Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes Discussion  (Read 441798 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline tobijon

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • t
  • Posts: 91
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1890 on: October 22, 2018, 12:20:29 PM »
what also would be possible is to simply increase the demand for transport of people to a planet with an academy, rather than making a new resource using the old one for more.
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2781
  • Thanked: 1048 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1891 on: October 26, 2018, 11:36:35 AM »
I wonder what made Steve change the efficiency of Conventional Industry? CI used to be decent enough on a conventional start, especially with multi-faction start on Earth, that it wasn't necessarily the best choice to just immediately convert all of it to factories and mines.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1892 on: October 26, 2018, 12:31:39 PM »
I wonder what made Steve change the efficiency of Conventional Industry? CI used to be decent enough on a conventional start, especially with multi-faction start on Earth, that it wasn't necessarily the best choice to just immediately convert all of it to factories and mines.

Total output is still the same (40% of an normal installation). However, now some of the output that went to ordnance, fighters and refineries goes to mining instead. The reason is that it occurred to that a conventional Empire could not build its starting installations without some form of mining capability.
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2781
  • Thanked: 1048 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1893 on: October 26, 2018, 12:38:02 PM »
Oh my bad, I didn't realise that was the change. Never mind then!
 

Offline Bremen

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • B
  • Posts: 743
  • Thanked: 150 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1894 on: October 26, 2018, 12:41:29 PM »
I wonder what made Steve change the efficiency of Conventional Industry? CI used to be decent enough on a conventional start, especially with multi-faction start on Earth, that it wasn't necessarily the best choice to just immediately convert all of it to factories and mines.

Total output is still the same (40% of an normal installation). However, now some of the output that went to ordnance, fighters and refineries goes to mining instead. The reason is that it occurred to that a conventional Empire could not build its starting installations without some form of mining capability.

Quote
In VB6 Aurora, Conventional Industry provides the same output as 0.1 construction factories, 0.1 ordnance factories, 0.1 fighter factories and 0.1 refineries

Is this right? I'm almost positive I remember getting some mining from CI in my pre-TNE games.
 

Offline Kelewan

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • K
  • Posts: 72
  • Thanked: 15 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1895 on: October 26, 2018, 01:36:45 PM »
I wonder what made Steve change the efficiency of Conventional Industry? CI used to be decent enough on a conventional start, especially with multi-faction start on Earth, that it wasn't necessarily the best choice to just immediately convert all of it to factories and mines.

Total output is still the same (40% of an normal installation). However, now some of the output that went to ordnance, fighters and refineries goes to mining instead. The reason is that it occurred to that a conventional Empire could not build its starting installations without some form of mining capability.

Quote
In VB6 Aurora, Conventional Industry provides the same output as 0.1 construction factories, 0.1 ordnance factories, 0.1 fighter factories and 0.1 refineries

Is this right? I'm almost positive I remember getting some mining from CI in my pre-TNE games.

Yes there was mining output from CI in my pre-TNE  games. If I remember correctly it was also 0.1 like construction. Don't remember  fighter factories
or ordnance factories as I never build any fighters or missiles before converting my industrie
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1896 on: October 26, 2018, 01:57:55 PM »
I wonder what made Steve change the efficiency of Conventional Industry? CI used to be decent enough on a conventional start, especially with multi-faction start on Earth, that it wasn't necessarily the best choice to just immediately convert all of it to factories and mines.

Total output is still the same (40% of an normal installation). However, now some of the output that went to ordnance, fighters and refineries goes to mining instead. The reason is that it occurred to that a conventional Empire could not build its starting installations without some form of mining capability.

Quote
In VB6 Aurora, Conventional Industry provides the same output as 0.1 construction factories, 0.1 ordnance factories, 0.1 fighter factories and 0.1 refineries

Is this right? I'm almost positive I remember getting some mining from CI in my pre-TNE games.

Yes, you right - it was 10% mining :)

C# is setup so that everything is configurable from the DB. I thought I had done the same when I checked the VB6 database, but it turned out that Access DB was already modified for C# and VB6 used hard-coded values. It looks like VB6 has 10% construction, 10% mining and 5% refinery, so this is a boost.

Even so, I will leave it as the new values and update the post.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2018, 02:01:43 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1897 on: October 27, 2018, 01:25:11 PM »
A quick view of the in-progress Race Summary window. You can edit some of the species information in SM Mode. I also plan to add some options around mixing commander name themes.

The technology column is for non-race-specific technology that wasn't automatically provided provided prior to game start. This will only show the best technology in each category.

This is from the first test game, which is about 3.5 years in at the moment. One of the aims for this window is a simple screenshot that can show the progress of a race. I'll add more information as needed.

« Last Edit: October 27, 2018, 01:27:12 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 
The following users thanked this post: Garfunkel, bro918, DEEPenergy, dag0net

Offline DEEPenergy

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 55
  • Thanked: 35 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1898 on: October 27, 2018, 02:41:37 PM »
Hey Steve, it looks great. Super pumped for the test campaign. About how fast is it running compared to VB6 Aurora?
 
The following users thanked this post: bro918

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1899 on: October 27, 2018, 05:19:43 PM »
Hey Steve, it looks great. Super pumped for the test campaign. About how fast is it running compared to VB6 Aurora?

Still not much going as I am still in the process of converting conventional factories. However, there are a dozen research projects, fifteen shipyard upgrades, all the commander experience, health, pop growth, orbital movement (including asteroids), all the detection phases, etc. Essentially the full construction phase for what is actually happening in this so-far limited game.

I am running 5-day increments and they are taking 0.17 seconds each, so definitely faster :)

It will be more interesting once there is shipping, civilians, multiple systems, etc.
 
The following users thanked this post: bro918, DEEPenergy

Offline jonw

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • j
  • Posts: 36
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1900 on: October 27, 2018, 05:52:48 PM »
That bruce boxleitner picture always makes me want to dig out my box set...
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1901 on: October 27, 2018, 06:15:37 PM »
That bruce boxleitner picture always makes me want to dig out my box set...

Yes, that was a great series :)

And I also have the box set :)
 
The following users thanked this post: jonw

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1902 on: October 28, 2018, 06:15:40 AM »
Just for interest, here is the test game underway on both monitors - you may have to scroll horizontally to see it. There is a button on the events window that will adjust it to the height of your monitor.

Erik, if this image is too large and causing loading issues, feel free to remove it.

 
The following users thanked this post: kks, bro918, Rye123, DEEPenergy, dag0net

Offline Bremen

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • B
  • Posts: 743
  • Thanked: 150 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1903 on: October 28, 2018, 02:23:49 PM »
Amusingly, Aurora is my primary reason for wanting a second monitor :P
 
The following users thanked this post: dag0net

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1904 on: October 29, 2018, 09:29:05 AM »
I've decided to allow medium weapons on light vehicles and heavy weapons on medium vehicles. Super-heavy weapons will still require super-heavy vehicles.

In the test campaign, I have reached the point (9 years in) where the various houses are designing their first ground forces. As I started to do research for the planned forces, I quickly realised there are plenty of examples where heavier weapons are mounted on lighter vehicles, creating greater firepower at lower cost, but with greater vulnerability.

As an example of the forces being created, below is the initial ground formation for House Reichmann. This is the smallest of the various house formations and is intended to function as part of battalion or regimental-size formation. House Reichmann is aiming for a mobile, capable offensive force and will have dedicated Panzer formations as well.



In contrast, here is a much simpler infantry-focused formation from House Aurelius, intended to be one of ten cohorts in a full Legion.



House Fuchida is using a larger base formation, with the Japanese WW2 infantry battalion as a template. The individual Fuchida Infantryman is cheaper but less well protected than the Reichmann Panzergrenadier or the Aurelius Legionary.



House Ragnar is infantry-led but uses the low-cost Thralls to soak up damage while the Berserkers do most of the offensive damage.



Finally, the House Varenne Regiment of Foot is primarily a defensive formation with limited heavy weapons. It is intended to hold the line while heavy armoured cavalry forces (yet to be designed) launch the decisive attack.

 
The following users thanked this post: Garfunkel, clement, bro918, Rye123, DEEPenergy, dag0net