Author Topic: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread  (Read 109471 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline NihilRex

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • N
  • Posts: 188
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #330 on: April 08, 2014, 11:22:39 PM »
If possible and reasonably feasible, some way to make it so I don't end up with 5/7/8/9 fully surveyed systems, and no more jump points.

I regularily have someone else set the SM password so I don't get tempted to meddle post-setup when trying out a scenario, and if they are not available to unlock it, I have to start a new game.
 

Offline ShadowLop

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • S
  • Posts: 37
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #331 on: April 09, 2014, 05:13:46 AM »
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.

Crews take shore leave automatically by being in orbit around a colony, no special order needed. I think they need a certain population at the colony though - I forget the exact minimum.
Alternatively, use a ship/NPR with Recreational Facilities component - being in the same location as one of these will also count as shore leave.
 

Offline Kaiser

  • Commander
  • *********
  • K
  • Posts: 321
  • Thanked: 39 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #332 on: April 09, 2014, 06:57:24 AM »
I don't know if it was already suggested, probably yes because it's obvious, but, I would like to ask to Steve, why don't you disable game interruptions when the human player does not see and it is not affected in what is happening beetween NPRs? I mean, in a standard game with 1 NPR at start and 30% chance to appear another it, the game suffers a lot of annoying interruptions because interceptions, fightings etc., but because this happens in other systems, beetween computer controlled race, these interruptions may be skipped and the interceptions, fightings could go ahead normally.
 

Offline Paul M

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • P
  • Posts: 1437
  • Thanked: 61 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #333 on: April 09, 2014, 07:26:06 AM »
I don't know if it was already suggested, probably yes because it's obvious, but, I would like to ask to Steve, why don't you disable game interruptions when the human player does not see and it is not affected in what is happening beetween NPRs? I mean, in a standard game with 1 NPR at start and 30% chance to appear another it, the game suffers a lot of annoying interruptions because interceptions, fightings etc., but because this happens in other systems, beetween computer controlled race, these interruptions may be skipped and the interceptions, fightings could go ahead normally.

But the game can't "Go Ahead Normally" when the NPRs are fighting.  The combat works basically on 5 sec intervals once missiles start impacting as you have AAM missile fire cycles, point defence cycles and detections etc.  Then there are pauses where you can move by 30 seconds to 30 min and then follows another phase where you are down to 5 second turns again.  There is no "automatic" resolution function that adds up the attack value and compares it between both sides and determines a winner.  The game is built around a 5 s combat turn, and when combat starts it is very hard to get too much away from that.

So you can't advance the time in time segments of 1 day while an NPR is fighting.  It doesn't matter if you are being updated on the battle or not, the database is being updated on a 5 game second basis.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2014, 10:07:07 AM by Paul M »
 

Offline NihilRex

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • N
  • Posts: 188
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #334 on: April 09, 2014, 01:48:52 PM »
Crews take shore leave automatically by being in orbit around a colony, no special order needed. I think they need a certain population at the colony though - I forget the exact minimum.
Alternatively, use a ship/NPR with Recreational Facilities component - being in the same location as one of these will also count as shore leave.

What he means is grant shore leave like the overhaul command: "Stay here until the crew completes shore leave, then continue with your order list."
 

Offline ScottyC

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • S
  • Posts: 3
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #335 on: April 09, 2014, 04:44:34 PM »
Quote from: NihilRex link=topic=5896.  msg71175#msg71175 date=1397069332
What he means is grant shore leave like the overhaul command: "Stay here until the crew completes shore leave, then continue with your order list.  "

Exactly - Not too bad of an issue on military ships since overhauling them almost always takes as much time as shore leave, or more, but would be nice for survey vessels. 

EDIT: Another idea - Be able to create scientist teams or teacher/student relationships where a more experienced scientist has bonuses to pass on his knowledge to a younger scientist in his same field.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2014, 06:25:32 PM by ScottyC »
 

Offline ShadowLop

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • S
  • Posts: 37
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #336 on: April 09, 2014, 06:38:49 PM »
What he means is grant shore leave like the overhaul command: "Stay here until the crew completes shore leave, then continue with your order list."

Then yes, this would be a very awesome idea.

Also, when you have 600+ systems, it burns a ridiculous amount of fuel to get fleets from one place to another.
Building up a new shipyard/supply depot that can handle massive warfleets is...difficult and you still burn all that fuel getting ships between them.

How about a high-end tech line developed from jump tech that can either build a directed warp-gate, or re-align an existing gated jump point to another gated jump point (at massive time/expense)? That way you can skip the 7 completely empty systems and get to the frontline quicker.
Or maybe the opposite of Hyperdrive: Cruise Engines. A tech that can be added instead of a Hyperdrive and instead decreases thrust for increased fuel efficiency?

This would make moving fleets around much more viable.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2837
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #337 on: April 09, 2014, 07:21:16 PM »
Then yes, this would be a very awesome idea.

Also, when you have 600+ systems, it burns a ridiculous amount of fuel to get fleets from one place to another.
Building up a new shipyard/supply depot that can handle massive warfleets is...difficult and you still burn all that fuel getting ships between them.

How about a high-end tech line developed from jump tech that can either build a directed warp-gate, or re-align an existing gated jump point to another gated jump point (at massive time/expense)? That way you can skip the 7 completely empty systems and get to the frontline quicker.
Or maybe the opposite of Hyperdrive: Cruise Engines. A tech that can be added instead of a Hyperdrive and instead decreases thrust for increased fuel efficiency?

This would make moving fleets around much more viable.

You can use Tugs to drag ships around for very little fuel use if that is a problem.

In general I don't find that fuel usage is such a large problem in the middle to late game when my ships become bigger. Bigger ships means bigger more fuel efficient engines. If you also combine that with more advanced fuel efficiency technology you should not face such huge problems with fuel shortages later in the game. In worst case scenario you can drag your most expensive (fuel consuming ships) with Tugs, smaller gunships/FAC ships is ferried in fuel efficient Escort Carriers.

I would personally not want to remove the logistical and strategic problem with technological shortcuts. I want to have as many problems to solve as possible... ;)
 

Offline NihilRex

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • N
  • Posts: 188
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #338 on: April 09, 2014, 08:24:15 PM »

Or maybe the opposite of Hyperdrive: Cruise Engines. A tech that can be added instead of a Hyperdrive and instead decreases thrust for increased fuel efficiency?

That already exists, and has a name.  Commercial Engines.

What would really solve this problem would be the ability to mount 2+ types of engines, and switch between them.   Added weight and cost in exchange for strategic options seems to fit thematically.
 

Offline Narmio

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • N
  • Posts: 181
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #339 on: April 09, 2014, 09:57:39 PM »
But the game can't "Go Ahead Normally" when the NPRs are fighting.  The combat works basically on 5 sec intervals once missiles start impacting as you have AAM missile fire cycles, point defence cycles and detections etc.  Then there are pauses where you can move by 30 seconds to 30 min and then follows another phase where you are down to 5 second turns again.  There is no "automatic" resolution function that adds up the attack value and compares it between both sides and determines a winner.  The game is built around a 5 s combat turn, and when combat starts it is very hard to get too much away from that.

So you can't advance the time in time segments of 1 day while an NPR is fighting.  It doesn't matter if you are being updated on the battle or not, the database is being updated on a 5 game second basis.

Unless there was an option to automatically resolve NPR combat when it's occurring more than N systems from anywhere you've discovered.  The algorithms to do so wouldn't be particularly complicated -- I mean, who really cares if some precursors kill two instead of three of an NPR's ships before being overwhelmed.  We can RP the resulting situation either way.  

If Steve isn't interested in designing an algorithm for rough combat resolution then I'm sure the community can come up with something.  Integrating such a "quick resolution" function with the code would involve a single check made per-system every time the player discovers a new system -- if a system is not within N of one visited by the player, set a "skip" flag. Whenever the player discovers a new system you only have to propagate out from that system to all within N (continuing the recursion if you encounter another "skip" flag, stopping if you don't) to update that flag for every system. It would, of course, only follow jump points that have been explored (because my understanding is that Aurora does not actually pre-calculate the stellar graph, it's invented as jump points are explored?), but that doesn't matter -- undiscovered systems are always treated as skippable, even if they end up next door. Then whenever a ship fires it just checks that flag (which hopefully is in memory somewhere in the system object, not requiring a DB call) and either calls the quick resolution function or continues normally.

And, of course, it would be entirely voluntary.

I admit I'm a Doylist RPer rather than a Watsonian (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WatsonianVersusDoylist). For me, the purpose of Aurora is to help me tell stories, not to be a simulation.  It achieves the goal of being a storytelling aid by being a simulation, but as a Doylist the first goal is always the most important. I recognise I'm different from a lot of roleplayers in that respect, but that's why I'd suggest something like this be voluntary.

If there's some interest in this, we could spin off a thread discussing how to automate a fight.  
 

Offline Shipright

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • S
  • Posts: 52
  • Thanked: 13 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #340 on: April 10, 2014, 09:22:04 PM »
I feel like you could probably make this easier. If the event doesn't trigger a player log entry (other than the interrupt message itself) the game continues to auto cycle through whatever increments the AI needs until you reach the turn increment the player chose. Technically you are still going to run through all the interrupts for AI purposes but at least the player himself doesn't have to sit there hitting next turn.

I don't personally mind long turn processing times. What I do mind is hitting the button, assuming and accepting its going to take a few minutes to process, go get a snack/make dinner/kiss the wife, come back and find out instead of running a turn for ten minutes to get to the increment I selected it got interrupted one minute in and was just sitting there waiting for me to hit "next" for the other nine.

Of I can build a robot hand to just press "next" over and over. Both are probably as likely to happen :D
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2837
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #341 on: April 11, 2014, 05:27:50 AM »
That already exists, and has a name.  Commercial Engines.

What would really solve this problem would be the ability to mount 2+ types of engines, and switch between them.   Added weight and cost in exchange for strategic options seems to fit thematically.

Yes I think that a natural progression of the game mechanics would be to allow two engine types to be fitted to ships. One engine type is the primary engine that is always in use, this would be your typical cruise engine with good fuel efficiency and high stealth abilities. You then slap on some very high boosted fuel guzzling engines that simply add to your main engine for combat manoeuvring.

In my opinion this would be an interesting tactical/strategic choice to make on your ships.

Obviously combat engines would almost always be of the highest power level but how much space are you willing to sacrifice for combat speed and how much cruise speed do you want and at what cost in fuel and mass etc... of course the cruise engine would always have to be a military engine type.
 

Offline Sharp

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • S
  • Posts: 51
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #342 on: April 14, 2014, 06:44:26 AM »
Not too sure if this has been suggested but it would be nice to be able to send yourself memo's for the future.  Basically an order or way to send yourself a message to yourself.

"On 14th Jan 2039 14:00:00 'Sol-Barnard's Star Defence Force Task Group to be relieved from Jump-Point'"

So the message pops up as an event, you can set what time the message will pop up and what the message reads, I would mainly use it for sorting out rotations for fleets in their duties but I suppose it could be used for other reminders like "Shipyard Retooling almost complete, recall Destroyer TG for refit"

I know you can set up time delays for orders although it would be nice to see the delay in the order list, so you can move Battle TG to Alpha Centauri Jump Point and make it wait there for 86400 (1 day) seconds before going to Barnard's Star Jump Point and waiting there for 86400 seconds before refuelling at earth but on order list it just appears as.

Move to Alpha Centauri Jump Point
Move to Barnard's Star Jump Point
Refuel at Earth

would be nicer if it was

Move to Alpha Centauri Jump Point
Move to Barnard's Star Jump Point (86400)
Refuel at Earth (86400)

so you can see the delay, and bonus if it updates if the order is currently being delayed, so after an hour (3600 seconds) at Alpha Centauri it looks like.

Move to Barnard's Star Jump Point (82800)
Refuel at Earth (86400)

So yeah those are my two suggestions, ability to give yourself an event message at a set time and be able to see order delay in Fleet Orders.
 

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: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #343 on: April 15, 2014, 07:00:01 AM »
Not too sure if this has been suggested but it would be nice to be able to send yourself memo's for the future.  Basically an order or way to send yourself a message to yourself.

LOL this was actually in SA oh so many years ago :)  I think it didn't make it into Aurora because SA was turn-based and Aurora is not.  Anyway +1 from me for this one.

John
 

Offline boggo2300

  • Registered
  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 895
  • Thanked: 16 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #344 on: April 15, 2014, 04:38:40 PM »
LOL this was actually in SA oh so many years ago :)  I think it didn't make it into Aurora because SA was turn-based and Aurora is not.  Anyway +1 from me for this one.

John

+1 from me too, it was a really useful feature in SA

Matt
The boggosity of the universe tends towards maximum.