C# Aurora Changes Discussion

[the obelisk]

If you have occupied a colony you may find the equivalent of the Rosetta stone so that translation becomes a research project based on computers and books and other ephemera left lying around. Chance should probably depend on size of colony, e.g. if materials are acquired from educational establishments.

The Rosetta stone helped with translation because it said the same thing in multiple languages, and several were already understood.  If you've got access to a colony, though (or even if you can pick up its EM emissions, really), you should definitely be able to make translation attempts.

[Hazard]

If you have access to a colony in Aurora you probably have access to the primary education centers. Just run off with all the teaching materials and look for the things that look like the language teaching books.

It'll take a while, especially to grasp the grammar, but it'll get you the writing system fairly quickly simply because you can start stringing words/symbols together when you know the meaning of them and then use those to form a crude translation system.


Well, there's a few caveats, one of which is that you need a species whose primary sense is the same as yours, but that's a really simple start.

[the obelisk]

If you have access to a colony in Aurora you probably have access to the primary education centers. Just run off with all the teaching materials and look for the things that look like the language teaching books.

Just being able to observe conversations gives you SOMETHING to work with (which is why if you can pick up EM transmissions, you should be able to start translation attempts), but I definitely agree that if you've got physical access to the colony it should be a bit easier.

[Steve Walmsley]

I will add a 'Russian Trawler' module, that allows some form of espionage and some ability to learn the alien language (although slower than normal translation attempts).

This may not help diplomatically if the other race refuses communication attempts, but at least it would help understand any intelligence material that might be gathered.

[Hazard]

Consider letting such a module to have a (small) chance of intercepting changes in orders for fleets, letting players see where a ship is moving to and/or what it's carrying.

[Bremen]

Can I suggest the weapon failure rate use recharge time as a multiplier? As it is it makes larger weapons much more efficient in terms of failure rate, and it makes sense that a small, rapid firing laser would have more mean shots to failure than a giant spinal one that fires once a minute. A multiplier would make it so they both at least suffer the same average number of failures in 10 minutes of sustained fire.

Also, is the failure chance modified by crew grade and/or officer skills? Might be a nice bonus for highly trained crews.

[linkxsc]

I will add a 'Russian Trawler' module, that allows some form of espionage and some ability to learn the alien language (although slower than normal translation attempts).

This may not help diplomatically if the other race refuses communication attempts, but at least it would help understand any intelligence material that might be gathered.

Perhaps have bonuses to their ability to translate based on the EM sensors of the ship the module is built into?

[mtm84]

it makes larger weapons much more efficient in terms of failure rate

I think for C# Aurora Steve is going for that sort of thing in general where larger systems are more efficient.  And unless I'm misunderstanding you, smaller weapons already have a higher chance to fail, and higher recharge rates would push that up even without a multiplier.  Though, I wouldn't mind a mechanic that reduces failure rate if you choose a lower recharge rate then your current maximum.

[Draco_Argentum]

Does anyone else think 1. 1 worlds per system is pretty low for ground surveys? As in not really worth having them.  I'd make it so that dwarf planets and the largest asteroids can be ground surveyed too.  Ceres and up I guess for size.

[Steve Walmsley]

Does anyone else think 1. 1 worlds per system is pretty low for ground surveys? As in not really worth having them.  I'd make it so that dwarf planets and the largest asteroids can be ground surveyed too.  Ceres and up I guess for size.

I may modify this once I get into play test. This is an average though so some systems may have more eligible worlds and other may have none. Overall, the intention is to make ground survey less common and therefore more interesting. That was my intention with teams, but you can literally resurvey every rock under the VB6 mechanic.

[sublight]

I agree that 1.1 average targets per system is low, but then again I remember many systems being practically empty. I'd suggest thinking in terms of Sol for ground survey target density.

As I understand things Sol has 7 potential targets * .25% chance for... 1.75 average team locations in Sol with a 13% chance of zero targets. That still feels kinda sparse.

On the other hand Ceres and larger would give 28 potential targets for 7 average ground surveys in Sol. Thats probably makes ground surveys too common.


I'd suggest either lowering the threshold to 2500 km diameter for Triton and larger or else lowering the Potential:None chance to ~65%. That would make 2-3 ground surveys in Sol typical. The multiple targets would encourage ground survey force creation since the force would likely be reused even on low-tech starts while still keeping surveys uncommon enough to show up as major events in an AAR.

[Steve Walmsley]

I agree that 1.1 average targets per system is low, but then again I remember many systems being practically empty. I'd suggest thinking in terms of Sol for ground survey target density.

As I understand things Sol has 7 potential targets * .25% chance for... 1.75 average team locations in Sol with a 13% chance of zero targets. That still feels kinda sparse.

On the other hand Ceres and larger would give 28 potential targets for 7 average ground surveys in Sol. Thats probably makes ground surveys too common.


I'd suggest either lowering the threshold to 2500 km diameter for Triton and larger or else lowering the Potential:None chance to ~65%. That would make 2-3 ground surveys in Sol typical. The multiple targets would encourage ground survey force creation since the force would likely be reused even on low-tech starts while still keeping surveys uncommon enough to show up as major events in an AAR.

There is also the constraint of ensuring bodies with very good minerals are still rare. I could expand the lower end (Minimal, Low), and leave the upper end the same without too much concern.

[Bremen]

I think for C# Aurora Steve is going for that sort of thing in general where larger systems are more efficient.  And unless I'm misunderstanding you, smaller weapons already have a higher chance to fail, and higher recharge rates would push that up even without a multiplier.  Though, I wouldn't mind a mechanic that reduces failure rate if you choose a lower recharge rate then your current maximum.

If all weapons have a 2% chance to fail on firing, then a weapon that fires every 5 seconds would fire 12 times a minute, working out to (on average) .24 maintenance failures a minute. A larger weapon with a 30 second rate of fire would fire twice, for on average .04 maintenance failures.

If instead, say, the failure rate was .2% per second rate of fire, then the rapid fire weapon would have a 1% chance each shot, and the larger laser would have a 6% chance each shot, and both would on average suffer .12 maintenance failures each minute.

I know realism isn't a strict argument, but consider it like saying a machine gun can probably fire a lot more total shots before needing servicing than a tank's cannon.

[Zincat]

There is also the constraint of ensuring bodies with very good minerals are still rare. I could expand the lower end (Minimal, Low), and leave the upper end the same without too much concern.

I think this would be a good solution. 1.1 average target per system is way too low in my opinion. I would raise that at least to 3-4 potential targets per system (in systems with a decent amount of planets). But most of those should be minimal or low potential anyway.
It is completely fine instead if High and Excellent worlds are very rare.

You could change it to something like: for worlds 4000 km diameter and more,
None 60%, Minimal 20%, Low 13%, Good 5%, High 1.5%, Excellent 0.5%
If the numbers are still too low, lower the min diameter to 3000 km or similar. Potential high value targets should be very rare, but there should be SOME possibilities to find a bit of minerals if one want to expend the resources and time needed to do ground survey.

[King-Salomon]

There is also the constraint of ensuring bodies with very good minerals are still rare. I could expand the lower end (Minimal, Low), and leave the upper end the same without too much concern.

1) I like this

2) an other question about this:

If a deposit of a mineral that didn't previously exist is generated by the ground survey, that deposit is added to the system body.
If a mineral deposit is generated by the ground survey and a deposit of that mineral already exists on the system body, the existing deposit is changed to match the amount or accessibility (or both) of the ground survey deposit if the latter is greater.

If I understand this correctly, if I survey a system body which has minerals only after it's deposit is nearly empty I would benefit more from ground survey as if I do the surveying at the beginning? In the first one the new deposits are always greater than the existing and the minerals will be "fulled up" again with the new amount. In the second one, it is possible/likely that the existing minerals outnumber the "new found" ones and there are nearly no chances at all.

Am I missing something?


3) Also - I am sure I missed the numbers somewhere, so sorry for asking - for clarification:

Let's say a "typical" survey unit has 10 "trucks" with 1 Survey point/day in total, how long would the survey last in comparison to the old "team" with 100 skill? I would like to think that a unit like this should need at least 3-4 months for a "typical planet" - maybe even more - but with what numbers are we working here atm?

4) will a unit with survey ability start working with unloading them on a planet or will there be a special order for the ground-unit to start it?

looks really good so far, thanks a lot