Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Mechanics / Re: Orbital Bombardment for Fun and Profit
« Last post by CatastrophicReEntry on Today at 12:54:47 PM »
Point taken. But there's no reason why a populated world can't be bombarded every now and then.
2
Mechanics / Re: Orbital Bombardment for Fun and Profit
« Last post by Erik Luken on Today at 12:52:40 PM »
But the dust eventually settles, reheating the planet.
3
Mechanics / Orbital Bombardment for Fun and Profit
« Last post by CatastrophicReEntry on Today at 11:42:04 AM »
So .... it turns out that with a bit of creativity, lasers can be re-purposed to further terraformation efforts. Since beam weapons produce dust when they strike a planetary target, and dust lowers a planet's temperature, there's no conceivable reason why orbital bombardment cannot be used to cool down hot, airless worlds like Mercury. It's intriguing, from a role-play perspective. Is this an exploit?
4
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Last post by Scandinavian on Yesterday at 07:58:06 PM »
As far as I am aware,this is the current thinking on fighters in relation to ground combat (where different roles are relevant): http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=9792.msg106084#msg106084

Unless I've missed something this is still the idea for ground support roles. If you mean being able to swap out the missile launchers on a fighter for lasers or whatever on a whim then that is something else (not something I'd be in favour of personally).
This cover most of what I was thinking about. Happy...
One point which was included also in my thoughts was the ability to have fighters which can change ordonance Koadjutors for ‚normal‘ battle usage ase in VB6 aurora. At the moment everything is limited to the size of the missile launchers. So if I would want a multi combat role fighter I would have to design every missile fitting to one launcher size. What I would like to have added would be an option to load for example
a) either 9 S6 missile for space to space combat (total of 54)
b) or 4 S13 missiles for space to ground bombardment (total of 52)
when using box launchers.
So with a S6 box launcher (because they are mounted on the outside of the ship), it would also be possible to mount a lesser number of missiles which could be bigger in size, up to the sum of all box launchers x number of them (54 in the example above, 9 x 6).
You can already do that with MIRVed missiles. You pay an overhead for the missile bus and are limited to having to fire the entire hardpoint at once and at the same target, but those seem like very reasonable kinds of costs. In your example, you'd mount four size 13 boxes and each of them would load either a size 13 bombardment weapon or a size 1 bus wrapped around two size 6 shipkillers. You only get 8 shipkillers instead of the 9 you would get on a dedicated platform, and you have to fire them in pairs rather than singletons. That trades a 12 % reduction in loadout and barely perceptible reduction in targeting flexibility for the strategic flexibility of multiple loadout configurations, which does not seem like an onerous level of trade-off.

You get in trouble when you try to mount AMMs that way, because they need the targeting granularity that you lose when MIRVing them. But AMMs probably shouldn't be interchangeable with shipkillers without taking some non-trivial performance hit.
5
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Questions
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Yesterday at 06:44:33 PM »
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=10097. msg109360#msg109360 date=1534255317
Aurora tracks objects in VB6 at a granularity of 10cm and in C# at fractions of a millimeter, so a grid system isn't really workable.  The coordinate system is based on kilometers but you can go to four decimal places in VB6 while C# uses a 64-bit floating point variable.
How feasible is it to implement the coordinate system, then put all the bodies and ships and other objects into a scrollable list that we optionally could open up and navigate with the arrow keys and filter using typing letters on the keyboard?
This way the coordinate system could be usable and we can find ways to instantly calculate distance and maybe heading between two objects in the current system.

It would be a list of thousands of items, but it would be much much easier than trying to search for an object on the map, which is not possible when reading the screen Linearly, not mentioning the scrolling and zooming part which is inaccessible.
apologies for the off topic post.

Yes, this is possible.
6
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Questions
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Yesterday at 06:44:05 PM »
Speaking of grids, have you remade the galactic map yet? And made it a tiny bit less painful to use, maybe?
Something like the systems automatically going toward grid nodes as you drop them would be nice, or an option to show the grid so it's easier to set things and then click "Line Up" without having half your repositioned systems move in the wrong direction.

I already have a 'to do' list item for the galactic map to automatically position new systems but I haven't coded it yet.
7
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Yesterday at 06:42:21 PM »
The discussion on training and order delays has had me thinking again about general crew readiness for combat. It's always bugged me that you can have a ship sit on a warp point for three years doing nothing and then suddenly be all guns blazing within the space of a five second increment. That level of readiness just seems odd to me.

I know its something as a player you can just RP by not firing straight away but I'd be interested in seeing some mechanic in the game to address this although accept that for the small number of times it would have an impact it may be a bit much. As to how that could work I was thinking about 2-3 states for the crew to be at that impact delays to initial but not subsequent orders such as:

- Normal Watch: CIWS no delays, beams short delays, missile batteries longer delay, fighter launch etc longest delay - no impact
- High Alert: As above but with no delays on wider range of actions and reduced delays on fighter launch etc - 2 times rate on deployment time
- Red Alert: Basically then just use normal command delays where applicable based on crew training etc - 5 times rate on deployment

So basically if you want to travel you are on normal alert, if you are worried you go to Amber and then its a decision as to when you go to Red Alert. It clearly makes jump point defence more of a logistical challenge and might make the investment in stealth ships more interesting if it means you have a better chance of catching an enemy out. Probably one for the AI to ignore though.

I think there was something on these lines in an early version of Aurora but it was removed. The issue was that the defender needed to keep checking the far side of the jump point with scouts (fighter sized) to ensure they had the right alert level, which added a lot of micromanagement.
8
Aurora Chat / Re: What's going on in your empire/planet/battlefield?
« Last post by Garfunkel on Yesterday at 03:29:31 PM »
Yeah, that's a pretty impressive fleet. Good luck!
9
The Corporate Federation / Re: Corporate Federation - Comments
« Last post by Garfunkel on Yesterday at 03:28:10 PM »
Sol is clear!

Oh wait, four more battleships...

Incoming!
10
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Last post by Garfunkel on Yesterday at 03:23:33 PM »
I'd point out the lower laser size limit is totally arbitrary at the moment.  I do however agree that something like that in particular souldn't be swappable for a fighter sized thing.

Also, the equalizer was a perfectly effective weapon (it let the thing destroy tanks for heck sakes), and the harrier was quite useful for the fact that it was very flexible, despite its overall low speed.  It performed fine in the Falklands war for instance.
Oh I completely agree that all the weapon sizes in Aurora are arbitrary, but the system as-it-is seems fairly balanced to me in ship-to-ship combat. Any change to weapon sizes would have far more impact on the far more important aspect of the game (ship-to-ship combat) rather than in fighter combat, and would thus be a major change.

And this is really getting off-topic, but the Harrier really was a terrible plane in air superiority, was only decent in air support role, and the two reasons why it performed as well as it did in the Falklands were that the training levels of Fleet Air Arm pilots was vastly better than their Argentinian counterparts (and before deployment, they got to practice flying against French Mirages) and that the Argentinian planes (especially their Mirage III interceptors) operated at the extreme limit of their range. Oh and the fact that the Argentinian Air Force lacked modern Air-to-Air missiles. Even with such handicaps, the Argentinians kept contesting the air space over Falklands for an impressively long time.

The discussion on training and order delays has had me thinking again about general crew readiness for combat. It's always bugged me that you can have a ship sit on a warp point for three years doing nothing and then suddenly be all guns blazing within the space of a five second increment. That level of readiness just seems odd to me.

I know its something as a player you can just RP by not firing straight away but I'd be interested in seeing some mechanic in the game to address this although accept that for the small number of times it would have an impact it may be a bit much. As to how that could work I was thinking about 2-3 states for the crew to be at that impact delays to initial but not subsequent orders such as:

- Normal Watch: CIWS no delays, beams short delays, missile batteries longer delay, fighter launch etc longest delay - no impact
- High Alert: As above but with no delays on wider range of actions and reduced delays on fighter launch etc - 2 times rate on deployment time
- Red Alert: Basically then just use normal command delays where applicable based on crew training etc - 5 times rate on deployment

So basically if you want to travel you are on normal alert, if you are worried you go to Amber and then its a decision as to when you go to Red Alert. It clearly makes jump point defence more of a logistical challenge and might make the investment in stealth ships more interesting if it means you have a better chance of catching an enemy out. Probably one for the AI to ignore though.
Wow. This is such an great idea and seems fairly easy to implement. Maybe on TG/Fleet basis and not ship basis? Two thumbs up.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10