Author Topic: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition  (Read 359884 times)

0 Members and 10 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline skoormit

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 801
  • Thanked: 321 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #345 on: August 10, 2020, 03:56:07 PM »
...The only micro management would be to regularly ship MSP (and fuel, if using ships) to the station. That can be done easily using a fleet with Cycle Orders turned on.

Unfortunately, there is no way to tell Fleet A to give fuel/MSP to Fleet B.
You can only tell Fleet A to join fleet B (and set the ship's transfer options appropriately) or tell Fleet B to take fuel/MSP from Fleet A.

All of this means that there is currently no way to use cycling orders to refuel/resupply a target fleet; it always require some manual intervention.
Hopefully Steve adds "give fuel/MSP to target fleet" orders in the future, so that we can fully automate these concerns.
 

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1334
  • Thanked: 592 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #346 on: August 10, 2020, 04:53:53 PM »
That can be done easily using a fleet with Cycle Orders turned on.

Yes and no, because that could be achieved with a series of order delays but you need to time it properly or if the order triggers at the wrong moment you will end up with the error: this order will result in an endless loop and has been cancelled

it always require some manual intervention.

I think you can use order delay to time your runs as I assume you are going A to B where both are Stationary (if either A or B are moving this will be impossible). So you can send the cycle moving from colony pick up fuel and then go to station, set something like 2 or 3 days delay to refuel and it will run as long as when the order triggers the tanker it's there. You need to start the chain with the supply ships on the station otherwise you will not be able to set the refill orders from the station.

But you are right: you will loose the sync sooner or later and some manual intervention will still be required, but not for every single run as you could time 3 or 4 runs at the time. and considering you don't want to always refill you may be fine for 5 or even 10 years. Still a pain of course.

PLEASE NOTE: I haven't tested this method myself yet as I have little use for stations, but it should be feasible following the logic behind the orders unless you will receive the error as soon as the fleet leaves the station? Maybe you can try or I may give it a spin later on. Not much time to play this week.

Offline skoormit

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 801
  • Thanked: 321 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #347 on: August 10, 2020, 04:57:08 PM »
I think you can use order delay to time your runs as I assume you are going A to B where both are Stationary (if either A or B are moving this will be impossible).

Unfortunately, the ultimate source of fuel or MSP is always a moving target.
Fuel comes from either a colony or a sorium harvesting fleet at a body.
MSPs come from a colony.
 

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1334
  • Thanked: 592 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #348 on: August 10, 2020, 05:36:04 PM »
I think you can use order delay to time your runs as I assume you are going A to B where both are Stationary (if either A or B are moving this will be impossible).
Unfortunately, the ultimate source of fuel or MSP is always a moving target.
Fuel comes from either a colony or a sorium harvesting fleet at a body.
MSPs come from a colony.

I see then. Well for stations it may be still possible to use and will be interesting to know if works. I may fire up Aurora quickly at work ;)

Offline xenoscepter (OP)

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1157
  • Thanked: 318 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #349 on: August 11, 2020, 03:02:39 PM »
Can overhauls be carried out at Maintenance Modules?
 

Offline midikiman

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • m
  • Posts: 15
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #350 on: August 11, 2020, 04:58:44 PM »
Quote from: db48x link=topic=11545. msg139478#msg139478 date=1596279380
Quote from: Silverkeeper link=topic=11545. msg139474#msg139474 date=1596263815
Oh and where is the unload 90% of fuel order for tankers? I can`t seem to refuel or transfer fuel to colony or other ships even though I have the tanker box ticked.

You've probably forgotten to put a fuel transfer system on your tankers.  Once you do, you'll see the order to "transfer fuel to colony".  Instead of transferring a fixed 90% of the fuel in the tanker, it transfers down to a minimum level set in the class design; it's on the Misc tab of the Class Design window.

So are you saying I would need both a refuelling hub _and_ a fuel transfer system on a harvester if I intend it to serve both roles? Because having a colony with a refuelling station and a tanker with a refuelling hub doesn't allow transfers, which is counter-intuitive.
 

Offline Elvin

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • E
  • Posts: 108
  • Thanked: 19 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #351 on: August 12, 2020, 02:59:11 AM »
Can overhauls be carried out at Maintenance Modules?

Yes they can. Note that there still seems to be a bug if the maintenance modules are in orbit of a body - the ship being overhauled won't travel with the body, instead staying still in space while the maintenance facilities move away. I reported that bug here:
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11565.msg139050#msg139050
 

Offline rantmaster_92

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • r
  • Posts: 2
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #352 on: August 12, 2020, 06:01:30 AM »
[NOOB POST]
i've recently downloaded the 151 full instalation and started a game.  then, i updated it to 195 and created a new game.  now, both research AND constructon speed are immensively high and this is just confusing. . .  are there some recommendet settings for a "normal" game that feels like 151?!?
 

Offline db48x

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • d
  • Posts: 641
  • Thanked: 200 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #353 on: August 12, 2020, 06:15:41 AM »
[NOOB POST]
i've recently downloaded the 151 full instalation and started a game.  then, i updated it to 195 and created a new game.  now, both research AND constructon speed are immensively high and this is just confusing. . .  are there some recommendet settings for a "normal" game that feels like 151?!?

Your Windows localization settings are wrong, specifically you're not using a period as the decimal separator. Also note that version 1.11 is out; you might want to upgrade.
 
The following users thanked this post: rantmaster_92

Offline rantmaster_92

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • r
  • Posts: 2
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #354 on: August 12, 2020, 08:54:01 AM »
aight done but you need to close the game AND generate a new one so this is worth for a noob thread
 

Offline Silverkeeper

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 89
  • Thanked: 9 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #355 on: August 12, 2020, 07:31:45 PM »
How do I bring down the annual failure rate other than adding engineering bays?

Here is an example design.

Town class Cruiser (P)      15 000 tons       376 Crew       2 231.4 BP       TCS 300    TH 602    EM 1 200
4010 km/s      Armour 5-54       Shields 40-300       HTK 106      Sensors 24/24/0/0      DCR 7      PPV 60
Maint Life 1.93 Years     MSP 660    AFR 254%    IFR 3.5%    1YR 231    5YR 3 466    Max Repair 180.465 MSP
Magazine 662   
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Eurojet M-240 Ion Drive (5)    Power 1203.1    Fuel Use 50.45%    Signature 120.310    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 839 000 Litres    Range 20 billion km (57 days at full power)
Gamma S20 / R300 Shields (2)     Recharge Time 300 seconds (0.1 per second)

Sunfire-5 Missile Launcher (12)     Missile Size: 5    Rate of Fire 25
FC50 Missile Fire Control (1)     Range 53m km    Resolution 100
Meteor Anti-Ship Missile (132)    Speed: 19 040 km/s    End: 44.9m     Range: 51.3m km    WH: 4    Size: 5    TH: 76/45/22

SA-50 Active Search Sensor (1)     GPS 4800     Range 51.3m km    Resolution 100
MK-2 Thermal Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 24     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  38.7m km
MK-2 Electromagnetic Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 24     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  38.7m km

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
 

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1334
  • Thanked: 592 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #356 on: August 12, 2020, 09:15:16 PM »
How do I bring down the annual failure rate other than adding engineering bays?

Here is an example design.

Town class Cruiser (P)      15 000 tons       376 Crew       2 231.4 BP       TCS 300    TH 602    EM 1 200
4010 km/s      Armour 5-54       Shields 40-300       HTK 106      Sensors 24/24/0/0      DCR 7      PPV 60
Maint Life 1.93 Years     MSP 660    AFR 254%    IFR 3.5%    1YR 231    5YR 3 466    Max Repair 180.465 MSP
Magazine 662   
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Eurojet M-240 Ion Drive (5)    Power 1203.1    Fuel Use 50.45%    Signature 120.310    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 839 000 Litres    Range 20 billion km (57 days at full power)
Gamma S20 / R300 Shields (2)     Recharge Time 300 seconds (0.1 per second)

Sunfire-5 Missile Launcher (12)     Missile Size: 5    Rate of Fire 25
FC50 Missile Fire Control (1)     Range 53m km    Resolution 100
Meteor Anti-Ship Missile (132)    Speed: 19 040 km/s    End: 44.9m     Range: 51.3m km    WH: 4    Size: 5    TH: 76/45/22

SA-50 Active Search Sensor (1)     GPS 4800     Range 51.3m km    Resolution 100
MK-2 Thermal Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 24     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  38.7m km
MK-2 Electromagnetic Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 24     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  38.7m km

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

Fewer components.

For the above design, you could get rid of the sensors (but I do use Commercial sensors on all my ships as well)

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11669
  • Thanked: 20441 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #357 on: August 13, 2020, 07:56:28 AM »
How do I bring down the annual failure rate other than adding engineering bays?

Here is an example design.

Town class Cruiser (P)      15 000 tons       376 Crew       2 231.4 BP       TCS 300    TH 602    EM 1 200
4010 km/s      Armour 5-54       Shields 40-300       HTK 106      Sensors 24/24/0/0      DCR 7      PPV 60
Maint Life 1.93 Years     MSP 660    AFR 254%    IFR 3.5%    1YR 231    5YR 3 466    Max Repair 180.465 MSP
Magazine 662   
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Eurojet M-240 Ion Drive (5)    Power 1203.1    Fuel Use 50.45%    Signature 120.310    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 839 000 Litres    Range 20 billion km (57 days at full power)
Gamma S20 / R300 Shields (2)     Recharge Time 300 seconds (0.1 per second)

Sunfire-5 Missile Launcher (12)     Missile Size: 5    Rate of Fire 25
FC50 Missile Fire Control (1)     Range 53m km    Resolution 100
Meteor Anti-Ship Missile (132)    Speed: 19 040 km/s    End: 44.9m     Range: 51.3m km    WH: 4    Size: 5    TH: 76/45/22

SA-50 Active Search Sensor (1)     GPS 4800     Range 51.3m km    Resolution 100
MK-2 Thermal Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 24     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  38.7m km
MK-2 Electromagnetic Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 24     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  38.7m km

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

They key stat is the maintenance life rather than the failure rate. Failure rates will rise as hull sizes rise because there are more things to go wrong. Assuming similar components, a 10,000 ton ship will have twice the failure rate of a 5000 ton ship but they will have the same maintenance life.
 
The following users thanked this post: knife644

Offline Dutchling

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 200
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • Baby Snatcher!
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #358 on: August 13, 2020, 11:02:11 AM »
Are Naval Admin jobs supposed to be skipped by auto-assignment? If so, is there a different way to enable auto-assignment for this?

I really like the idea of a deeply structured naval command, but I am way too lazy to keep appointing people to the same post over and over again  ;D
 

Offline skoormit

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 801
  • Thanked: 321 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #359 on: August 13, 2020, 11:36:18 AM »
Are Naval Admin jobs supposed to be skipped by auto-assignment? If so, is there a different way to enable auto-assignment for this?

I really like the idea of a deeply structured naval command, but I am way too lazy to keep appointing people to the same post over and over again  ;D

Unfortunately, no, there is no way to automate naval admin assignments.
To reduce the time I spend maintaining the command structure, I only do it once a year (as part of my annual checklist)