Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Last post by QuakeIV on Today at 08:40:59 PM »
Other random quality of life suggestion: Instead of suggesting random new companies for naming components, have a separate panel where you can save the names of the companies you have in your game (and generate suggestions)
Then you can select the company name in a dropdown menu, as you will be likely be reusing company names.

Strongly in favor of this, would hugely help me keep things straight (I might actually start using company names again).
2
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Beam Cruisers
« Last post by Kurt on Today at 08:35:06 PM »
The only thing I'd change if I designed it would be multiple smaller power plants, so that you don't lose power all at once, and changing the engines from just one to at least two (half size) smaller engines.  That way you don't lose motive power if your only engine is damaged.  You will lose efficiency, but the resilience should more than make up for it. 

Kurt
3
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Last post by Whitecold on Today at 02:45:56 PM »
Other random quality of life suggestion: Instead of suggesting random new companies for naming components, have a separate panel where you can save the names of the companies you have in your game (and generate suggestions)
Then you can select the company name in a dropdown menu, as you will be likely be reusing company names.
4
C# Aurora / Re: mineral usage
« Last post by QuakeIV on Today at 01:25:59 PM »
True, that could do it.  In general dropping spies on highly populated worlds could concievable produce truckloads of data about production sites, other population centers, navigational data, mineral quantities, et cetera.  IIRC the new version will have some degree of that which I am failing to remember at the moment.  Mainly I argue it shouldn't take overly Herculean efforts to find places that employ like 10% of some empires population.  Maybe even just existing near foreign civilian ships with good EM sensors and listening in on comms once you have their language translated would be enough to quickly pick up on the big things.
5
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Beam Cruisers
« Last post by misanthropope on Today at 01:09:11 PM »
fighters are the most dangerous form of attack the AI employs, and you seem uniquely vulnerable, since you engage so few salvos.

6666 kkps isnt fast for the tech level.  there are magneto-plasma fleets to be found on this site where your plan would have to be "absorb every missile in his entire empire and then hope his yards are in the contact system".

extravagant uridium and gallicite costs, and a fast ugly slide from state-of-the-art to total obsolescence are AFAIK unavoidable problems with beam fleet concepts in aurora.  i know of no build trick that helps much;  on the strategic side your main advantage is maximizing your odds of fuel-cost-only victories, so you play to that by expanding in a fashion that lets you bring 100% of your fleet to the attack at the instant of first contact.  its all i got, sorry.
6
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Beam Cruisers
« Last post by Erik Luken on Today at 12:37:50 PM »
I'd double up on the fire controls to provide some shielding against combat damage and to engage more than one target per ship.

I'd probably add another power plant or so, again for combat damage. And another sensor.

Anything you have only 1 of that is a mission-critical item, is a point of failure. :)
Doubling power plants is probably a good idea, but the beams fire controls are rather a bit too expensive already, doubling them is not really an easy choice.

But if you lose the FC, you are sitting on 18k tons of target. :)
7
C# Aurora / Error messages including what order causes the error
« Last post by Triato on Today at 12:27:36 PM »
In the current Aurora, errors can sometimes be solved simply by changing the orders that caused the error. However, we frequently give docens of orders per turn, making it very hard to find which caused the error. My sugestion is to include which order, fleet or construction caused the error so we can change it. Also, if posible, maybe an order log where we can see the orders made in every turn.

Thank you very much for this game. I love it even though I´ve had to abandon many games due to error messages that made me have to pass minutes pressing enter to continue the game.
8
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Questions
« Last post by chrislocke2000 on Today at 11:50:57 AM »
Not sure if I have missed this. Was just wondering how damaged or destroyed units in ground formations will be dealt with after combat. Will they be repaired / replaced over time or will you need to build individual replacement units to get them back to strength now the concept of readiness has gone? Is there still the concept of replacement units to speed up rebuild if you don’t need to replace one for one?
9
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Beam Cruisers
« Last post by Felius on Today at 10:55:57 AM »
I'd double up on the fire controls to provide some shielding against combat damage and to engage more than one target per ship.

I'd probably add another power plant or so, again for combat damage. And another sensor.

Anything you have only 1 of that is a mission-critical item, is a point of failure. :)
Doubling power plants is probably a good idea, but the beams fire controls are rather a bit too expensive already, doubling them is not really an easy choice.
10
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Beam Cruisers
« Last post by Erik Luken on Today at 10:50:09 AM »
I'd double up on the fire controls to provide some shielding against combat damage and to engage more than one target per ship.

I'd probably add another power plant or so, again for combat damage. And another sensor.

Anything you have only 1 of that is a mission-critical item, is a point of failure. :)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10