Author Topic: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread  (Read 107591 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline andrewas

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • a
  • Posts: 5
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #315 on: March 12, 2014, 11:41:55 AM »
It'd be nice if the game would abort autoturns in the event of an error.  I'm probably going to have to abandon this game just when it was getting interesting, after an attempt to bypass an NPR battle overnight left me with a few hundred five second increments to run and an error message popping up every time.  If it aborted those increments I might be able to fix it in SM mode, or at least run bigger increments in the hope the offending taskgroup gets destroyed sooner. 
 

Offline Haji

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 442
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #316 on: March 16, 2014, 11:41:17 AM »
It would be nice to have more point defense options for ships when it comes to targeting. Right now all targeting is done automatically (unless you want to run point defense in manual mode, which is far to micro-intensive) which can lead to some incoming salvos being ignored, while others are destroyed completely. What I'd like to have is following options:

Target largest salvo - self explanatory
Targets salvos larger than X - if your fleet has both anti-missiles and energy based point defense, then there is no point destroying all the salvos completely. This option will allow you to limit the use of anti-missiles by leaving some enemy missiles to be killed by point defense.
Target smallest salvo - This will allow you to designate ship (or ships) what will take care of remnants of enemy salvos, while the rest of the fleet concentrates on destroying bigger salvos.

Why would this be useful to have? For example, in my current campaign I had a fleet defending against a single missile wave comprised of twenty six salvos, each consisting of eighty missiles. Due to automated targeting some salvos have been destroyed, most have lost about two thirds of it's strength, and few have remained completely intact. When they reached my last line of defense (ships equipped with Gauss cannons) the situation repeated itself with my escorts targeting the smallest salvos (as far as I can tell) leaving several others intact. While most of my ships have received no damage, several has been grievously wounded (the entire wave was spread evenly between all my ships).

If I had the above options I could reduce all the enemy salvos by the same amount, which means the damage would be properly spread, rather than concentrated. And since my ships had shields, I could probably avoid receiving any damage to the armor.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2822
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #317 on: March 16, 2014, 12:08:13 PM »
Yes, I would agree that an option close to this would be very useful. I almost always make fleet with a good balance of AMM and beam PD and this has been a continuous problem. I certainly do NOT want my AMM ships to completely destroy incoming salvoes before they start engaging salvoes further out and rather have my PD engage the rest and shields will take the occasional leaker.

I generally shoot about one missile on each enemy missile so I don't have time to shoot all salves down before the reach my ships, given technology it roughly equal. This will give rather good results but better granularity in the AMM behaviour would be nice.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2822
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #318 on: March 16, 2014, 02:43:56 PM »
Another thing related to this is that cannons set on Final Fire PD should fire their weapons at incoming missiles as long as no missiles are within a certain radius of the ship. Currently I have to micromanage this and it is sort of tedious.

I set my long range cannons on wide area fire and when any missiles are between 10-15 seconds away I switch to Final fire for that fire-control. The weapons will fire both Wide Area fire and finish with Final-Fire.

The setting should perhaps just switch from Wide Area to Final Fire when any missiles are within the weapons recharge time +5 seconds. It would obviously use the weapon with the longest recharge rate attached to that fire-control. This would optimise the usage of beam PD without unnecessary micromanagement from the player.

It is obviously still useful with ONLY Wide Area fire to shoot at missile that are passing by the ships, but Final Fire should perhaps work as above.
 

Offline NihilRex

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • N
  • Posts: 188
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #319 on: March 28, 2014, 08:22:55 PM »
Rotating the Galaxy Map - When your map takes off in one direction and you don't want to redo the whole thing to make it more sensible.

The equation according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_coordinate_system#Rotation is

Code: [Select]
To rotate a figure counterclockwise around the origin by some angle \theta is equivalent to replacing every point with coordinates (x,y) by the point with coordinates (x',y'), where
x'=x \cos \theta - y \sin \theta
y'=x \sin \theta + y \cos \theta .
Thus: (x',y') = ((x \cos \theta - y \sin \theta\,) , (x \sin \theta + y \cos \theta\,))
 

Offline Hydrofoil

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • H
  • Posts: 123
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #320 on: March 31, 2014, 07:01:10 AM »
Still no word on 6.4 release then?
 

Offline boggo2300

  • Registered
  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 895
  • Thanked: 16 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #321 on: March 31, 2014, 03:39:05 PM »
Grease is the word!

Matt
The boggosity of the universe tends towards maximum.
 

Offline Erik L (OP)

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5654
  • Thanked: 366 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #322 on: March 31, 2014, 11:20:01 PM »
Grease is the word!

Matt

I beg to differ. The word is bird.

Offline SilverWolf54

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • S
  • Posts: 2
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #323 on: April 04, 2014, 06:20:21 PM »
im differ what u differ the bird is the world
 

Offline davidr

  • Gold Supporter
  • Lt. Commander
  • *****
  • d
  • Posts: 258
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • 2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #324 on: April 06, 2014, 01:18:47 PM »
Could it be possible to show (say on the System Generation and Display screen - F9 ) which bodies have had a geological team complete a mineral scan. At present ( and I will happily be contradicted ) , there does not appear to be a simple way of knowing which bodies have had a geological team complete a visit after they have left.

 I role play by transporting my geological teams to specific bodies which automatically creates a colony. After I receive an event notice that the mineral scan has been completed I transport the team off the body and then abandon the colony until at some further point in time it is used as a source of minerals or living planet , when a colony is again created.

However in between the two actions there is no easy visual identification that a physical mineral has taken place after abandoning the colony. I therefore have to keep written notes of which bodies have had actual physical visits.

DavidR
 

Offline Paul M

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • P
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 50 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #325 on: April 07, 2014, 02:25:56 AM »
In the summary page for a body it states if the body in question had a ground survey performed or not.  Admittedly this isn't exactly what you want, and I'd not mind seeing something somewhere in the system overview to say which bodies have had it as well.
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #326 on: April 08, 2014, 01:36:07 AM »
In the summary page for a body it states if the body in question had a ground survey performed or not.  Admittedly this isn't exactly what you want, and I'd not mind seeing something somewhere in the system overview to say which bodies have had it as well.

But if the colony is abandoned that screen is not available, correct?
 

Offline Paul M

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • P
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 50 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #327 on: April 08, 2014, 01:46:26 AM »
Yeah that is true, and unfortunately it is the only place I know of the game states that the ground survey was done.
 

Offline ScottyC

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • S
  • Posts: 3
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #328 on: April 08, 2014, 10:13:11 PM »
Just picked up the game a couple weeks ago, and have been loving it so far.  If suggestions are still being taken, I have a few.

1.  "Grant Shore Leave" option (similar to overhaul or resupply or refuel).  I'm sure this has been mentioned before, so no elaboration needed.

2.  "Auto Turn NPR Bypass" Make an option for auto-turn to not cause an interrupt when an NPR interacts with another NPR.  I've been getting 1 to 3 day interrupts for a full year of in-game time due to them going back and forth on thermal sensor detections, and it's killing my 70year game.

3.  An audible sound option for "Turn finished" when the game is done calculating the last turn.  During NPR battles or other long periods of computation, this would be nice if I was going to let the system run while I did something else.  I see the option for "voice and effects on" but it didn't seem to output any sound for this.

4.  NPR battle bubble - Currently you are able to select (in SM mode) to make a system bubble, to assist with quickening the pace of battles for small-time increment processing.  It would be nice if there was an option/system to erect a battle system bubble when two NPRs engage in combat if you have no visibility over said battle, and your current selection is on a longer time increment, so the processing time would be greatly reduced.  Make a general "everyone" update every 1 hour or something.

5.  Overdrive module - I feel like it would help if there was a module that could drastically increase movement speed at the cost of obscene amounts of fuel burn.  It would heighten the use of ships other than missile and anti-missile ships.  Perhaps something like increasing the power of your engines 2x 3x 4x for 2000x 3000x 4000x fuel use after a short boot up period? Then make it so your weapons suffer from the same speed targeting penalty at those speeds, so you're forced to slow down once the range has been closed.  Missiles that move slower than your boosted movement speed cannot be fired while boosting.  Maybe also cause strain to the ship and accelerate IFR per 30 seconds of usage? It seems like this would give a new purpose to beam and gauss ships without changing or nerfing missiles.

6.  Ignore Asteroid option - An option for surveyor ships to ignore asteroids "Survey next five non-asteroid system objects"

7.  Lock View on task force - I can lock views on planets, but not on task forces it seems.  At least not when zoomed in - Frequently in battles I'd "focus" on my task force and zoom in, but after the next turn they would zoom out of my view, leaving me with an empty blue square.  Have to zoom back out, re-select, and zoom back in.

ScottyC
 

Offline xeryon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 581
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #329 on: April 08, 2014, 11:13:14 PM »
6 is available as "Survey planet or moon"  It does skip comets but it ignores asteroids.

7 Technically, it is the same for planets as well but their orbital periods are so great that from one time increment to the next the body seems to not move.  Next time you can perform a 5 day increment max-zoom in on a planet and you should notice it do the same thing.  I am almost certain there is nothing that can be done about this based on the responses of others previously.  As I understand it the map isn't a 'live' map so it is incapable of updating in that way.