Update on Progress

[Kristover]

I'm a little on the fence about KSP2 just because they got bought by TakeTwo (however so far TakeTwo seems decent). So I'll reserve judgement. No doubt it'll be great, but time will see. I also strongly think that KSP is as popular as it is because of the highly robust modding community. So long as they keep that going in KSP2 I'm sure it'll be great.

CK3 is looking interesting. I do love paradox, but they don't always hit home runs (early HOI4 comes to mind) so again we shall see.
I'm mostly looking forward to Mount and Blade Bannerlord and Cyberpunk. Oh and Baldur's gate III could be good given that Larian is behind it.

I generally tend to play KSP with less than a half-dozen mods so I'm not as much into the mod scene - but I understand it is a HUGE part of the appeal.  Judging off the features list, KSP2 seems to scratch the big itches I needed for the series so if turns out to just be KSP + More, then I'll be satisfied.  I totally hear you on Paradox - huge fan of theirs but the reputation that every other game of theirs is incomplete and fixed by the expansions is totally earned.  BUT, given CK3 is their biggest and most important series, I tend to think they are going to pull out all the stops to not screw this one up.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I am still playing the campaign and finding bugs. For example, only this week I noticed that minerals showed up in the population minerals view even without a geo survey

Therefore, in order to meet the March date I might leave the new version of Diplomacy until v1.1 (VB6-style Diplomacy is already coded). I'll keep bug-fixing and I am also working through the minor functions that are still missing.

As an example, below is the new technology window.

[Kristover]

I'm really intrigued by a new diplomacy model but my big ask was for better ground game and NPR initiated ground invasions so I'm totally cool with diplomacy slipping to v1.1 (not that I'm even remotely the decider on that one at all).  Lots of new toys to play with already!

[QuakeIV]

I think most of us would be pretty hype for an initial release that is missing some features.

[Arwyn]

I am still playing the campaign and finding bugs. For example, only this week I noticed that minerals showed up in the population minerals view even without a geo survey

Therefore, in order to meet the March date I might leave the new version of Diplomacy until v1.1 (VB6-style Diplomacy is already coded). I'll keep bug-fixing and I am also working through the minor functions that are still missing.

As an example, below is the new technology window.

You seem to be missing some boarding and melta torps there Steve....

[Shuul]

I think most of us would be pretty hype for an initial release that is missing some features.

Still, i feel like diplomacy is the major feature for me and i really want it from the start
@Steve - if diplomacy module will be released later can it happen to be compatible with saves in previous versions?

[JustAnotherDude]

The man will release it how he wants and when he wants, and that's that. The fact he listens to us at all is very, very kind on his part.

[Tikigod]

As I mentioned in a earlier post, diplomacy is probably the one aspect of the game I rarely ever touch in VB so the idea of C# releasing with diplomacy bare bones would have little to no impact, as diplomacy has never really been a 'player engagement' feature in Aurora. Diplomacy has always been more of a passive system that exists in the background of Aurora that just happens by itself whilst I am busy playing the actual game.

The improved stability, performance and deeper behaviour to the various aspects of the C# release that are actually player engaging completely win out plus being able to kick the recurring bugs and broken aspects in the current public VB release to the curb is long desired.

Fed up with so many whole campaigns in VB becoming unplayable and need to be wiped because the game hits time progression stopping errors on orbital behaviour. 

[vorpal+5]

I am still playing the campaign and finding bugs. For example, only this week I noticed that minerals showed up in the population minerals view even without a geo survey

Therefore, in order to meet the March date I might leave the new version of Diplomacy until v1.1 (VB6-style Diplomacy is already coded). I'll keep bug-fixing and I am also working through the minor functions that are still missing.

(..)

What about a campaign started in March, will the new diplomacy be compatible with it once it is released?

I'm asking that because our current RPG campaign, 5 people around a table for almost 5 years is about to end, and I gearing up for a new campaign, a sci-fi themed one. I intent to use Aurora as a basis to describe ongoing actions between nations block of Earth and their possible interaction with alien races (with a good dose of Space Master intervention if things go south in a way I do not intent to).
So if you tell me there are some good chances the new diplomacy will require a restart, I might revise my plan, perhaps not using Aurora for the RPG campaign in 2020 but waiting for 2021, and 'simulating' in good old 'paper' way the campaign background.

I see an immense benefit of using Aurora partly to support the campaign, consistency, plausibility and surprise which don't have the DM hand (again, with the SM mode to edit things if this really don't fit my plan). Imagine I tell my players they are planned for a 120 days travel toward a new colony and then Aurora kicks in and show me there is an alien ship spotted along the way. This I would not have planned for and this would increase tension, because players will know even the DM did not took part in the event . So what will they do, will they end up in a lifeboat?

[Tikigod]

I am still playing the campaign and finding bugs. For example, only this week I noticed that minerals showed up in the population minerals view even without a geo survey

Therefore, in order to meet the March date I might leave the new version of Diplomacy until v1.1 (VB6-style Diplomacy is already coded). I'll keep bug-fixing and I am also working through the minor functions that are still missing.

(..)

What about a campaign started in March, will the new diplomacy be compatible with it once it is released?

I'm asking that because our current RPG campaign, 5 people around a table for almost 5 years is about to end, and I gearing up for a new campaign, a sci-fi themed one. I intent to use Aurora as a basis to describe ongoing actions between nations block of Earth and their possible interaction with alien races (with a good dose of Space Master intervention if things go south in a way I do not intent to).
So if you tell me there are some good chances the new diplomacy will require a restart, I might revise my plan, perhaps not using Aurora for the RPG campaign in 2020 but waiting for 2021, and 'simulating' in good old 'paper' way the campaign background.

I see an immense benefit of using Aurora partly to support the campaign, consistency, plausibility and surprise which don't have the DM hand (again, with the SM mode to edit things if this really don't fit my plan). Imagine I tell my players they are planned for a 120 days travel toward a new colony and then Aurora kicks in and show me there is an alien ship spotted along the way. This I would not have planned for and this would increase tension, because players will know even the DM did not took part in the event . So what will they do, will they end up in a lifeboat?

If they aren't compatible how about using two different installations of Aurora, the initial 1.0 C# release you can reference for your campaign, and then a updated one further you can use for your own purposes playing the latest releases as they roll out?

[Father Tim]

As I mentioned in a earlier post, diplomacy is probably the one aspect of the game I rarely ever touch in VB so the idea of C# releasing with diplomacy bare bones would have little to no impact, as diplomacy has never really been a 'player engagement' feature in Aurora. Diplomacy has always been more of a passive system that exists in the background of Aurora that just happens by itself whilst I am busy playing the actual game.

The improved stability, performance and deeper behaviour to the various aspects of the C# release that are actually player engaging completely win out plus being able to kick the recurring bugs and broken aspects in the current public VB release to the curb is long desired.

Fed up with so many whole campaigns in VB becoming unplayable and need to be wiped because the game hits time progression stopping errors on orbital behaviour. 

But is that, perhaps, because diplomacy hasn't been very good so far?  For me it's the fourth most important part of the software, after economy, movement, and space combat.  It's MORE important to me than ground combat (although please note that I consider NPRs ability to launch ground invasions part of Diplomacy).  I'm tired of having all non-player controlled interaction be enslavement or extermination.  Either I win the race to full alliance, or they get mad at me for existing in a system they consider theirs, and all-out war ensues.  The only way war stops is if I run away from it, they exterminate me, or I destroy every last combat-capable unit they have so the remainder surrender.

It's easy to make another faction fight you -- start shooting at them.  There's an infinite variety of non-fighting interactions, and VB6 Aurora models about two of them.

I want weak allies that are always pestering me for support, and strong allies that occasionally demand I help exterminate some spoilers.  I want permanently neutral aliens that are happy to co-exist in the same system because they're methane-breathers and don't like my planets.

I want to sell minerals, and technology, and spare ships to other empires when I have a Corundium shortage.  I want to buy their High-Powered Microwaves 'cause I've never researched any.  I want conquered populations to slowly assimilate a few percentage points at a time each construction cycle, not jump 20% once every four years.

- - - - -

In short, I'm more excited about a properly-robust Diplomacy system than I am about Chaos Rifts or spoiler races getting ground units.

[QuakeIV]

I mean thats great and all but in my experience games do a lot better in the long run if the currently active community is playing them.  It seems to me the sooner Steve can set everyone loose on this thing the sooner he starts getting some gratification out of people having fun playing his thing.  I grant you that is an assumption, but I am pretty sure he interacts with us because some aspect of it is enjoyable to him.  When there is a giant refactor in single-dev game communities like this, its always been like the dev is holding their breath, and whether or not they manage to release the refactored version in time or not decides the fate of the community.

From the sounds of it what he's got is entirely releasable (it could be played and enjoyed), with the caveat that we will probably fairly quickly start finding bugs.  I think if he is feeling it then he should go for it.

[Silentbrick]

I am eagerly awaiting this as my current games tend to wind up with 45 min to an hour for 30 days to pass and that's on a 4th gen I7 with 16 gigs of ram.  My personal laptop only takes 20 min but I mostly play on my work machine.

Besides, maybe it'll elminate my habit of sitting quietly in my system while mad scientists probe the universe whether it likes it or not until the ships of DOOM start rolling off the assembly line.  I just hate upgrading or getting a ship out of the yard and 2 years later half of it's obsolete.

[Caplin]

I can definitely sympathize with wanting a new diplomacy system, as it has always seemed to be a slightly oversimplified omission in the current VB6 game.

On the other hand, I want to see how well C# works with my screen reading tech, and being able to enjoy the rest of the game features will be wonderful. I can't wait to have a poke at it. I've missed this game a great deal.

[bugkill]

I mean thats great and all but in my experience games do a lot better in the long run if the currently active community is playing them.   It seems to me the sooner Steve can set everyone loose on this thing the sooner he starts getting some gratification out of people having fun playing his thing.   I grant you that is an assumption, but I am pretty sure he interacts with us because some aspect of it is enjoyable to him.   When there is a giant refactor in single-dev game communities like this, its always been like the dev is holding their breath, and whether or not they manage to release the refactored version in time or not decides the fate of the community.

From the sounds of it what he's got is entirely releasable (it could be played and enjoyed), with the caveat that we will probably fairly quickly start finding bugs.   I think if he is feeling it then he should go for it.

I discovered Aurora 4x late in the game and was barely scratching the surface of it before I happened to come across this forum for C#.  After seeing all the updates, I immediately stopped playing Aurora in order to save all my experience for the better version.  It has been a very long wait and I highly anticipate the release.  I'm not going to try and rush Steve because he KNOWS how bad the community wants to get their hands on this thing.  I do agree that if the game is playable with no game breaking bugs, it will help him immensely in the long run to release it because it will allow him to step back a bit and breathe. 

He will be able focus on other things for a bit of time while the community is able to play it and provide feedback where only major issues would need his immediate attention.  In the end, it is entirely up to Steve and he knows what he is doing, so we all have to find something else to do until release.  Getting updates is greatly appreciated, but I'm at the point of checking in to verify a release date and leaving.  Updates are great, but there comes a point where it feels a bit like torture.  Anyway, look forward to the release and keep up the great work, Steve.