Author Topic: Leader Assignment confusion  (Read 1916 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rastaman (OP)

  • Azhanti High Lightning
  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • R
  • Posts: 144
  • Thanked: 8 times
Leader Assignment confusion
« on: March 24, 2011, 07:07:23 AM »
Hello everyone!

Version 5.   42.   

Over the last couple of days I am climbing the learning cliff.    I did a pre-newtonian start with no immediate NPRs, started in 2011.    Because of lots of early mistakes and economic/shipyard/class design ignorance, it took me over a hundred years to leave the system.    Taking pointers from Steve's NATO vs.    Soviets campaign like many others, I designed my own version of carrier battlegroup, it took decades to design, develop, build, redesign, refit, deploy and train them.    I now have about 220 fighters in 3 groups, and assorted combat and support ships.    I also have about 420 naval officers.   

'Automatic Assignments' is ticked.   

The issues:

1.    I have lots of unassigned officers, yet some of my ships are not commanded.    Rank requirements *should* be no problem.   

2.    After unassigning everybody, lots of automatic command assignments followed.    The same ships as before received no commanders.    Of some classes, nobody was assigned, of other classes, only a few ships cannot receive a leader.   

3.    I manually assigned all vacancies.    After a couple of 30 day increments, they all automatically reassigned, so that again these certain ships and fighters lost their commanders.    For example, I have 4 command cruisers that need a rear admiral (probably to much, but anyway).    I have 3 rear admirals.    I manually assigned them and assigned new officers for their old ships.   

Then they unassigned from the command cruisers.   Same with some classes of fighters and a number of fighters and ships of other classes. 

4.    None of this reassignment happens to the one full carrier battlegroup that has its own Task Force and that is moving around and into Alpha Centauri.    The leaders stay put.   

So what is happening here? Is it a rank requirement issue? How can I make the automatic assignments work at all times?

5.    Independent from whether that is the case, can I change the rank requirement of classes retroactively?



 
« Last Edit: March 24, 2011, 07:15:29 AM by Rastaman »
Fun Fact: The minimum engine power of any ship engine in Aurora C# is 0.01. The maximum is 120000!
 

Offline sloanjh

  • 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: Leader Assignment confusion
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2011, 07:43:18 AM »
1)  Two things:

A)  Aurora seems to default to requiring R2 officers (as opposed to R1) for most ships.  This can cause ships to sit without commanders.
B)  The auto-assign algorithm seems to require a non-zero rating in a ship primary attribute in order for a commander to be assigned to that ship.  For most ship types (except terraforming, survey, etc which require special skills) the primary attribute is crew training.  So anyone with zero crew training is likely to sit around unassigned, even if there are ships available.  I've suggested an "assign all possible officers" checkbox, which would try to keep all command slots full, in the past - perhaps it's time to suggest this again.

2)  Same as #1

3)  On the leader (F4) screen, in the upper left corner there should be a "length of tour" (or something like that) pulldown.  I think this defaults to 24 months - it's how you change the frequency of auto-assign taking place.

4)  There's a checkbox that controls whether commanders are limited to their physical location during assignment - if that box were mis-checked that would explain this.  OTOH, I thought that box was ignored during auto-assign.

5) On the 3rd "DAC" tab of the Class Design (F5) screen, there's a place to specify the minimum rank of ship commanders.  There's also a priority number - use this to determine which classes get better commanders (Higher is better, IIRC).

John
 

Offline Rastaman (OP)

  • Azhanti High Lightning
  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • R
  • Posts: 144
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: Leader Assignment confusion
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2011, 08:14:42 AM »
Thank you for your prompt answer.

Having checked, it looks like that the unassigned officers have indeed no crew training.  This would also explain why the vacancies are assigned over time with a trickle of new officers. 

Is there a solution to this apart from "Moar academies = moar officers!"? Maybe fleet training? Or can those guys then be used only for specialty jobs? Is it even necessary to have all fighters have an officer?

 
Fun Fact: The minimum engine power of any ship engine in Aurora C# is 0.01. The maximum is 120000!
 

Offline ZimRathbone

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 408
  • Thanked: 30 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Leader Assignment confusion
« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2011, 09:05:29 AM »
As you say - more academies.

Fleet training has no effect on this (it is applied to units, and basically only really affects how fast a unit reacts to changes in orders or recovery from transit effects).

It is not necessary to have a named officer in charge of a unit - they wont increase in crew grade without a commander with the Crew Training attribute, but they can still do anything else that a unit with such a commander can.

I usually set the required rank for all auxilliaries , fighters & Bases to 1, that for light armed units (eg covettes, destroyers) to 2 and heavy units & Destroyer Leaders to 3 (do this in the Class Design), then manually assign leaders to units without commanders after an auto assigment run (make sure that the frequency is set to at least 24 months).   A small proportion of the commanders with no crew training will get this skill in the course of their work
Slàinte,

Mike
 

Offline welchbloke

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1044
  • Thanked: 9 times
Re: Leader Assignment confusion
« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2011, 09:54:15 AM »
I tend to assign the next available officer without crew training to my fighters.  As has been mentioned they can pick up crew training experience and I find that many of my otherwise useless officers gain crew training rating and, therefore, become more useful in the long term.
Welchbloke
 

Offline sloanjh

  • 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: Leader Assignment confusion
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2011, 04:05:44 PM »
Thank you for your prompt answer.

Having checked, it looks like that the unassigned officers have indeed no crew training.  This would also explain why the vacancies are assigned over time with a trickle of new officers. 

Is there a solution to this apart from "Moar academies = moar officers!"? Maybe fleet training? Or can those guys then be used only for specialty jobs? Is it even necessary to have all fighters have an officer?

 

You can assign them by hand.

John