Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 2 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Doren
« on: August 26, 2019, 08:22:16 AM »

Thanks for the writeup.  I've set up a carrier with two scout fighters in one wing, and a jump scout fighter in another.  How do I launch only one wing (or only one fighter) without launching the others?   I can use the "release all" command from the individual ship menu then issue land command with the naval organization chart you describe to land all but the one fighter I wanted to launch, but is there a way to launch only one fighter to start with? 

Edit: I found the answer.  Double-click on the parasite within the task group window.  On the right hand side of the individual unit page is the individual unit spage is a paraship menu is a parasite menu where you can launch just that ship.
To launch wing you should just create task force from naval organization chart with Branch only (you need to have different wings in separate branches obviously). This works because parasites in different task groups are automatically kicked out of their mothership.

As you found out for single ship you can double click it or you can select the ship and create task force from naval org chart with ship only selection.
Posted by: bankshot
« on: August 24, 2019, 10:43:12 PM »

Thanks for the writeup.  I've set up a carrier with two scout fighters in one wing, and a jump scout fighter in another.  How do I launch only one wing (or only one fighter) without launching the others?   I can use the "release all" command from the individual ship menu then issue land command with the naval organization chart you describe to land all but the one fighter I wanted to launch, but is there a way to launch only one fighter to start with? 

Edit: I found the answer.  Double-click on the parasite within the task group window.  On the right hand side of the individual unit page is the individual unit spage is a paraship menu is a parasite menu where you can launch just that ship.
Posted by: Adseria
« on: October 03, 2018, 04:50:02 PM »

As a new player, I would like to say that this was extremely useful, not just for organising carriers (I'm only quite early in my 1st game, so I don't actually have any carriers, just a couple of PDCs with hangars), but also for learning how to use the organisation window in general. It seems extremely complex, and I'm having a bit of trouble working it out, but I've done some experimenting with test branches to work out basics like moving branches around etc, and I can see how it would be extremely useful, especially when I finally start getting a decent fleet that has more than half a dozen ships. Your explanations were really succinct and to-the-point, and I think that, combined with the other bits and pieces I can find, It will be really helpful.

As a side note, I don't suppose you'd be willing to do this kind of step-by-step tutorial for the org window in general, rather than carriers specifically? The way you explain things makes it easy to work out what's going on, and labelled pics work in a way that nothing else can XD
Posted by: Vandermeer
« on: November 08, 2015, 03:02:25 PM »

Ok, so here some bad news and good news on the issue.

o Nr.1 bad news is that Join Parent conditional order is broken in current Aurora, and doesn't work as hoped anyway.
I tried the following setup:
Off-Topic: show

-----

...but that is impossible for two reasons. One, the conditional order is of higher hierarchy in Aurora, so the docking would come before the survey, making it useless for this purpose. But secondly also, because the Join Parent does work with an error only. You will get a couple of error windows equal to the number of ships that were ordered, and then this happens:
Off-Topic: show

-----

Though it appears right in the log, the join-command in the TF window has no target. I experimented a bit to see if it was maybe because of the special signs, or I needed distance, or if it simply wouldn't work when default and conditionals were given together... . Yet, no matter what, it simply is dysfunctional, so that is no option as of now.


o Nr.2 bad news is that not even the "follow parent" alternative would work. I can set up a secondary default order of 'follow higher fleet in system', which is nice, because it of course works so that it comes after a completed survey. However, even so that part is working out, you would want those crafts to join into your carrier group automatically once they are there, or else it will be micromayhem once again. ..So what you'd have to do to the carrier tg is this:
Off-Topic: show

-----

...and it doesn't work. Through testing I have determined that the bottleneck here is the trigger, and Aurora cannot recognize for some reason if there really is a sub-fleet present at the same spot. I had them all stacked up, with follow order, without, with better naming etc., but it doesn't do it.
The incorporation itself works fine though, as I could test with the usual method from the tutorial above, where the first survey drone is actually the higher fleet, not the carrier. With that I could set the condition to "Fuel tanks full", and it would neatly absorb every other drone in place back into the tg.
..You can't do that with the carrier of course who will likely never be at 100%, and the only other cheat trigger condition in the list that could've probably been used is "current speed not equal to max" if you artificially decrease it. Yet that trigger is also dysfunctional, and does nothing as of now.
So it can't be done.

o Nr.3 bad news is there are no good news.(yet) Though you could technically do the divide command very neatly and quick from the carrier, having the carrier then as superior formation does rob you of the option to make the unison docking call, thus having all ships called back without micromanagement. Since both methods from above that could have automated the procedure don't work, and the carrier tg cannot target itself to 'dock on itself' and copy those orders down, you would end up having to do a docking or merging command for every single drone you sent, which would be unnerving with already these 18 drones from above. Real automation should not care whether you send 4 or 400 individual drones, as it is the same amount of clicks to order them, so it is better to stick to the 'lead survey' ship method for now.

Bridging the neutral orders thing is however a real improvement, and I am looking forward to seeing the incorporate sub fleet work in the future, which would make all the magic suddenly work out and even spare you the docking call, and, -most importantly-, the log spam of those ships who finished survey.
It would also be nice to have a "no orders" or so condition, so that "join parent" could be used for those idle survey ships without overtaking the order hierarchy.(would become the superior method of those two possible options, since there is no delay here in waiting for the carrier to absorb, and it doesn't take away a conditional order slot on it then too ofc.
//Edit/...hmm, on the other hand the "follow" method also gets rid of the problem with the moving carrier not being able to land any craft, and thus causing orders to get interrupted. Normally he doesn't need to move, but it would be nice if he could)
Posted by: Vandermeer
« on: November 05, 2015, 01:54:16 PM »

Yeah, without some review at least, it could get diluted should things really start out at some point.
Posted by: Erik L
« on: November 05, 2015, 01:51:06 PM »

Had to think for a bit before recognizing KB is the Knowledge Base I only recently read about. :) Everyone can just post in there? Well, I will see to copy it in after potential update.

Anyone that is past their 10 day newbie period. Articles are set to auto approve also. (I should change that)
Posted by: Vandermeer
« on: November 05, 2015, 01:48:20 PM »

Had to think for a bit before recognizing KB is the Knowledge Base I only recently read about. :) Everyone can just post in there? Well, I will see to copy it in after potential update.
Posted by: Erik L
« on: November 05, 2015, 11:16:25 AM »

You could add this to the KB :D
Posted by: Vandermeer
« on: November 05, 2015, 10:58:59 AM »

..But maybe you saw another way of making join parent work?
The divide option only works on unselected ships in the list, so this wouldn't necessarily be a problem - if you only want to divide 6 of the 10 ships in the fleet, you can just use CTRL and shift to select the other 4 in the list before you hit the divide button, and those 4 will be kept in the fleet.  In fact, that might be a better way of doing things if you're using the method above, since it would bypass the trouble with the lead ship.  You would need to add the default orders to the carrier group then remove them after the divide of course.
That is what I meant, amazing. Well, it still all depends on whether the join parent thing works at all (there is such an order btw., not just the follow one), but if it does -and I am going to test it this week-, then I will completely rewrite the survey carrier section, because that garbage would be obsolete. :) Only speech command would be easier. Hopefully it does also take care of the log spam, but I will see.
Posted by: Nice Save
« on: November 05, 2015, 08:05:11 AM »

Quote from: Vandermeer link=topic=7826. msg82442#msg82442 date=1446703791
Curious what you want to say here.  You mean that the join parent fleet conditional command would work when they are out of survey locations? That would get rid of the late-survey log spam, but my understanding so far was that the divide method makes all the craft children to only the leader survey ship, so that would be unwanted.


Yeah, I'm getting into murky waters there since I've not tried any of this out.  The conditional command is to follow the parent fleet though, not join it, so I believe that would work.  As each ship runs out of objects to survey, it will move towards and start trailing along behind the ship you kept in the fleet when you divided it.  Once the lead ship finishes, you'd get the whole lot moving towards the carrier, assuming it's marked as the superior formation for the lead ship.  Then once all the fleets are following along (whether the lead ship has reached the carrier or not), you could use the Incorporate Sub-fleets order on the lead ship to consolidate them all. 

It wouldn't be perfect - I believe you'll still get message spam about the primary orders not being doable even when there are secondary orders there.  It might also be a bit unwieldy if the lead ship is the first to finish, or is the last to finish while it surveys a comet on the far side of the system.

Quote
I guess it could work though if you have a survey carrier that really has nothing else in his task group, so he could just do the divide itself and stay parent.

The divide option only works on unselected ships in the list, so this wouldn't necessarily be a problem - if you only want to divide 6 of the 10 ships in the fleet, you can just use CTRL and shift to select the other 4 in the list before you hit the divide button, and those 4 will be kept in the fleet.  In fact, that might be a better way of doing things if you're using the method above, since it would bypass the trouble with the lead ship.  You would need to add the default orders to the carrier group then remove them after the divide of course.
Posted by: Vandermeer
« on: November 05, 2015, 12:09:51 AM »

One thing that might be worth updating in the survey section is the Divide TG part - the sub-fleets that are created will automatically have the same default and conditional orders as the original one, so it's better to set the orders before you divide.  This gets around the issue with needing a regular order when copying to subfleets.
You are right - I will add a note for this. However, I will not completely change it since the part also explains what to do to dock or order them around later, so I don't need a separate section for this.

Quote
I also feel that the copy orders function might be replaced by the Follow Higher Fleet in System default order as a secondary, or potentially by the Incorporate Sub-Fleets regular order.  I've not had a chance to try either of those though, so it could need testing to make sure it works as smoothly as all that.
Curious what you want to say here. You mean that the join parent fleet conditional command would work when they are out of survey locations? That would get rid of the late-survey log spam, but my understanding so far was that the divide method makes all the craft children to only the leader survey ship, so that would be unwanted.
I guess it could work though if you have a survey carrier that really has nothing else in his task group, so he could just do the divide itself and stay parent.
..But maybe you saw another way of making join parent work?
Posted by: Nice Save
« on: November 04, 2015, 06:15:47 PM »

I'm liking the guide, although I may have to come back whan I've slept and my brain works again.

One thing that might be worth updating in the survey section is the Divide TG part - the sub-fleets that are created will automatically have the same default and conditional orders as the original one, so it's better to set the orders before you divide.  This gets around the issue with needing a regular order when copying to subfleets.

I also feel that the copy orders function might be replaced by the Follow Higher Fleet in System default order as a secondary, or potentially by the Incorporate Sub-Fleets regular order.  I've not had a chance to try either of those though, so it could need testing to make sure it works as smoothly as all that.
Posted by: sloanjh
« on: June 03, 2015, 08:09:10 AM »

I've stickied the thread...

John
Posted by: Vandermeer
« on: June 03, 2015, 07:43:28 AM »

So astoundingly useful I shall commission a new medal to be named after that man.
Oohh, that is the highest Aurora honors I believe.


Quote
One Thing I was not aware of though is the whole hanger in hanger issue. I have always just docked my carriers of any kind to a planet side dock with all craft still docked, so far I have never had any problems. Is this an old issue (using 6.42) or does it sometimes happen and sometimes not?
I also play on the newest version, but the last time I encountered the problem was admittedly in 6.3. Even there I only witnessed it two times before learning the lesson and keeping extra attention to avoid boxes in boxes.
...But I just tried it again in the current game, and nope, it is still there. Down below a picture from the ship window, where it documents how all the survey drones (amongst others) on the "Atlanta" cruiser got lost after I let it dock to planetary hangar with all the parasites landed.



Quote
One quick thought I had when reading the survey part will need testing and could be perhaps an exploit. If you were to make a 20 ship strong fighter wing up, fly the wing at a target to attack and then divide the TG when they arrive on target. Using the copy orders you would essentially have 20 TG's attacking like a big swarm. Now obviously if this were say a large beam ship it will happily cut down fighters quickly with single shots. But having now 20 separate targets would mean that the tracking systems would not be able to keep up, you would in essence have created a copy of large salvo AMM but using fighters who could keep on firing all day long instead of being a one shot wonder. Hell do the same thing but with a bomber wing and you could create instant one click 20 salvo volleys to really make someones day go bad fast. Or how about meson fighters the same way and watch as even the largest ships in the universe crumble under a loss of 10+ components every firing cycle.
All the enemies attack this way anyway (one ship per TG), so I wouldn't consider it an exploit even if it came with serious advantages. There is some charm to having all fighters attack individually in some sort of swarm mode, but I personally don't do any divide orders for attacks, because fighting takes place outside of the task force window, and from there you cannot easily copy orders over anymore when they are not part of the same task group.(unless you use "class in system" copy mode, but that obviously is impossible if your attackers don't make up for literally all the ships of the class in the system) ..So this would result in much micromanagement, which I try to avoid at any costs everywhere.
Other than that, -though there is an exploit in another section-, attack strength wise, having them separated doesn't make much difference. Beam strength is just the same of course, divided or not, but the missiles of individual fighters never group up anyway, even in the same TG, and always produce that 20 salvo volley which you describe.(which is admittedly awesome for its defense overloading capacity, and the main reason why I build bombers - where the wiki only sees "extended missile deployment", "overloading PD" is the real seller :) - ...and that you can get them close enough in order to use more efficient warheads...)
The defensive advantage is also relatively meager normally, because AI targets ships anyway, so it doesn't matter whether they share the same TG or fly divided, but still in the same spot. It can be kind of relevant in missile diversion (there is even a secret exploit which I don't want to explain, as nobody should use it), but again, I don't use it because of the targeting difficulties that you get yourself into.

Dividing is a tool that is mostly useful whenever you need multi-tasking and a fleet to actually split up, not just do the same but separated. Great for automated orders, and great for organization. Now, if we could get an automatic "follow nearest enemy signal" default order, then combining that with auto-target could become automated civilian culling or 'white blood cell' type harassment reaction here, so splitting squadrons for multi-task attacking would make sense, which I would much appreciate. We're not there yet sadly.



I have used this method of managing my carriers and more importantly scout and recon crafts on ships for a long time as well. This is the only way I can really manage my ships in a sane way and the organizational hierarchy makes it quite easy to control all your ships. This is certainly a good guide and something I really think many people have not explored enough in their game because that tab is a bit complex before you get how it works.
There are so many arcane buttons in the game that you just ignore for long, because things already 'kind of work', so why do the extra learning? The only reason I forced myself to go further at a point is because I made the same experience in other programs, like Photoshop, Vegas and Maya(oh god, convoluted Maya..), where breaking out of your normal cycle of doing things really teaches you how fruitful it can be to take time and explore all the menus.
Still find new buttons though. Didn't know that I could invent custom ranks for the naval officers until the game before the current for example.
Posted by: Jorgen_CAB
« on: June 03, 2015, 06:43:47 AM »

I have used this method of managing my carriers and more importantly scout and recon crafts on ships for a long time as well. This is the only way I can really manage my ships in a sane way and the organizational hierarchy makes it quite easy to control all your ships. This is certainly a good guide and something I really think many people have not explored enough in their game because that tab is a bit complex before you get how it works.

One quick thought I had when reading the survey part will need testing and could be perhaps an exploit. If you were to make a 20 ship strong fighter wing up, fly the wing at a target to attack and then divide the TG when they arrive on target. Using the copy orders you would essentially have 20 TG's attacking like a big swarm. Now obviously if this were say a large beam ship it will happily cut down fighters quickly with single shots. But having now 20 separate targets would mean that the tracking systems would not be able to keep up, you would in essence have created a copy of large salvo AMM but using fighters who could keep on firing all day long instead of being a one shot wonder. Hell do the same thing but with a bomber wing and you could create instant one click 20 salvo volleys to really make someones day go bad fast. Or how about meson fighters the same way and watch as even the largest ships in the universe crumble under a loss of 10+ components every firing cycle.

This will not actually work as I suspect you think it does. A beam ship will be able to target one salvo or ship for each fire-control that it has, the number of TG have no impact on this what so ever. Likewise will 20 fighters in one TG or one fighter in 20 TG produce the same number of salvos when they fire missiles.

So... if all your beam ships only have one fire-control it will only be able to kill one fighter per firing cycle no matter what, if it has two fire-controls it can target two separate fighters from the same or different TG, the combat interface don't even register TG as far as I know, just targets.