Semi-Official 7.x Suggestion Thread

[Bremen]

I actually think the idea of a bomb type weapon that uses the launching vehicle's speed is pretty intriguing, but I'm not sure if it fits with the lore idea of inertialess drives.

Give it a range of speed x 5 and maybe have it work like missiles fired within 5 seconds of their range (normal beam PD can't shoot it down, but I believe CIWS still can) and it would open interesting tactical possibilities as a single shot and then reload version of a beam fighter. It would still have the problem beam based fighters have where it's almost impossible to get through AMM defenses, though.

[Zincat]

To be honest, I'm not too fond of the ideas Alex posted. No offense meant, I just think they don't fit well to the mood of the game and would be hard to balance too.

Some don't fit well the "physics" of the game too, considering the trans-newtonian laws the game works by...

[swarm_sadist]

I know this has been suggested before but have the sensors and reactors in missile design combined, so that having .5 Missile Size worth of Sensors doesn't produce another .264 something of reactor.

Having more FC options would be nice as well, such as delayed active sensors, fire and forget options, and search and destroy options. We can sort of do this with waypoints and sensor missiles, but the missile has to reach the waypoint first. It would be much easier if the missile locked on to any emissions it encounters along the way.

[rcj33]

How about adding research for increased-size missile launchers and lasers with faster refire rates? I know that they wouldn't have much mechanical benefit (the only really practical use would be for making useful AMM launchers at low TLs) but having powerful fast-firing weapons would be cool for RP. Plus I think they could be stuck into the existing tech lines for reduced-size missile launchers and lasers, kind of how genetic engineering techs work now.
Yes i know you can just put two weapons on a ship, fire one, and then assign the second to the FC when the first is halfway done cycling, but I really hate to do that kind of micro.

Also missile batteries would be nice (just turrets without rotation gear, but shooting missiles) and an option to "clone" non-racial components like ECM so that you wouldn't always find "your" stuff in alien wrecks.

[alex_brunius]

I actually think the idea of a bomb type weapon that uses the launching vehicle's speed is pretty intriguing, but I'm not sure if it fits with the lore idea of inertialess drives.

Give it a range of speed x 5 and maybe have it work like missiles fired within 5 seconds of their range (normal beam PD can't shoot it down, but I believe CIWS still can) and it would open interesting tactical possibilities as a single shot and then reload version of a beam fighter. It would still have the problem beam based fighters have where it's almost impossible to get through AMM defenses, though.

That was pretty much my idea. That these can work as early game weapons for making Carrier fighters/bombers somewhat potent before TL4-5, but after that they are marginalized and not really used anymore in face of potent AMM defenses, heavier dual purpose PD turrets with good tracking and sensors spotting strikes further away from target. It would neatly model the historical transition from WW2 tech to coldwar and modern carrier ops.


Cheaper weapons like Torpedoes would still be useful later on to give the a cheap punch to destroyers as well as more stealth like submarines operating behind the lines against enemy merchant shipping or in surprise attacks on less defended stationary targets.

And bombs could be a good means of finishing off enemy Orbitals or PDC defenses without a fortune worth of missiles once their offensive capacity is reduced sufficiently.

[Zincat]

I know it has been asked before. But we could really use some way to move to distant companions stars. There's so many of them, 1000+ billion km away from the main star. And they often have planets. It's just so... irritating, seeing them but not being able to reach them.


I understand you removed hyperdrive, and probably has no plan to use it ever again. But as it is, all those planets are useless...

[Zed 6]

2nd the motion to be able to move to distant companion stars. either a return to hyperdrive or some other method. These stars are very useful.

[Rich.h]

Or a mechanic for adding in a LP even if were only in SM.

[Laiders]

One simple suggestion that has occured to me from some Reddit discussions is the implementation of conditional orders based on how full a cargo hold is and, maybe, even what it is full of.  This would allow players more flexibility in setting up intra and inter system freighting routes.  It would also allow players to not get interrupted by 'loading failed.  Cargo hold is full' messages all the time if they are going a freighter heavy style of play. 

[linkxsc]

^ Seems reasonable enough.

What occurred to me as a suggestion just a bit ago.
As we now have the ability to "halt" production of civilian shipping lines. A nice addition.

Perhaps instead of a halt we could set an upper limit on tonnage that the Civilians are allowed to operate, and of what type.
So I could allow them 100,000t worth of freighters, 30,000t of colony ships, and 0t of fuel harvesters.
From there they pick their designs and can build up to less than that number in tonnage. If I lower the number while I they have more tonnage, it remains at that level until ships begin needing to be scrapped, after they're back below the allotted tonnage, they're allowed to start making new ships again.

[sublight]

... We can sort of do this with waypoints and sensor missiles, but the missile has to reach the waypoint first. It would be much easier if the missile locked on to any emissions it encounters along the way.

We can already do this: just delete the target waypoint after the missile is fired and the missiles will switch to 'searching for new target' mode while continuing to fly toward the lost waypoint's location.

[Dfuzzed]

The abillity to set min and max rank requirements on ship classes.  Right now captains are commanding 20k ton ships and officers above R3 are commanding a single fighter, as all military classes require at least an R3 officer .  The admiral might be an excellent fighter pilot, but it just feels weird from a rp perspective.

Maybe make the TF commander automatically the commander of the flag ship said TF is based on.  Right now the TF commander is based on the flag ship of said TF but is not the commanding officer of said flag ship, you have to assign a different commander.

I think this would go well with another suggestion I read here in the suggestion forum: hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=8005. 0

[DIT_grue]

The abillity to set min and max rank requirements on ship classes.  Right now captains are commanding 20k ton ships and officers above R3 are commanding a single fighter, as all military classes require at least an R3 officer .  The admiral might be an excellent fighter pilot, but it just feels weird from a rp perspective.

Maybe make the TF commander automatically the commander of the flag ship said TF is based on.  Right now the TF commander is based on the flag ship of said TF but is not the commanding officer of said flag ship, you have to assign a different commander.

I think this would go well with another suggestion I read here in the suggestion forum: hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=8005. 0

Minimum rank required is set on the DAC / Rank / Info tab of the Ship Design window.

This is in line with reality - you don't want your admirals distracted by running a ship, that's what their flag captain is for.

[Dfuzzed]

Minimum rank required is set on the DAC / Rank / Info tab of the Ship Design window.

This is in line with reality - you don't want your admirals distracted by running a ship, that's what their flag captain is for.

Yes I am a massive idiot.  I came here to edit my post as I found it myself just a moment ago. 

[Sheb]

A "Maximum Rank" thing might be nice though. It IS weird to have your admiral run a shuttle.