypassing armor? If not, then why are all your targeted missile strikes splashing against armor across the length of the ship, then suddenly all hitting the engine as soon as the armor is breached? I think for this to logically work Steve would need to move more towards localised armor, which opens a huge can of worms.

Well I can understand the difficulty hitting internal systems like sensors or shields, I would have to take some time to think of how that could work without remaking armor. Engines have to have an external element to generate thrust however, meaning that it would work by the missiles going behind the ship, then powering as close to the engine as they can before going boom.

[TCD]

Well I can understand the difficulty hitting internal systems like sensors or shields, I would have to take some time to think of how that could work without remaking armor. Engines have to have an external element to generate thrust however, meaning that it would work by the missiles going behind the ship, then powering as close to the engine as they can before going boom.

But then shouldn't non-guided missiles should also have a chance to cause direct engine damage (just be happening to hit near the engine opening? Can-of-worms!