C# Aurora v0.x Questions

[Desdinova]

Is the game still balanced for a 500 million starting population? Are neutral NPRs still a thing? Basically, is there a mechanism in place for playing the modern Earth with a population of 7 billion without messing things up?

[Steve Walmsley]

Is the game still balanced for a 500 million starting population? Are neutral NPRs still a thing? Basically, is there a mechanism in place for playing the modern Earth with a population of 7 billion without messing things up?

Probably more than 1000m. Yon can play with 7b but it will be a huge game.

[Father Tim]

When the "Intelligence and Foreign Relations" window shows warship classes in the summary (such as the "3x Genghis" here:http://www.pentarch.org/steve/Screenshots/Crusade/Space1889_VenusIntel.PNG), is there any way for my empire to designate them, for example, Battleships and have it show "3x Genghis BB" instead?

Even if that's not what the foreign government calls those ships, and even if the window does identify them as such elsewhere, it's specifically the leftmost column and the "Known Ship Classes" dropdown where I'd like to see the hull type designators listed.

So, for example:
"Known Ship Classes"
- 3x Genghis BB
- 8x Hazara CA
- 3x Khan BB
- 1x Mongka CJ
- 12x Nevnizgiin H4
- 12x Nevnizgiin Small C4
- 12x Nevnizgiin Small F4
- 8x Timurad DD
- 10x Yuan FF"

It's fine if I have to set the "BB, CA, CJ," etc., myself.

[Steve Walmsley]

When the "Intelligence and Foreign Relations" window shows warship classes in the summary (such as the "3x Genghis" here:http://www.pentarch.org/steve/Screenshots/Crusade/Space1889_VenusIntel.PNG), is there any way for my empire to designate them, for example, Battleships and have it show "3x Genghis BB" instead?

Even if that's not what the foreign government calls those ships, and even if the window does identify them as such elsewhere, it's specifically the leftmost column and the "Known Ship Classes" dropdown where I'd like to see the hull type designators listed.

So, for example:
"Known Ship Classes"
- 3x Genghis BB
- 8x Hazara CA
- 3x Khan BB
- 1x Mongka CJ
- 12x Nevnizgiin H4
- 12x Nevnizgiin Small C4
- 12x Nevnizgiin Small F4
- 8x Timurad DD
- 10x Yuan FF"

It's fine if I have to set the "BB, CA, CJ," etc., myself.

Yes, you can already set the hull designation and it shows up in the contact details on the map and in the alien class description. They all start as XX designation. I'm going away for a few days but I will add it to to the tree view when I get back.

[KurtWulfgang]

I have two questions.  Tried searching for them but found nothing.

1.  How's the performance of c# comparing to old version? When, or does, the game really starts to slow down, like turns longer than two minutes? And how do NPR's affect the performance, is it significant or can one play with multiple NPRs at start?

2.  On spoiler races: Are there any changes to any of them?

[muraug]

Hello.

I play Aurora 7. 1 in more then one PC.  I copy the "Stevefire. mdb" archive in a memory, or i send it by mail, or. . .  and then i can play the same campaign in more than one place.  ¿Is going to be possible to do some like that in Aurora C#?

[Garfunkel]

How's the performance of c# comparing to old version?

Massively better. C# runs faster than VB6 does and the game no longer writes into the database all the time. Civilian shipping will no longer be a drag. NPRs will still cause issues because there is no way to stop them from fighting other NPRs and/or spoilers but their mere existence will not slow things down. Steve has posted actual numbers here and there - things that used to take a minute now take few seconds.

On spoiler races: Are there any changes to any of them?

Yes.

Off-Topic: show

There is a whole new spoiler race that is entirely planet-bound
and
Star Swarm now has ground combat and ship boarding capability
and
Steve has speculated about changes and additions to Invaders but we have nothing concrete yet

¿Is going to be possible to do some like that in Aurora C#?

Yes, the database will remain and you can take it with you so you can play the same campaign at multiple places and on several PCs.

[KurtWulfgang]

How's the performance of c# comparing to old version?

Massively better.  C# runs faster than VB6 does and the game no longer writes into the database all the time.  Civilian shipping will no longer be a drag.  NPRs will still cause issues because there is no way to stop them from fighting other NPRs and/or spoilers but their mere e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Thanks, cant wait for it!

Off-Topic: show

  Im getting a massive tyranid vibe from the star swarm here.   

[Father Tim]

. . . When, or does, the game really starts to slow down, like turns longer than two minutes?

None of Steve's C# campaigns have reached this point, so we don't know.  But the answer is likely "a thousand times further on than VB Aurora."

[papent]

@Steve Walmsley

 - So I don't need Ordinance Transfer equipment of any sort to do it then, even when the Fighter in question hasn't been landed? Well, alrighty then.

Ah - yes you would need ordnance transfer.

Regarding the new ordinance mechanics:

 - If I have a Collier Fighter, 500 Tons(10HS) let's say, carrying 2 Size 10 Missiles, and it lands on a ship which has a magazine capable of receiving them, can I transfer them? Or does that ships ALSO need some kind of extra equipment? If so, can the mothership mount it, or does the Fighter need to? I would suspect that if the equipment to reload my Fighters from the mothership's magazine(s) exists in a hangar space, then the inverse would also hold true.

At the moment you can do it without landing - just join the fleet with the collier and set it to transfer ordnance. I think it would also transfer if you landed, but the carrier would then transfer it back. Although if you set the collier to a zero loadout, it would work. So yes, but complicated. Easier to do it before landing.

Pingback to this question. Does the fighter-collier or any other parasite ship needs ordnance transfer equipment to transfer to the mothership while docked?

And what about parasites transferring fuel to motherships?

[Hazard]

AFAICT, the originating vessel needs transfer equipment for all transfers, unless the receiving colony/vessel has heavy duty transfer equipment available.

[Jorgen_CAB]

AFAICT, the originating vessel needs transfer equipment for all transfers, unless the receiving colony/vessel has heavy duty transfer equipment available.

I'm pretty sure you will not need any special equipment to transfer inside a hangar between the parasite and the mother ship... that would be a bit weird.

If you want to have small shuttles and every ship has a 500t hangar bay to dock ships then you could in theory build 500 ton refuel/ordnance/maintenance carriers without any transferring equipment needed. Not sure if there is any specific time needed to load and unload MSP, fuel or missiles from parasite to mother ship in C#... perhaps Steve could clarify if there is any time involved here as well as between ships.

I could assume a hangar simply act like a refuelling hub or the equivalent for the other for anything in a hangar and that would imply that it does take time to load and unload, at least it should in my opinion. If not you can bypass the load/unload time by shuttling stuff with small shuttles this way taking no time. Now... if it takes time will I be able to transfer twice the amount of missiles/MSP from parasite to mother ship if I dock two 250t shuttles instead of one 500t shuttle?!?

[xenoscepter]

Well, not no time... You can only dock so many ships per hangar, meaning that while yes you could slap a Boat Bay or two and use that, it would end up taking a serious toll on your mouse, not to mention your sanity to issue so many orders AND micro manage the launch / landing processes to allow it to happen in just one increment.

You could build massive carriers w/ the replenishment gear, but that would defeat the purpose. So... yeah. I think we should have gear similar to Cargo Handling Systems, except it affects small ship launch rate. And have launch rate be a thing. Battlestars had plenty of fighters, but only a few launch tubes, meaning that they could sortie every last one simultaneously... if I recall correctly. Battletech ships also needed time to recover their small ships and had a launch rate tied to Bay Doors.

[SevenOfCarina]

Steve, would it be possible to add locations hosting more than one million tons of station tonnage to the NPR banned bodies list? I'm asking because C# is going to make deep space fleet bases and orbital maintenance/mining/refuelling facilities more ubiquitous , so you'll often end up with vital colonies with minimal or zero population (large fleet bases without ground-based maintenance facilities, strategic fuel harvesting or mining platforms, etc.), that you really don't want NPRs parking a fleet over.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Well, not no time... You can only dock so many ships per hangar, meaning that while yes you could slap a Boat Bay or two and use that, it would end up taking a serious toll on your mouse, not to mention your sanity to issue so many orders AND micro manage the launch / landing processes to allow it to happen in just one increment.

You could build massive carriers w/ the replenishment gear, but that would defeat the purpose. So... yeah. I think we should have gear similar to Cargo Handling Systems, except it affects small ship launch rate. And have launch rate be a thing. Battlestars had plenty of fighters, but only a few launch tubes, meaning that they could sortie every last one simultaneously... if I recall correctly. Battletech ships also needed time to recover their small ships and had a launch rate tied to Bay Doors.

We have time for ordinance, MSP and fuel... I think it is about time we also get some more hangar/carrier love...

Different types of hangar, docking and launch bays so both parasite size and numbers matters for launching, docking and maintaining parasites. I know Steve have been a bit reluctant adding more complexity to parasites but I don't think it has to be more complex and problematic to handle than ordinance, fuel or MSP exchange will be.

You then also would have to install ordnance and refuelling system in carrier so rearming and refuelling take time depending on the systems you have installed. You would the see differences between a fleet carrier configuration and one just carrying some scouts or survey vessels. A fleet carrier would need allot more internal/external space for servicing/launching military operations while carriers with more simple hangar system can be more streamlined and less complex and cheaper.

As smaller ships in general have become more potent I think that it is about time carriers and especially military fleet carriers become a bit more expensive. I also think that parasites perhaps also should have a small MSP cost to maintain as well. I know the hangars themselves needs maintained so the cost should not be big but it could be at least some small cost as the cost of fighters will rise quite rapidly with technology advancement.

You also could differentiate civilian and military hangars more with different system. Perhaps civilian hangar can install larger launch bays far easier and cheaper while they can't fit internal ordinance systems but have to rely on maintenance facilities to do that.

Anyway... I would enjoy more complexity in parasite management in the future as long as the tools are there to manage them properly which I think we will get in C# Aurora.