Author Topic: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions  (Read 345117 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Whitecold

  • Commander
  • *********
  • W
  • Posts: 330
  • Thanked: 88 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #345 on: July 15, 2018, 12:55:59 PM »
Another suggestion of mine: Remove the missile engine component, and revert to designing missile engines along with the missile itself, adding options for boost modifier/engine generation/fuel consumption there.
The missile engine component adds an annoying step to missile design. Unlike regular engines they are very rarely reused, every new missile usually requires a new engine. Furthermore there is no incentive to use multiple engines on a missile if you can use a single one instead, and I don't think there should be one.
Also, I'd suggest to remove the cap on missile engines to 5 MSP, especially with the new incentives to large missiles.
The missile engine only adds unnecessary complications, you should not have to use an external performance calculator to find out which engine size you need in the first place.
 
The following users thanked this post: GeaXle, JacenHan, El Pip, Barkhorn, Bughunter, Titanian, the obelisk

Offline Profugo Barbatus

  • Gold Supporter
  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 78
  • Thanked: 19 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 v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #346 on: July 15, 2018, 02:17:57 PM »
Well, ripping it out would solve the discrepancy as well, but my idea would be to leave it in place, and calculating the BP needed for the components which are still missing from a design, and allowing industry to support the shipyards up to that amount of BP.

That doesn't address the desire to build components in advance of when you intend to build the ships. Allowing industry to support shipyards actively is great, but sometimes I'm still researching and developing the tech for a new generation of ships, and won't be done for a couple years, but I got the technology to start making the new engines right now. I don't want to lose two years of production time, so I start manufacturing the engines ASAP.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #347 on: July 15, 2018, 02:25:11 PM »
Quality of Life suggestion: When one does not select a name pattern for new ships, Aurora automatically counts upward. But that numbering might be off for whatever reasons. Being able to set the next free number would be great.

Or even better: give us the option to create a naming scheme for every ship class, so it not automatically is the class name + increment, but rather something which can be chosen by the user.

Options: <class name>, <number increment>, <letter increment>, <manual text>, etc.
 
The following users thanked this post: Titanian, the obelisk

Offline Darkminion

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • D
  • Posts: 26
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #348 on: July 15, 2018, 03:38:08 PM »
Quality of Life suggestion: When one does not select a name pattern for new ships, Aurora automatically counts upward. But that numbering might be off for whatever reasons. Being able to set the next free number would be great.

Or even better: give us the option to create a naming scheme for every ship class, so it not automatically is the class name + increment, but rather something which can be chosen by the user.

Options: <class name>, <number increment>, <letter increment>, <manual text>, etc.

It would also be nice (Read as "Im Lazy") to have an option to choose the ship theme name select at random rather than going down the list alphabetically. Sure you can select the name from the theme list when queuing the ship for construction but I don't think it moves to the next name (at least in 7.2) until you queue one up automatically. Some of the cool names and be quite far down and it would be nice to see some pop up rather than wading through all the names that start with A,B,C,ect. first. 
 
The following users thanked this post: Titanian, the obelisk

Offline Whitecold

  • Commander
  • *********
  • W
  • Posts: 330
  • Thanked: 88 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #349 on: July 15, 2018, 03:45:56 PM »
That doesn't address the desire to build components in advance of when you intend to build the ships. Allowing industry to support shipyards actively is great, but sometimes I'm still researching and developing the tech for a new generation of ships, and won't be done for a couple years, but I got the technology to start making the new engines right now. I don't want to lose two years of production time, so I start manufacturing the engines ASAP.
You should still be able to all do this! The original suggestion was to be able to build packages of components to accelerate ship construction, instead of ordering every single component individually. My suggestion is to automatically calculate BP, not requiring any packages to be ordered but directly construct components in factories as they are needed.
If you want components, you can build components. What I don't like is that placing two dozen orders gets you a ship faster than placing a single order. You should not be spending your time fiddling with construction all the time.
 
The following users thanked this post: Titanian

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #350 on: July 15, 2018, 04:09:46 PM »
I know I am not responding to every suggestion but I am reading them all. Once I get through with the AI, I will start going through the list properly.
 
The following users thanked this post: SpikeTheHobbitMage, Kytuzian, TMaekler, Rye123, King-Salomon

Offline Triato

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • T
  • Posts: 82
  • Thanked: 7 times
Error messages including what order causes the error
« Reply #351 on: July 16, 2018, 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.
 

Offline Whitecold

  • Commander
  • *********
  • W
  • Posts: 330
  • Thanked: 88 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #352 on: July 16, 2018, 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.
 
The following users thanked this post: QuakeIV, alex_brunius, JacenHan, El Pip, sapphirefox, Rye123, King-Salomon, the obelisk

Offline QuakeIV

  • Registered
  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 759
  • Thanked: 168 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #353 on: July 16, 2018, 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).
 

Offline Profugo Barbatus

  • Gold Supporter
  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 78
  • Thanked: 19 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 v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #354 on: July 16, 2018, 11:18:24 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).

Absolutely in favor, I would *love* to actually keep consistent companies for equipment and ordinance and so forth.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #355 on: July 17, 2018, 11:21:14 AM »
Absolutely in favor, I would *love* to actually keep consistent companies for equipment and ordinance and so forth.

Would be interesting to have civilian companies also as additional production capacity - not only handing transport orders to them, but also building equipment... .
 

Offline the obelisk

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • t
  • Posts: 109
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #356 on: July 17, 2018, 03:56:28 PM »
Another suggestion of mine: Remove the missile engine component, and revert to designing missile engines along with the missile itself, adding options for boost modifier/engine generation/fuel consumption there.
The missile engine component adds an annoying step to missile design. Unlike regular engines they are very rarely reused, every new missile usually requires a new engine. Furthermore there is no incentive to use multiple engines on a missile if you can use a single one instead, and I don't think there should be one.
Also, I'd suggest to remove the cap on missile engines to 5 MSP, especially with the new incentives to large missiles.
The missile engine only adds unnecessary complications, you should not have to use an external performance calculator to find out which engine size you need in the first place.
Maybe add the ability to create missile engines in missile creation without removing missile engines as a component?

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.
I think that's been discussed before, could be wrong.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2018, 04:00:25 PM by the obelisk »
 

Offline wedgebert

  • Ace Wiki Contributor
  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • ****
  • w
  • Posts: 87
  • Thanked: 33 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #357 on: July 17, 2018, 05:43:54 PM »
Absolutely in favor, I would *love* to actually keep consistent companies for equipment and ordinance and so forth.

Would be interesting to have civilian companies also as additional production capacity - not only handing transport orders to them, but also building equipment... .

I was thinking about something like this. Assuming a capitalistic society, what if you had something along the following:

Multiple companies, each with fields of interest (maybe some are like Rolls Royce and focus on engines, other are Intel like and do computers, etc).

Instead of designing a new technology, you instead put out a request to these companies. "I want a 15cm UV laser with 10sec recharge". Then after some time, these companies come back with their prototypes that each have small tweaks to your request.. Maybe the Foobar Corporation's laser does an extra point of damage but takes a little extra material to make. But Barfoo Inc has a model that can fire a little farther. Then you pick the one you want and it becomes a thing to build.


 

Vivalas

  • Guest
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #358 on: July 17, 2018, 11:04:45 PM »
Love how C# is coming, reading the long changes thread gets me real hyped.

While the core content is more important, I've always wanted maybe some more details in law enforcement and justice within your empire, and more specifically, details into piracy and rebellion.  Having a system where pirates can form, hijack shipping, form bases and maybe even re-invade your empire would be neat, like a weak (at first) empire that represents individual pirates and how their resources increase over time.  Perhaps things like smuggling as well so you can have parts of your navy dedicated to interdiction.

Rebellions would also be nice, where they start at certain unrest and have stages (planning, covert, overt).  Planning is where rebels gather resources and followers secretly, and then other phases like covert (where they sabotage and steal) and overt (where they outright fight the local governance and law enforcement / military).  Perhaps it could be something like certain buildings and other things on planets get allocated to the rebels in the overt stage, and other special calculations otherwise (money and equipment stolen, rebel leaders, support).

Perhaps tying into this system could be maybe a bit of fluff things, like modelling of population centers on planets and their growth / names / impacts on other mechanics, and maybe small little details like statistics on minor civilian traffic at worlds (things like small shuttles, liners, recreational vessels and such that are too numerous and insignificant to be modeled by the game, but a statistic that could impact smuggling difficulty or tie into other things).  Just some thoughts, and I want to get the idea off even if you don't want to go down that rabbit hole!  :)
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #359 on: July 18, 2018, 04:40:30 AM »
Absolutely in favor, I would *love* to actually keep consistent companies for equipment and ordinance and so forth.

Would be interesting to have civilian companies also as additional production capacity - not only handing transport orders to them, but also building equipment... .

I was thinking about something like this. Assuming a capitalistic society, what if you had something along the following:

Multiple companies, each with fields of interest (maybe some are like Rolls Royce and focus on engines, other are Intel like and do computers, etc).

Instead of designing a new technology, you instead put out a request to these companies. "I want a 15cm UV laser with 10sec recharge". Then after some time, these companies come back with their prototypes that each have small tweaks to your request.. Maybe the Foobar Corporation's laser does an extra point of damage but takes a little extra material to make. But Barfoo Inc has a model that can fire a little farther. Then you pick the one you want and it becomes a thing to build.

I have considered something on these lines before (as well as civilian companies building warships for the government). Probably won't in the first version, but will consider for the future.