1
C# Bug Reports / Re: v2.3.1 Bugs Thread
« Last post by Mint Keyphase on Today at 04:03:00 AM »And also related to the DSP is this display bug
Recent Posts
2
C# Bug Reports / Re: v2.3.1 Bugs Thread
« Last post by Mint Keyphase on Today at 03:48:05 AM »This happened when selecting a DSP, and also when I do 5-Day increments after making the said DSP
3
C# Suggestions / Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Last post by Mint Keyphase on Today at 03:45:51 AM »UI scale and font size pls?
4
The Academy / Re: Passive two stage missiles?
« Last post by nuclearslurpee on Yesterday at 11:39:46 PM »It may help to share your missile designs, including separation distance for first stage. Multiple-stage missiles have historically been a bit buggy but also easy to set up incorrectly so it's hard to tell which is the case here without more detail.
5
The Academy / Passive two stage missiles?
« Last post by Mayne on Yesterday at 11:26:15 PM »I am trying to make a long range two stage missile for use against raiders. The idea is that I would fire the first stage at a waypoint and then the thermal tracking second stage would do the rest. Instead, the 2nd stage just stays at the waypoint until it runs out of fuel. I have tried this with actives and then thermals on the 2nd stage, and also with both on the 1st stage and have not found a way to make this work. I have tried deleting the waypoint after firing after reading that somewhere to no success.
Interestingly, using the "Launch Ready Ordnance" command makes them function as short-lived mines where the 2nd stage tracks and attacks targets as expected, so that's something I suppose.
Am I missing something and this is WAI? Or is this a bug?
Interestingly, using the "Launch Ready Ordnance" command makes them function as short-lived mines where the 2nd stage tracks and attacks targets as expected, so that's something I suppose.
Am I missing something and this is WAI? Or is this a bug?
6
C# Bureau of Design / Re: Probably awful dreadnought design
« Last post by prophetical on Yesterday at 08:58:24 PM »Code: [Select]Beagle class Dreadnought 227,875 tons 7,373 Crew 440,561.5 BP TCS 4,557 TH 800 EM 452,790...Well that escalated quickly...
17553 km/s Armour 32-332 Shields 15093-670 HTK 1617 Sensors 750/750/0/0 DCR 600 PPV 2,155
Maint Life 0.00 Years MSP 15,000 AFR 45575% IFR 633.0% 1YR 8,343,520 5YR 125,152,802 Max Repair 80000.00 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 8,000 tons Magazine 1,437
Captain Control Rating 6 BRG AUX ENG CIC FLG PFC
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months Flight Crew Berths 160 Morale Check Required
Quantum Singularity Drive EP40000.00 (2) Power 80000.0 Fuel Use 1.58% Signature 400.0000 Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 833,000 Litres Range 41.6 billion km (27 days at full power)
Omega S1677 / R670 Shields (9) Recharge Time 670 seconds (22.5 per second)
120.0cm C25 Far Gamma Ray Laser (1) Range 1,400,000km TS: 25,000 km/s Power 377-25 RM 120,000 km ROF 80
Quad 80cm C25 Far Gamma Ray Laser Turret (3x4) Range 1,400,000km TS: 25000 km/s Power 672-100 RM 120,000 km ROF 35
Particle Lance-100 (8) Range 1,200,000km TS: 25,000 km/s Power 312-25 ROF 65
Twin 40cm C25 Far Gamma Ray Laser Turret (4x2) Range 1,400,000km TS: 25000 km/s Power 84-50 RM 120,000 km ROF 10
Quad 40cm C25 Far Gamma Ray Laser Turret (2x4) Range 1,400,000km TS: 25000 km/s Power 168-100 RM 120,000 km ROF 10
Quad 15.0cm C6.25 T100000 Laser Turret (4x4) Range 720,000km TS: 100000 km/s Power 24-25 RM 120,000 km ROF 5
R10080/C25 Meson Cannon (2) Range 1,400,000km TS: 25,000 km/s Power 168-25 RM 10,080,000 km ROF 35
Quad Gauss Cannon R600-100 Turret (12x32) Range 60,000km TS: 100000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 60,000 km ROF 5
Quad R10080/C25 Meson Cannon Turret (2x4) Range 1,400,000km TS: 25000 km/s Power 672-100 RM 10,080,000 km ROF 35
Beam Fire Control R1400-TS25000 (5%) (1) Max Range: 1,400,000 km TS: 25,000 km/s 99 99 98 97 96 96 95 94 94 93
Beam Fire Control R350-TS100000 (5%) (1) Max Range: 350,000 km TS: 100,000 km/s 97 94 91 89 86 83 80 77 74 71
Quantum Singularity Power Plant R320 (3) Total Power Output 960 Exp 5%
Size 3.0 Missile Launcher (132) Missile Size: 3 Rate of Fire 5
Size 1 Missile Launcher (80) Missile Size: 1 Rate of Fire 5
Missile Fire Control FC1924-R100 (5%) (1) Range 1,924.4m km Resolution 100
Point Defense MFC Size 5 (5%) (1) Range 293.2m km Resolution 1
Class 1 AMM-II (ECCM) (381) Speed: 60,000 km/s End: 2m Range: 7.3m km WH: 1 Size: 1 TH: 4440/2664/1332
Class 3 ASM-II (352) Speed: 20,000 km/s End: 15.2m Range: 18.3m km WH: 60 Size: 3.0 TH: 333/200/100
Active Search Sensor AS304-R100 (5%) (1) GPS 18000 Range 304.3m km Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor AS146-R1 (5%) (1) GPS 900 Range 146.6m km MCR 13.2m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH10-750 (5%) (1) Sensitivity 750 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 216.5m km
EM Sensor EM10-750 (5%) (1) Sensitivity 750 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 216.5m km
ECCM-10 (4) ECM 100
Strike Group
16x Agamemnon Fighter Speed: 18029 km/s Size: 9.98
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes
I play at max tech a lot and am going to echo what others have said. You really do want to spend time with lower level techs. Playing around at this level will not actually teach you much and you are quickly going to learn the wrong lessons by building ships like this that, while likely able to destroy anything you run across, aren't actually good ships at that tech level.
7
C# Mechanics / Re: Space stations
« Last post by Garfunkel on Yesterday at 07:46:11 PM »Yes, and remember that there is nothing that prevents you from RP'ing that a "fleet" of space stations is actually one big station. That way you can build modular space stations with both commercial and military elements to them.
8
C# Mechanics / Re: v2.4.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by nuclearslurpee on Yesterday at 06:19:31 PM »The new Jump Drive changes look nice.
Does this signal a shift from bugfixing the recent releases to working on the next major release?
Personally I am hoping we get the drive changes and then Steve starts on a 2.5 which will be a major release. Seems like most of the obvious bugs have been found now so 2.4 should be a stable version for AARs.
9
C# Bug Reports / Re: v2.3.1 Bugs Thread
« Last post by Ragnarsson on Yesterday at 05:46:47 PM »Potential bug with the "Create Habitable" feature.
Game version 3.3.1, entirely new game, all I've done is activate SM and click "Create Habitable".
In the 2.2 Patch Notes it was stated that when using Create Habitable the following rule applied toward the end of the process:
Unless this is no longer the case, "habitable" systems are being created that fall outside this temperature bound. Attached is the screenshot of one such planet. There are no other planets in the system that might be considered the habitable one, so it's not the result of a failed conversion that was mentioned as a possibility in the feature description. As you can see, the temperature is currently 47.9 degrees, with the min/max due to eccentricity at 47.29 - 62.05 degrees.
Game version 3.3.1, entirely new game, all I've done is activate SM and click "Create Habitable".
In the 2.2 Patch Notes it was stated that when using Create Habitable the following rule applied toward the end of the process:
Quote
If the resulting temperature is between 250K and 310K (-23C and 37C), the planet qualifies as habitable and the dominant terrain is updated. If not, subsequent planets are checked. If no suitable planets are created, the system is discarded and regenerated until a suitable planet is created
Unless this is no longer the case, "habitable" systems are being created that fall outside this temperature bound. Attached is the screenshot of one such planet. There are no other planets in the system that might be considered the habitable one, so it's not the result of a failed conversion that was mentioned as a possibility in the feature description. As you can see, the temperature is currently 47.9 degrees, with the min/max due to eccentricity at 47.29 - 62.05 degrees.
10
General Discussion / Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Last post by Froggiest1982 on Yesterday at 05:40:44 PM »Another option is to make buoys.
Woooo, Unless you want to end up with several dots on your screen impossible to recognize, you need to remember to name waypoints and stuff because the remove Salvo tracker doesn't have a "location" but it tracks targets. I just did a quick and dirty setup to show you how hard it could be otherwise.
First just launched ready ordnance as you can see no target, then I added a waypoint (just general).
This is important especially when you have multiple search and destroy missions along with monitoring of Jump points and such. Reason? You may have to clean it up at some point, trust me.
Oh, don't be worried, you can remove the waypoints as well, doing that doesn't cancel the target on the salvo screen.
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk