Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition

[TMaekler]

What's happening is that you've got enough police to counter the unrest that is being generated. You do not need 100% unrest reduction in order to successfully maintain order, as the colony grows the amount of unrest generating will go up because of more PPV being needed but also policing will become less effective since larger populations need police.

Unfortunately the game does not tell you the % unrest being generated in the planet summary and you have to eyeball it when the unrest starts to reduce stability so I can't give you a good answer on how much police you need. Just make sure that the policing % unrest reduction is higher that the % unrest increase that you'd expect.

I see. Keeping it close to 100% should suffice (I hope ). So you don't get any log messages like it has been in VB6. Thanks.

[Droll]

What's happening is that you've got enough police to counter the unrest that is being generated. You do not need 100% unrest reduction in order to successfully maintain order, as the colony grows the amount of unrest generating will go up because of more PPV being needed but also policing will become less effective since larger populations need police.

Unfortunately the game does not tell you the % unrest being generated in the planet summary and you have to eyeball it when the unrest starts to reduce stability so I can't give you a good answer on how much police you need. Just make sure that the policing % unrest reduction is higher that the % unrest increase that you'd expect.

I see. Keeping it close to 100% should suffice (I hope ). So you don't get any log messages like it has been in VB6. Thanks.

I usually have way less than that (<30%) and it works perfectly fine for overpopulation and PPV. Occupation and subjugation is different though since they generate unrest much quicker. You could probably get by with 15-20% policing because you usually are looking at 1.2-2% unrest per month from PPV/overpopulation.

[Froggiest1982]

until they declare independence

Unfortunately, this won't happen as the game does not handle well the process so Steve has not introduced an automatism to do that at a certain threshold and you could run a colony even at 0%.

You still suffer heavy penalties though.

You can declare independence manually though, although the new entity will always be player controlled.

[bsh]

I have discovered a system called "WISE 2348-1028[2]". never seen the [2] before. But apparently there are quite a few such system names in the database. I'm just curious what does that mean?

[serger]

Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer Catalog of Periodic Variable Stars

[bsh]

My question was about the [2].

[Kylemmie]

My question was about the [2].

I've not used 'Known Star names' in awhile, but I don't recall ever seeing that.  I'm clueless when it comes to DB stuff, but I can't help but ask.....I know it's a 'did you unplug it and reboot' type response.... but could you verify that those extra [2]'s etc appear in a   clean download/install?  I'd look, but I'd have to spend a day learning how

Edit: "Clean' as in a fresh new download - not implying anything except maybe a corrupted download

[nuclearslurpee]

My question was about the [2].

I've not used 'Known Star names' in awhile, but I don't recall ever seeing that.  I'm clueless when it comes to DB stuff, but I can't help but ask.....I know it's a 'did you unplug it and reboot' type response.... but could you verify that those extra [2]'s etc appear in a clean download/install?  I'd look, but I'd have to spend a day learning how

They do appear in my install as well. Probably a weird holdover from something Steve was doing years ago.

[Droll]

Is there another star called "WISE 2348-1028"? The [2] could be trying to differentiate from the duplicate name. Though idk how many star systems you've explored in your game or how many unique star names are available in a known stars game.

[nuclearslurpee]

Is there another star called "WISE 2348-1028"? The [2] could be trying to differentiate from the duplicate name. Though idk how many star systems you've explored in your game or how many unique star names are available in a known stars game.

I checked, and the only star by that name in the DB is the one with [2]. Several more examples exist, and all are WISE stars.

• WISE 2255-3118[2]
• WISE 2319-1844[2]
• WISE 2325-4105[2]
• WISE 2340-0745[2]
• WISE 2344+1034[2]
• WISE 2348-1028[2] - this is the one in question

There are half a dozen stars with this odd feature in their names, and [2] is the only number used in this way. Another half-dozen stars have parentheses instead:

• Zeta(2) Reticuli
• Zeta(1) Reticuli
• Nu(2) Lupi
• Xi(2) Centauri
• Tau(1) Gruis
• Giclas (G) 112-54

I didn't find any names with braces.

The one clue here is Zeta Reticuli which has a (1) and (2) name in the DB, suggesting that it might be two halves of a widely-spread binary star system. A quick Google confirms that Zeta Reticuli consists of two stars separated by roughly 560 billion km which is only 0.06 LY but far enough apart that there'd be really no point in having both stars in a single system - the space is all but uncrossable except with Lagrange Points, and the latter just makes the whole thing exceedingly silly. The next three stars with parentheses are real stars which actually have that number in their names, as they share the same name otherwise with one or more additional stars. The parentheses however seem to be a Steve addition rather than the "correct" format, similar to hyphenated names like Pi-3 Orionis. The Giclas star I have no idea about as nothing comes up on a search

Returning the the question of the WISE [2] stars, however, nothing useful comes up on Google. Several of the stars have Wiki entries in the Dutch language, oddly enough, but that's about it other than trawling the astrometric databases which is way more trouble than I want to go to today. Assuming none of these are second components of binary systems (none has a pair with the same WISE identifier in the DB), my best guess is that Steve at some point was editing the DB, added the [2] to a few new entries for stars he was modifying, deleted the old ones, and forgot to fix the names.

[Andrew]

I had a brief and amateurish look at astronomical databases WISE 2348-1028 seems not to be a binary rather a fairly distant and faint star. So no clue there to the 2 I have to agree with nuclearslurpee it is probably a database artifact

[bsh]

my guess was that Steve dumped star system names from a catalog and processed them by a script into the database, and some names may have had remarks or notes indicating a link or a reference (similarly to wikipedia), and these may have slipped through the script.

[Borealis4x]

I'm going to ask my annual 'Why Use Carriers Instead of Missiles' question cuz while I think carriers are cool using long-range missiles seems a lot more straightforward and less risky. A lot less finicky to use too.

[xenoscepter (OP)]

I'm going to ask my annual 'Why Use Carriers Instead of Missiles' question cuz while I think carriers are cool using long-range missiles seems a lot more straightforward and less risky. A lot less finicky to use too.

 - 1. You can load a carrier with gunz via fighters.

 - 2. You can load a carrier with sensorz via fighters.

 - 3. You can use accurate, short range missiles with bigga warheadz at a greater range by strapping them to fighters to improve their range.

[Droll]

I'm going to ask my annual 'Why Use Carriers Instead of Missiles' question cuz while I think carriers are cool using long-range missiles seems a lot more straightforward and less risky. A lot less finicky to use too.

 - 1. You can load a carrier with gunz via fighters.

 - 2. You can load a carrier with sensorz via fighters.

 - 3. You can use accurate, short range missiles with bigga warheadz at a greater range by strapping them to fighters to improve their range.

Also the fact that the carrier itself can be outdated and still be combat effective since its easier and cheaper to upgrade fighters with new weapons and sensors and missiles.