C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions

[QuakeIV]

I feel like 'people will post spurious bug reports because of broken mods' is a somewhat weak argument against modding, because mods can potentially do a lot for the enjoyability of a game, and to my general experience its not all that hard to ignore reports that fail to clarify whether they are using mods or not.  Mind you, I also don't know what form the modding would even take exactly in this case, perhaps adding new weapons or rebalancing existing ones?  Its not totally clear if that would even be practical to add.

e: As an aside, cataclysm DDA was a total disaster long term and turned into a kindof terrible game due to all the weird crap people were adding to the baseline game.  I can't say I particularly support an open sourced approach in any specific regard.  It has its uses, some projects do it successfully, but you need to constantly be an asshole to people making pull requests if you want to keep the game in any sort of good state, and there will be splinter games forming at the drop of a hat.  Heck, in the case of aurora there is already that Quasar thing which sprung up even without any open sourced code.

[JustAnotherDude]

At the end of the day, all of the conjecture about whether or not it would make the game better is moot because Steve is not comfortable with it. That is his right and we should all respect it. It's his game and ultimately his choice.

[Frank Jager]

Fer Cthullu's sake!

Steve is very nearly NOT releasing C# Aurora in ANY format to the public, because you all can't respect the mans property.

There will be no mod support. The source code will not be released. That's pretty clear from the MULTIPLE posts and thread that Steve created.

Imagine you had a boat, that you had built from scratch. It took several hundred hours to create. Now imagine sharing that boat with everyone, because you are proud of it. Now imagine everyone chopping that boat to pieces, changing things around to suit them. That boat that you built, suddenly doesn't look like your boat, your labor of love.

I would really, really, really like to actually be allowed to play with Aurora C#. I would like it to be released in a few weeks.

There is already a delay, caused by this community, with the repeated blatant statements that you will not respect the mans wishes, and will simply hack the source code anyway. This has led to an actual DELAY!!!

Please just respect Steve's wishes.

It isn't like its hard to figure them out.

[hostergaard]

I'm not sure how I could have made it clearer

As stated in the FAQ entry, I have zero interest in project managing a group of developers or trying to integrate someone else's code. I'm not interested in Aurora having the best possible code or the best possible architecture or debating what that might look like. I simply want to have fun programming and playing.  I do not want to share the actual code, which represents thousands of hours of work on my part. I don't want to waste time on bug reports caused by someone else hacking around and I don't want multiple potentially competing versions of Aurora. In simple terms, I want to maintain control over my creation.

Now it might seem 'weird' to you that I am not prepared to hand over my work to everyone and that's fine. I'm not trying to defend my stance on this, I am simply stating it so there is no confusion.

Okay, thanks for the clarifications, I believed those arguments to be about having people working on the actual game, not about open sourcing it.  While I largely disagree with some of those arguments its not up to me and you have made up your mind and I respect your wishes, so its pointless to debate, especially here. Weird simply because for me my default nature and thinking is to share things with others unless there is very good reason not to but people are different. Thanks for taking the time to answer and I hope you will reconsider one day as I would love to do some work expanding certain areas of the game.

Anyway, really excited for the release and appreciative of the hard work you are doing for us all!

Fer Cthullu's sake!

Steve is very nearly NOT releasing C# Aurora in ANY format to the public, because you all can't respect the mans property.

There will be no mod support. The source code will not be released. That's pretty clear from the MULTIPLE posts and thread that Steve created.

Imagine you had a boat, that you had built from scratch. It took several hundred hours to create. Now imagine sharing that boat with everyone, because you are proud of it. Now imagine everyone chopping that boat to pieces, changing things around to suit them. That boat that you built, suddenly doesn't look like your boat, your labor of love.

I would really, really, really like to actually be allowed to play with Aurora C#. I would like it to be released in a few weeks.

There is already a delay, caused by this community, with the repeated blatant statements that you will not respect the mans wishes, and will simply hack the source code anyway. This has led to an actual DELAY!!!

Please just respect Steve's wishes.

It isn't like its hard to figure them out.

Calm down buddy, I was just asking him to clarify since the post he made left me a bit confused about it, no need toget so upset over it. I am not going to get into a debate over the merits of freedom of information but suffice to say, a lot of of what you said I find to be incorrect of misleading and if you want me to explain how you can send me a message and I am happy to have a talk about it there, this thread is not the place. That is all I have to say about that, I am not demanding anything but please do keep a civil and respectful tone and don't treat me and others who have a different opinions and disagree with you and at perhaps Steve as if we are idiots. We, or at least I am, are fully aware of most arguments for and against open sourcing code, no need to be so derisive when making arguments.

There's a password for Space Master functions (if left blank Aurora treats this as 'no password').  You can lock each race behind its own password.

I can't remember if the current version supports locking time advance behind the SM password, but you can instruct your players that only the SM will advance time.

Now you can email the database to each player in turn (or use some sort of virtual drive and versioning support) and 'run' multiplayer Aurora.

(Note, however, that when two (or more) players start fighting each other the game is going to bog down to an epic degree.  It can take days or even weeks for players A & B to finish a three-Aurora-hour fight during which players C through H can do nothing.)

Problem with that is its entirely honor based. Might work if you do it with close friends, but if you do some forum game or something its almost guaranteed someone will advance the game to know whats going to happen to get an advantage.

As for it taking a long time, well, hence the suggestion to make it multiplayer so one can do live battles and not have the battles bog down games forever.

[SultanPepper]

VERY much a long term idea, just wanting to put this out there.

A game style similar to Freelancer(kinda) and whatnot.  Player race handed off to NPR, player only controls one Task Force, has to buy new ships with wealth.  I know it's vastly different to what Aurora is, but this is a suggestions forum isn't it?

Essentially it'd be like Adventurer in Dwarf Fortress.  The player would control their captain/whoever in the universe as is.

Again, VERY MUCH a long term suggestion, thought I'd throw it out and see what people think.

As for the open-source nonsense, people who want open-source, moddable Aurora should go and code their own.  Steve doesn't want it open source, or cracking the code, or anything.  Small-ass price to pay for the game.

[TMaekler]

Maybe Steve could create an option that blocks time Progression for regular players if activated?

Don’t know if the one who is creating quasar 4x would appreciate having people helping him?

[Inglonias]

Problem with that is its entirely honor based. Might work if you do it with close friends, but if you do some forum game or something its almost guaranteed someone will advance the game to know whats going to happen to get an advantage.

As for it taking a long time, well, hence the suggestion to make it multiplayer so one can do live battles and not have the battles bog down games forever.

I mean, there's nothing stopping me from clambering over the poker table and looking at my opponents' hands either, or walking behind the DM screen and taking a sneak peek. If someone goes and ruins the game, stop playing with them.

Maybe Steve could create an option that blocks time Progression for regular players if activated?

All of my above statements being said, this would also work.

[Nori]

Oh boy... Modding rears up again. I generally love modding, but I can also understand why a developer wouldn't want it.

That being said, my biggest concern is that, God forbid, something bad happens to Steve and Aurora dies off. Hopefully Steve has given some trusted person access, just in case.

Anywho, super excited for the impending release. Best wishes to all and stay safe and healthy.

[Vasious]

Reading the FAQ Modding and Open source posts, I'd quite understand and support a decision to not release C# to the public, especially if code obfuscation became too time consuming or burdensome.

I'd just hope we'd still get to share the fiction from C#

[Zhatelier]

Now, firstly, if this has already been suggested (or implemented), my apologies.

But a feature I'd like to see for role-playing purposes is the ability to give the control of a race to the AI permanently, effectively converting it into an NPR, control of which you couldn't take back without the developer mode.  This wouldn't exactly need to be a high priority feature, should Steve be interested in this, but rather if/when there's enough loose time to implement it in.

The reason why I'm expressing interest in this is somewhat selfish: I'm planning for my first proper playthrough for C# Aurora and I'm toying with an idea of around 4-14* NPRs, but I'd like to personalize each one of them a bit, give some initial ship designs, starting fleets etc.  to make things somewhat balanced but also have a control on the starting varieties between the races.

* A run as Pirates utilizing mostly carronades and boarding parties with the NPRs modelled after various (naval) powers from 17th & 18th century, like Britain, France, Spain etc.

[Father Tim]

But a feature I'd like to see for role-playing purposes is the ability to give the control of a race to the AI permanently, effectively converting it into an NPR, control of which you couldn't take back without the developer mode.  This wouldn't exactly need to be a high priority feature, should Steve be interested in this, but rather if/when there's enough loose time to implement it in.

It's on the wish list, but the complexities of 'taking over' an empire that wasn't designed according to NPR AI rules are vast and daunting -- and the AI rules don't currently include "don't use missiles" or "rely heavily on boarding actions" or "only build general-purpose cruisers."

[Zhatelier]

It's on the wish list, but the complexities of 'taking over' an empire that wasn't designed according to NPR AI rules are vast and daunting -- and the AI rules don't currently include "don't use missiles" or "rely heavily on boarding actions" or "only build general-purpose cruisers. "

I'm not actually saying it needs to have special rules, in my opinion, the AI could take everything to a completely different direction if deemed it better.  But I do understand that it isn't nearly as simple as it might sound and hence probably shouldn't be very high on the priority list.

[Steve Walmsley]

It's on the wish list, but the complexities of 'taking over' an empire that wasn't designed according to NPR AI rules are vast and daunting -- and the AI rules don't currently include "don't use missiles" or "rely heavily on boarding actions" or "only build general-purpose cruisers. "

I'm not actually saying it needs to have special rules, in my opinion, the AI could take everything to a completely different direction if deemed it better.  But I do understand that it isn't nearly as simple as it might sound and hence probably shouldn't be very high on the priority list.

It's extremely complex and therefore unlikely to happen any time soon. The AI currently decides on a doctrine and then designs and builds a fleet according to that doctrine. It knows what everything does, because it was built to a plan. It would be a lore more complex for the AI to understand everything designed by the player and then develop a doctrine of its own based on those designs.

[Jorgen_CAB]

It's on the wish list, but the complexities of 'taking over' an empire that wasn't designed according to NPR AI rules are vast and daunting -- and the AI rules don't currently include "don't use missiles" or "rely heavily on boarding actions" or "only build general-purpose cruisers. "

I'm not actually saying it needs to have special rules, in my opinion, the AI could take everything to a completely different direction if deemed it better.  But I do understand that it isn't nearly as simple as it might sound and hence probably shouldn't be very high on the priority list.

It's extremely complex and therefore unlikely to happen any time soon. The AI currently decides on a doctrine and then designs and builds a fleet according to that doctrine. It knows what everything does, because it was built to a plan. It would be a lore more complex for the AI to understand everything designed by the player and then develop a doctrine of its own based on those designs.

As an intermediary "fix" you could make it possible for the player to choose the AI ship building theme for an NPR... that would to some degree help in this case. It would then choose technologies according to that scheme and build the ships based on that AI theme.

[Zhatelier]

It's extremely complex and therefore unlikely to happen any time soon.  The AI currently decides on a doctrine and then designs and builds a fleet according to that doctrine.  It knows what everything does, because it was built to a plan.  It would be a lore more complex for the AI to understand everything designed by the player and then develop a doctrine of its own based on those designs.

Quite understandable.  I reckon the AI could just roll for the doctrine and ignore any potentially pre-existing designs, that would cut some corners and make it a bit less complex for the AI.  That would risk losing some work, but I suppose a warning message about AI ignoring certain stuff would prevent it from being a surprise for the player.  Handing the stuff for AI to handle once you've set up stuff, like colonies in multiple pre-generated systems with various installations, and so forth, would make things less prone for accidents.  I do realize that it can be done through already existing tools to a degree via SM, but the ability to double-check the details before handing the keys would be handy.  I'm aware that my scenario is going to be most likely a very rare in nature compared to the average playthrough and I'll make do with any tools available to the best of my abilities