Author Topic: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later  (Read 65768 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • Posts: 6819
  • Thanked: 1368 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« on: August 17, 2010, 06:34:19 AM »
Please post your suggestions for the next version in this thread. I still intend to go back through the previous suggestion threads but I don't mind if anyone repeats a previous suggestion here.

Steve
 

Offline Caplin

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 117
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2010, 12:05:30 PM »
Hi,
The coordinate system in 5.20 for the system map seems to be working great so far.
It would work even better if I could click on the labels of bodies and change map focus to them that way.
Is such a thing already supposed to happen, and I'm merely clicking in the wrong spot?
Either way, thanks for creating such a wonderful game and continuing to improve it.
All the best,
Zack.
 

Offline Erik Luken

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5068
  • Thanked: 92 times
    • Arkayn Game Design
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2010, 02:21:29 PM »
Been meaning to suggest this for a while...

Part of the Basic Parameters of a new game, in addition to year, allow month and day to be set for game start.
 

Offline Erik Luken

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5068
  • Thanked: 92 times
    • Arkayn Game Design
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2010, 04:42:34 PM »
When a conditional order of refuel or resupply is ordered, the other is also added. It really doesn't make sense to put in for resupply, then ship out with 35% fuel, to just turn around in a month to refuel.
 

Offline iamlenb

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2010, 10:03:59 PM »
Per the Race Relations Thread http://http://aurora.pentarch.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2825,
I thought I'd second the smart mines suggestion and expand a bit on espionage.

Quote from: "Xaoc"
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
I don't mean from a programming sense. I mean in a real world sense. For example, how does a mine laid by a British minelayer in 1940 know the Germans are now our allies? When you lay a mine in Aurora, it could not realistically know about any changes in the political situation. That's why it is set to only ignore the race that laid it.
Steve

Ships are in contact with the central HQ(government, admiralty or what have you), I can't see why high tech mines couldn't have such communications as well. Sure communications like that could expose the mines to third party sensors, but the communications could be wide ranging(eg. the message is sent to all systems in range) and thus not pinpoint the location of the mines. The communication system is currently abstracted anyway and there is no form of electronic warfare that targets communications currently either(room for future expansion? Then again even current encryptions are unfeasible for decryption and without inside support via diplomacy or espionage it would take way too long to decrypt messages for it to be of tactical use). I'm of the mind that remotely updated IFF protocols are completely viable.

Have a mine control module within active sensor range of minefields to engage in smart targeting.  An OWP at a jump point could control all mines in range, perhaps with a numerical limit of mines set by a control channels stat and response time stat upgradable through research.  Set to either active or disabled, response time dictating the status change much like the awaiting acknowledgement from changing TG orders in combat.

Espionage comes into play just like acquiring research data from NPRs.  There could be a research project for discovering an NPR IFF Algorithm.  Getting current IFF Data through espionage should implement it throughout your fleet until it goes stale, and doesn't have to be researched.   Picking up lifepods might give a chance of current minefield IFF settings, especially if you "rescue" the commanding officer.  A stealthed sensor ship in passive sensor range of an NPR transiting a minefield as a friendly should get some IFF data as well, maybe not enough to decode, but adding RP to the IFF Algorithm research project back home.

Hmm, maybe this suggestion should be expanded to cover Electronic Warfare in general.
 

Offline IanD

  • Registered
  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 612
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2010, 10:12:35 AM »
I want to be able to disassemble precursor missiles found in dumps rather than just be able to use them, would prefer former and not allow latter until all background techs researched.

I also have a little problem about gaining intelligence on a "foreign" missile and immediately being able to build it, even though it could be several tech levels above the gaining empires current tech. An advance in tech would be better.

Regards
IanD
 

Offline georgiaboy1966

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 60
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #6 on: August 23, 2010, 04:39:13 PM »
With the addition of ORbital Habitats.

Could we not now have orbital colonies around gas giants as fuel depot/colonies.

I have run into several systems that only have a single gas giant with no moons. The OH's would be the perfect way to make these systems useful as fuel depots, sensor stations, maintanence bases out in the middle of no where.
Glen

Been a player since the Beta of SA, 1993?

"Constructive criticism is never a bad comment"
-Me
 
"By all means marry. If you get a good wife, you'll be happy. If you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher."
- Socrates
 

Offline Vanigo

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 295
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #7 on: August 24, 2010, 12:23:09 PM »
Hey, now that ground forces training is the only skill that really matters for battalion and division commanders, could you increase its promotion value? It kind of sucks when the high ground combat officers, who need to be at low rank to be effective, are getting promoted, and the high training officers, who need to be high rank to be effective, are not. Actually, scratch that, it totally sucks.
 

Offline Vanderer

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #8 on: August 24, 2010, 06:50:31 PM »
Better AI. In my last game, i have discovered an Alien planet, with a fleet nearby. The fleet attacked me,and was destroyed. After than i have attacked the ships in orbit out of their range, and they didn't move at all. They just stay in orbit and obviously were destroyed.  :twisted: It was not the first time, i have see this behavior a couple of times before, so i don't think is a bug.

Same for fleets, they didn't know when stop fighting and retreat. When you don't have any chance to win,no more armour, and big damages for example, what the point of fighting?  In my games, they always continue full speed on your fleet...

I know, Ai is very difficult to program but...well, it is just a suggestion.
 

Offline Andrew

  • Registered
  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 362
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #9 on: August 25, 2010, 10:20:15 AM »
Quote from: "Vanderer"
Better AI. In my last game, i have discovered an Alien planet, with a fleet nearby. The fleet attacked me,and was destroyed. After than i have attacked the ships in orbit out of their range, and they didn't move at all. They just stay in orbit and obviously were destroyed.  :twisted: It was not the first time, i have see this behavior a couple of times before, so i don't think is a bug.

Same for fleets, they didn't know when stop fighting and retreat. When you don't have any chance to win,no more armour, and big damages for example, what the point of fighting?  In my games, they always continue full speed on your fleet...

I know, Ai is very difficult to program but...well, it is just a suggestion.
The Ships in orbit where probably bases with no movement
 

Offline Vanderer

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #10 on: August 25, 2010, 01:44:21 PM »
Nope, at least one of them was the same class than one from the fleet i have encountered earlier, so its not possible. And one of them was very small, since he exploded after a single volley of 5 S4 missiles. Could be a bug tough, i don't know, but like i said earlier, i have seen this type of behavior in previous games.
 

Offline Beersatron

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 976
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #11 on: August 30, 2010, 12:53:29 AM »
Ability to set a Shipping Line's Home Port.

At the moment I have 5 Shipping Lines and they do the Earth-Mars run 99% of the time, the other 1% will see the odd ship nip next door to Barnard and back again.

I have a total of 5 well developed 0.0 planets all within 3 jumps of each other yet the other 2 planets get no trade at all. One of them is has 150million pop, spaceports and a 20k Naval Shipyard plus very good mineral extraction industry - government and civilian.

I would suggest that some basic pre-reqs for an option to assign a planet as their base would be:
1. Civilian Mining Colony present (which also covers the minimum pop required for these).
2. Commercial Spaceport on the planet.
3. Financial Center on planet.
4. Maybe - Commercial Shipyard that has one slip equal to size of smallest Cargo or Colony design.
5. Maybe - PPV twice of that requested by the current population.

This would mean that any new ships for that Line are produced at their Home Port. Any trade runs will have a higher chance of starting or ending at their Home Port.
 

Offline Beersatron

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 976
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #12 on: August 30, 2010, 12:58:01 AM »
Quote from: "Vanderer"
Nope, at least one of them was the same class than one from the fleet i have encountered earlier, so its not possible. And one of them was very small, since he exploded after a single volley of 5 S4 missiles. Could be a bug tough, i don't know, but like i said earlier, i have seen this type of behavior in previous games.

Could well have been that you destroyed all their active sensor platforms and since they couldn't see your ships they didn't have anything to run away from.

If it was civilian then they would have ran away directly opposite you.

If it was FACs then chances are they either didn't know you were there since they will have myopic active sensors due to size restrictions or it could have been that they were waiting for more missiles to become available. [spoiler:3bujo8d3]Don't think NPRs will ram.[/spoiler:3bujo8d3]
 

Offline Brian

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1212
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #13 on: August 30, 2010, 05:44:25 AM »
I have raised this before, but could we have the capaciter field of the energy weapons design be dialable to choices other than the reasearched capaciter reacharge rate.  Case in point, in a recent game I was designing a particle beam-4 which requires 7 points of power.  My available options were either 6 points or 8 points for the capaciter.  I am either taking a penalty on my reacharge rate, or using 1 more point of power than the weapon needs.  With 20 of these on the base I actually needed an extra 4 hull spaces of power plants to handle the extra energy required.

Brian
 

Offline Brian

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1212
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later
« Reply #14 on: August 30, 2010, 06:43:08 AM »
For missiles could we please have some way for the better tech armour to give a bonus on the missile ablative armour rating.  Either something like each level above the basic giving a 5% boost, or a new tech line that has a prerequisite of the general armour tech, like compact ecm vs regular ecm.  Currently it does not matter what generation of armour you reasearched when you are designing a missile they all have the same effect on it's chance to survive being hit.

Brian
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52