Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes List  (Read 17272 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 6402
  • Thanked: 653 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes List
« Reply #30 on: May 29, 2017, 07:00:09 AM »
Missile Launcher Changes

Missile Launchers have undergone significant changes in C# Aurora.

1) Fractional-size launchers can be created. The minimum is still 1 HS but a launcher can now be 1.1 HS, 2.7 HS, etc.

2) The reduced-size launcher techs are all available immediately and do not need to be researched. This means box launchers are available from the start. The progression for reduced size launchers has been altered slightly:
0.75 HS  2x Reload
0.6 HS  5x Reload
0.4 HS  20x Reload
0.3 HS  100x Reload
0.15 HS  100x Reload (Box Launcher) - note that reload for this was x15 in VB6.

If a box launcher containing a missile is damaged, the missile will explode. The chance of this happening can be reduced by a new tech line. The first step reduces the explosion chance to 70% for 1000 RP and the last step reduces to 5% for 120,000 RP.

The base reload rate for all missile launchers is now: (SQRT(missile size) * 30 seconds * Reduced Size Modifier)  / Reload Rate Tech.

Assuming a race has reload rate tech of 3, a normal size 1 launcher will reload in 10 seconds, a size 4 will reload in 20 seconds and a size 9 will reload in 30 seconds. This change will dramatically reduce reload times for larger launchers.

The change for box launcher reload rate from x15 to x100 is not as dramatic as it seems for larger missiles due to the new reduced reload times for larger missiles. However, it is still an significant increase from VB6. A size 4 missile mounted on a box launcher will now take about 1h 40m to reload in a hangar and about 17 hours for maintenance facilities. A size 6 is about 2 hours and 20 hours respectively.

These changes are intended to:
1) Reduce the disadvantage of larger missiles,
2) Remove the realism issue of not having box launchers available at low tech yet make box launchers a more difficult decision vs standard-type launchers.
 
The following users thanked this post: byron, idefelipe, iceball3, DIT_grue, misora, SerBeardian, serger, TCD, lordcirth

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 6402
  • Thanked: 653 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes List
« Reply #31 on: June 10, 2017, 12:34:07 PM »
New Passive Sensor Model

A new passive sensor model has been implemented for C# Aurora, using similar principles to the new active sensor model. In VB6 Aurora, small ship-based passive sensors are not particularly effective compared to active sensors in terms of detection, although their passive nature does allow a ship some sensor capability without giving away its position. Planet-based passive sensors (deep space tracking stations) are very effective as they can be stacked to cover the whole star system,

The C# Aurora passive sensor model substantially improves small passive sensors, particularly against small signatures, while dramatically reducing the benefits of creating large numbers of deep space tracking stations.

The VB6 sensor model is based on the following formula, which increases range in direct relation to sensor strength:
Detection Range = Passive Sensor Strength * Target Signature * 1000 km.  For example, a strength-10 thermal sensor would detect a signature-500 target at 5m km (10 * 500 * 1000).

The C# model uses all the existing technology and tech values. However, the sensor strength now has to cover an area rather than a direct range, creating diminishing returns for larger sensors.
Detection Range = SQRT(Passive Sensor Strength * Target Signature ) * 250,000 km. The same example as above would result in the strength-10 thermal sensor detecting the signature-500 target at 17.7m km.

Because of the great improvement in the performance of small passive sensors, there will no longer be an inherent size-1 passive sensor on all ships. In addition, the smallest functional passive sensor on a missile will be 0.25 MSP.

The screenshot below demonstrates the difference between the two models.



« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 08:48:55 AM by Steve Walmsley »
 
The following users thanked this post: serger, Titanian, Tuna-Fish, lordcirth

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 6402
  • Thanked: 653 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes List
« Reply #32 on: June 11, 2017, 09:12:19 AM »
Missile Updates

The following changes will be made to missiles in C# Aurora:

1) Missile Armour has been removed.

2) Laser warheads have been removed (I may add these back at some point in the future).

3) ECM is now a fixed 0.25 MSP for missiles. The 'Missile ECM' tech line has been removed and if a missile is equipped with ECM it will have the same ECM capability as the current racial ECM technology, The missile design will maintain that ECM capability and will not be upgraded if the racial tech improves. For each level of ECM, the missile will be 10% harder to hit with energy weapons and will reduce the lock of missile fire controls by 10%. This can be negated by linking a similar level of ECCM to the point defence fire controls.

4) Missiles can be equipped with ECCM, which is a fixed 0.25 MSP. The missile ECCM level will be equal to the current racial ECCM tech. In C# Aurora, the ECCM of missile fire controls will only affect the range at which the fire control can lock on. The ECCM of the missile itself will affect the chance of the missile striking its target, if that target has active ECM.

5) Any missile sensor (active, thermal, EM or Geo) has to be a minimum of 0.25 MSP or it will have no effect.

6) Missile series have been removed. Instead, there will be more detailed class loadout options.

These changes will make electronic warfare much more important for missile combat. Missiles with ECM will become harder to shoot down and missiles without ECCM will have a reduced chance to hit targets equipped with ECM. Anti-missile missiles will either be less effective, or larger, vs ECM-protected missiles, while anti-ship missiles are likely to increase in size (and therefore reduce salvo sizes). Large volleys of size-1 missiles will be less effective in a heavy EW environment and no longer have a huge advantage in launching speed (due to the missile launcher changes).
 
The following users thanked this post: waresky, ExChairman, Bremen, QuakeIV, MagusXIX, JOKER, serger, TCD, xhunterx, lordcirth

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 6402
  • Thanked: 653 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes List
« Reply #33 on: June 27, 2017, 02:01:50 PM »
Turret Update

A minor update. The benefits of multiple energy weapons in turrets have been doubled. A twin turret now has a 20% reduction in crew vs two solo weapons and has a 10% reduction in gear size. A quad turret has a 40% reduction in crew vs four solo weapons and has a 20% reduction in gear size.

In addition, I found an error in the VB6 code for turret design that meant a turret needed four times more armour than a ship of equivalent size. This has been corrected for C# Aurora, which means armoured turrets are now much more viable.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2017, 02:45:33 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 
The following users thanked this post: ExChairman, MagusXIX, iceball3, mtm84, serger, xhunterx, Detros, lordcirth

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 6402
  • Thanked: 653 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes List
« Reply #34 on: July 09, 2017, 06:08:02 AM »
Missile Thermal Detection

In VB6 Aurora, the thermal detection of missiles is based on the following formula:

(Missile Size / 20) * (Speed / 1000)

I have no idea why I coded thermal detection for missiles to be based on size, although I am sure it seemed like a good idea at the time :). For C# Aurora, missiles will use the same formula as ships for thermal signature:

Max Engine Output * (Current Speed / Max Speed) * Thermal Reduction

As missiles (for now anyway), don't have thermal reduction or an option to travel below maximum speed, their thermal signature is equal to the power of their engines. Combined with the changes to passive detection, this means that missiles in C# Aurora will probably be detected by thermal sensors at much greater distances than in VB6 Aurora.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 6402
  • Thanked: 653 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes List
« Reply #35 on: July 18, 2017, 05:05:43 PM »
Commercial Hangars

Commercial hangars are available in C# Aurora. They are 50% larger than military hangar bays (size 32), have the same cost of 100 BP and the same crew requirement (15).

They are intended for transport of other commercial vessels, temporary transport of military vessels, reloading of box launchers and for repairing ships. With this in mind, a military ship still has normal maintenance requirements while in a civilian hangar.

However, as you can maintain ships in deep space in C# Aurora it will be possible to build a large ship that could provide both commercial hangar space and maintenance, or combine ships with commercial hangars and ships with maintenance modules to provide a logistics hub.

 
The following users thanked this post: Rye123, lordcirth, superstrijder15

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 6402
  • Thanked: 653 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes List
« Reply #36 on: July 18, 2017, 05:43:23 PM »
Beam Weapon Recharge

In VB6, if a power plant is damaged, it slows down the recharge rate of all weapons by a proportionate amount.

In C# Aurora, power is allocated weapon by weapon until the available power is exhausted. This means that some weapons may not be recharged, but the others will be recharged at the maximum rate. Weapons are charged in order of ascending power requirement. Once a weapon is recharged, it will require no more power and other weapons can begin the recharge process.

This should allocate power in the most effective way to keep a ship in the fight.
 
The following users thanked this post: DIT_grue, Detros, lordcirth

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 6402
  • Thanked: 653 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes List
« Reply #37 on: July 19, 2017, 04:02:13 AM »
Commercial Magazines

I've added a non-military magazine to C# Aurora. There are two versions; one with 100 capacity and one with 500 capacity.

In general terms they are cheaper but less efficient in terms of space then military magazines. Also, they have a 100% explosion chance if hit, so don't apply for a job on a commercial ammunition transport :)

Commercial Magazine - Capacity 100, Size 12, Cost 25, Crew 5, HTK 1, RP 2000
Commercial Magazine - Capacity 500, Size 50, Cost 100, Crew 20, HTK 1, RP 5000

Even if you armour the ship, one of the magazines could still explode due to shock damage. As the magazines are fairly large, if they are hit then the ship is probably gone, so it would be a Bad Idea to take a commercial ammunition transport along with the battle fleet.

 
The following users thanked this post: ardem, DIT_grue, Xtrem532, Rye123, lordcirth, superstrijder15

 

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