Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes Discussion  (Read 441785 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1486
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #90 on: August 25, 2016, 01:21:03 PM »
Keeping track of deceased and retired officers along with their service records would bee good. It'll help me name my destroyer and frigate sized ships, as the USN does today.

I'd also like it if the layout of the systems we know about in our immediate area were as fleshed out as the Sol system, but that is probably asking too much.

Useless...seriously.
 

Offline NuclearStudent

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • N
  • Posts: 95
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #91 on: August 25, 2016, 03:25:09 PM »
Quote from: waresky link=topic=8497. msg96187#msg96187 date=1472149263
Useless. . . seriously.

A lot of this game is about roleplaying, so I would politely disagree with you.  I think that the officer system could be good for roleplay, but it is too difficult to keep track of multitudes of officers to keep it fun. 
 
The following users thanked this post: iceball3

Offline Sheb

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 789
  • Thanked: 30 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #92 on: August 26, 2016, 02:01:55 AM »
Yeah, keeping track of officers is a PITA. At the very least keeping a record of all officers (or at least all officers that had a ship posting) would be great.
 

Offline Britich

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • B
  • Posts: 20
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #93 on: August 26, 2016, 05:20:38 AM »
Yeah, keeping track of officers is a PITA. At the very least keeping a record of all officers (or at least all officers that had a ship posting) would be great.

I concur, I like to write up Battle Reports in the Galaxy Notes window, even name the battles.
 

Offline sloanjh (OP)

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 2805
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #94 on: August 26, 2016, 07:06:49 AM »
A lot of this game is about roleplaying, so I would politely disagree with you.  I think that the officer system could be good for roleplay, but it is too difficult to keep track of multitudes of officers to keep it fun.

Something you should be aware of is that we've been here before: Aurora started out keeping dead or retired officers.  There was a general consensus that all it resulted in was a ton of noise with very little signal (signal being the "interesting" officers that you would actually want to remember), so Steve took it out.  I saw a good idea go by a year or two ago for how to put it back in: basically it would keep dead officers in a holding bin for a short time, allowing you to flag them for permanently remembering.  IIRC, this idea came up while Steve was focusing on things other than Aurora, which is probably why he didn't jump on it and run with it.  If he were to put it back in, it should probably be on a option so that people who did't want to mess with it could turn it completely off.

I suspect this is the long version of what waresky was trying to say :)

John
 
The following users thanked this post: waresky, Ayeshteni, JacenHan, NuclearStudent

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1486
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #95 on: August 26, 2016, 09:31:48 AM »
Yeah, keeping track of officers is a PITA. At the very least keeping a record of all officers (or at least all officers that had a ship posting) would be great.

RPG its 90% of Aurora, but we need more options in others field. My 2 cents
 

Offline NuclearStudent

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • N
  • Posts: 95
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #96 on: August 26, 2016, 12:54:22 PM »
Something you should be aware of is that we've been here before: Aurora started out keeping dead or retired officers.  There was a general consensus that all it resulted in was a ton of noise with very little signal (signal being the "interesting" officers that you would actually want to remember), so Steve took it out.  I saw a good idea go by a year or two ago for how to put it back in: basically it would keep dead officers in a holding bin for a short time, allowing you to flag them for permanently remembering.  IIRC, this idea came up while Steve was focusing on things other than Aurora, which is probably why he didn't jump on it and run with it.  If he were to put it back in, it should probably be on a option so that people who did't want to mess with it could turn it completely off.

I suspect this is the long version of what waresky was trying to say :)

John

Yes, that sounds like an absolutely good explanation of why my idea wouldn't work, as well as an excellent alternate suggestion for a better system.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #97 on: August 27, 2016, 06:30:15 AM »
The C# version is only saved when the user chooses (or will be when I code that part :) ).

Therefore I could leave the officers in the game but flagged as dead. The player would decide anyone he wanted to keep in the 'Hall of Heroes' (or something on those lines). Anyone else would disappear when the game was shut down (as I wouldn't bother to save them).
 
The following users thanked this post: Happerry, Ayeshteni, Britich, serger

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #98 on: August 27, 2016, 03:09:44 PM »
Is there a chance to get some parameters which for example can tweak how much dust and radiation is removed per day? Could use a planetary SpaceMaster Parameter which says how much of the dust is removed. The Dust and Radiation in my storygame simply are reduced too quickly and I have to "re-add" them now and then to keep the grows of the population more under control as I have planned. Such a parameter would make my life as SpaceMaster a little easier... . :D
 

Offline Sheb

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 789
  • Thanked: 30 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #99 on: August 27, 2016, 03:25:42 PM »
Just detonate another nuke from time to time, as some poor schmuch hit an unexploded missiles while digging foundations.
 

Offline Kristover

  • Gold Supporter
  • Lt. Commander
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 259
  • Thanked: 135 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #100 on: September 13, 2016, 08:59:38 PM »
Love the game and looking forward to playing the C# version.

One question - I have seen in the discussion the increased functionality and easier to program in VB6.   Any plans to address NPRs not being able to conduct ground invasions on planets?  I would like to see it in future versions - having to defend planets with my ground forces from NPR invasion.

Thanks!
 

Offline Borealis4x

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 717
  • Thanked: 141 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #101 on: September 14, 2016, 07:16:32 PM »
Are you going to allow for a more complex OoB, like allowing task forces to be the subordinate of other task forces so we can have a central high command?

Will it also model the central government so our capital system is not just another system in a sector?
 

Offline NuclearStudent

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • N
  • Posts: 95
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #102 on: September 14, 2016, 09:35:40 PM »
Are you going to allow for a more complex OoB, like allowing task forces to be the subordinate of other task forces so we can have a central high command?

Will it also model the central government so our capital system is not just another system in a sector?

Steve just mentioned yes to the above up on the top of the page :)
 

Offline Borealis4x

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 717
  • Thanked: 141 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #103 on: September 15, 2016, 12:34:35 AM »
I went back to page 2 and saw that I already answered this and he said it was a maybe. I don't see any response from Steve regarding this on this page though.
 

Offline TCD

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • T
  • Posts: 229
  • Thanked: 16 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #104 on: September 15, 2016, 10:17:18 AM »
The OoB/task force changes are in (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8438.msg96786#msg96786), but I don't think anything has been said about central government/civilian command structure yet?