Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes Discussion  (Read 449550 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1545 on: March 09, 2018, 02:24:14 AM »
Maybe MSP loading could use either Cargo Shuttle bays or Ordnance Transfer logic ( renamed to Military logistics systems or something like that instead ).

It would feel quite odd and fiddly for it to require a fourth separate system so we have refueling, cargo, missiles and MSP all transferred differently


And hey your Ordnance Transfer logic already is capable of transferring "rate at 40 MSP per hour"  ::) ;D *runs and hides*
 

Offline JacenHan

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 454
  • Thanked: 115 times
  • Discord Username: Jacenhan
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1546 on: March 09, 2018, 10:41:57 AM »
I think it would be reasonable for engineering spaces to act as the MSP transfer component, since every vessel with MSP will have at least one. That way, you can have non-instant transfers and the player doesn't have another type of component to worry about when designing ships.
 
The following users thanked this post: Erik L

Iranon

  • Guest
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1547 on: March 09, 2018, 01:41:48 PM »
Things shouldn't be too fiddly or too expensive; reusing existing components seems reasonable.

Expanding logistics is turned on its head if it is too onerous and hence encourages playing around logistics entirely:
Design for fuel efficiency, no fuel logistics beyond the bare minimum.
Long-lived disposable designs instead of maintenance.
And so on. Doing things "as intended" should have upsides.
 
The following users thanked this post: Viridia

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11667
  • Thanked: 20438 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1548 on: March 10, 2018, 05:09:15 AM »
Quick Question: Do you think if a fire control is set to a point defence mode it should only engage if the fire control is set to 'Open Fire'? Or should it automatically engage even if open fire is off?

 

Offline Zincat

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Z
  • Posts: 566
  • Thanked: 111 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1549 on: March 10, 2018, 05:49:39 AM »
Quick Question: Do you think if a fire control is set to a point defence mode it should only engage if the fire control is set to 'Open Fire'? Or should it automatically engage even if open fire is off?

Personally, I think it should always engage. The "open fire" setting is more of a control / rp thing, as in, I want to decide when my guns/missiles actually shoot.

But if I have an incoming missile, there is no possible situation in which I don't want a point defence weapon to fire. I mean, what's the point? Am I going to let it hit my ships?
 
The following users thanked this post: PartyAlias

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2791
  • Thanked: 1052 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1550 on: March 10, 2018, 06:19:38 AM »
Area Defence Mode: no
Final Defence Mode: yes

It's the difference between being a possible third-party in a missile exchange, and being the actual target.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11667
  • Thanked: 20438 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1551 on: March 10, 2018, 06:42:25 AM »
Personally, I think it should always engage. The "open fire" setting is more of a control / rp thing, as in, I want to decide when my guns/missiles actually shoot.

But if I have an incoming missile, there is no possible situation in which I don't want a point defence weapon to fire. I mean, what's the point? Am I going to let it hit my ships?

What about AMM ships - do you want some control over which ones fire?
 

Offline chrislocke2000

  • Captain
  • **********
  • c
  • Posts: 544
  • Thanked: 39 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1552 on: March 10, 2018, 07:23:54 AM »
Makes sense to me to have the option. Agree on control in area def mode and always on in final fire mode.
 

Offline King-Salomon

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 153
  • Thanked: 38 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1553 on: March 10, 2018, 08:58:30 AM »
Quick Question: Do you think if a fire control is set to a point defence mode it should only engage if the fire control is set to 'Open Fire'? Or should it automatically engage even if open fire is off?

Depends... if the system is computer controlled all the time, the computers should be able to start a "last second emergency defence" (maybe with reduced efficiency? - could also be a new tech?)

If the system is not fully computer controlled all the time (or the system is shut down like in maintenance, resupply etc) I wouldn't think it would be realistic...

an area defence I wouldn't think realistic - just a "panic emergency" reaction to defend the ship itself - and only with PD not missile launcher...

would be a bad day for a ship captain to let the computer shot down friendly shuttles because it thinks they are hostile missiles...

---

I would like to get the "auto defence" in a simple and cheap tech were the player/race may include it in a fire controll system for PD - or if he thinks he does not need it, let it out  (that of course a much more complicated system as just say "yes" -.- )
 

Offline Hazard

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • H
  • Posts: 643
  • Thanked: 73 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1554 on: March 10, 2018, 09:13:39 AM »
Quick Question: Do you think if a fire control is set to a point defence mode it should only engage if the fire control is set to 'Open Fire'? Or should it automatically engage even if open fire is off?

Yes, although if a PD ship is facing hostile/neutral missiles entering his defense envelope there should probably be an interrupt in the update sequence because a player may want to start shooting. Final Defense Mode should be an exception; the ship's clearly made anyway so you might as well unload with everything you've got to not die, you are not going to be giving your position away with weapons' fire.
 

Offline sloanjh (OP)

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 2805
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1555 on: March 10, 2018, 10:17:00 AM »
What about AMM ships - do you want some control over which ones fire?

Leaving interface complexity problems aside for the moment, I would think the following is most realistic:

1)  Have a "Weapons Free?" selector with three possible states: "Yes", "No", "Defensive Only".  "Yes" presumably corresponds to "open fire" on; "No" to "open fire" off.
2)  Have a different selector for beams and missiles.
3)  The granularity of the selector could be at the fleet, TG, ship, or FC level (or all of these levels to allow global policies with local overrides).
4)  For area defensive fire when aliens are present, more nuance could be added to "Defensive only", with "My race", "My allies", "Neutral", and "Any" levels (where each level includes defending the ones above this, i.e. Neutral would defend my race, allies, and neutral).  I think it's fine to use Aurora's knowledge of who the missiles are targeting, since it should be fairly obvious in most cases (ignoring exploits like waypoints).  These sub-levels probably don't need to be actual Weapons Free? states - it's probably enough to have a separate state at the TG, fleet, and/or empire level.

My inclination would be to have the weapons free settings at the TG, ship, and FC level.  I don't think this would hurt interface complexity, since the "open fire" setting is already at the FC level.  You might also want to nuance the "Yes" state of weapons free to "Only within range" vs. "Do it, d**n it!" and/or have a %max range setting for it so e.g. in a few clicks the player could order all the ships in a TG to open missile fire when their targets have closed to 70% of the missiles' range.  If you combined this with general auto-targeting orders like "engage enemy class X first" and "Y missiles/target" it might help a lot with the micromanagement in combat. 

If you go down this road (of "engage class X first"), I would let the AI (and possibly players) figure out the exact class of enemies with very little sensor input.  The reason for letting the AI know this would be to allow the AI to build up threat profiles to avoid the "big armored missile sponge blob" exploit - if a ship class has been observed to have tons of armor and no missiles, it would presumably be dropped near the bottom of the threat engagement list (and possibly only engaged by beams at very close range and/or simply avoided/evaded) in favor of engaging thin-skinned missile combatants.  Since AI is so hard to write, I don't think it's unfair to give the AI some help in figuring these things out.

John
« Last Edit: March 10, 2018, 10:18:37 AM by sloanjh »
 
The following users thanked this post: DIT_grue

Offline Rook

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • Posts: 21
  • Thanked: 12 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1556 on: March 10, 2018, 12:12:00 PM »
Not sure on the level of complexity here. . . 

Point-defense Final Fire: I agree, yes.  Always "On".

PD Area Defense: I suppose default, off.  As already suggested (and a pretty great idea): fleet-wide orders to have Area defense engage any/all hostile missiles, and/or fighters, with-in range, automatically.

Veteran players may have experienced situations where an Area Defense engaging missiles automatically is a bad thing, but I couldn't think of such a situation.  However, I will defer to the veterans on how that setting should be handled.  In lieu of an any situation where it is undesired, I don't see why Area Defense shouldn't automatically engage.
 

Offline Zincat

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Z
  • Posts: 566
  • Thanked: 111 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1557 on: March 11, 2018, 04:10:11 AM »
What about AMM ships - do you want some control over which ones fire?

Well AMM ships could indeed be different. Still... the only reason not to shoot in this instance is the desire to conserve AMM.

But would a normal military actually do that? "Let these missiles hit us, in the meanwhile we're conserving AMM". Is that realistic? I understand how a minmaxing PLAYER might do something like this. Because a player is detached and sees numbers on a screen, and because damage in Aurora is by nature too "fixed", and thus predictable. You can predict that these missiles will not take down your ships... But I believe a real military would not take the chance, and prefer to hit the incoming missiles.

The only situation I can envision in which I might want to choose who will shoot is when there's overkill: I have 250 AMM ships, and there's 3 incoming missiles. Obviously in this case, I don't want 250 ships to shoot at 3 missiles... Likewise, I probably don't want to shoot 10 times at the same incoming volley, if I have a technological advantage that allows for that.

An on/off switch might make sense, in this case. Or perhaps, a new fire control operation mode. You could have a "point defence autofire" mode which always shoot at every incoming threat until its down.



A note on what Garfunkel said. Being a third party in a  missiles conflict... While I completely understand, I believe it's a rather sticky issue. Because a third party, once missiles are flying, does not actually KNOW whether or not the missiles are going to hit its ships. What if it's all a ruse and both the other contendants are actually targeting your ships? What if the missiles are only pretending to go for the other ships, and are going to change target at the last second and hit your ships?  If you are at the location, and there's missiles flying, should you shoot? Would you shoot?

I still think that "beam" weapons assigned to point defence should just shoot down missiles who come too close. If we want to model the "third neutral party" situation better, I think an empire-level switch would be better. You are able to select, maybe in the diplomacy screen, which other races are "friendly" and which are "hostile". Unless you change that classification, friendly ships/missiles are not going to appear in the contact list, nor are going to be targeted by point defence,. If you want to open hostilities, you go to the diplomacy screen, set a race as "hostile", and suddenly all the contacts are going to be available, and missiles will be auto-targeted.
An IFF system, so to speak. Ships and missiles of nations considered "friendly" are not valid targets, unless you change their identification.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2018, 04:20:10 AM by Zincat »
 

Offline hyramgraff

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • h
  • Posts: 44
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1558 on: March 11, 2018, 03:26:05 PM »
Well AMM ships could indeed be different. Still... the only reason not to shoot in this instance is the desire to conserve AMM.

But would a normal military actually do that? "Let these missiles hit us, in the meanwhile we're conserving AMM". Is that realistic? I understand how a minmaxing PLAYER might do something like this. Because a player is detached and sees numbers on a screen, and because damage in Aurora is by nature too "fixed", and thus predictable. You can predict that these missiles will not take down your ships... But I believe a real military would not take the chance, and prefer to hit the incoming missiles.

If your ship has good shields and you're facing a small salvo then letting the shields absorb the damage is a viable option.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11667
  • Thanked: 20438 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1559 on: March 11, 2018, 06:42:30 PM »
If your ship has good shields and you're facing a small salvo then letting the shields absorb the damage is a viable option.

Also, if you have decent energy weapon point defence or gauss you may not want to expend missiles against smaller salvos.

I think probably Auto-fire is fine for Final Fire, while on/off is necessary for area fire and AMMs.
 
The following users thanked this post: DIT_grue