C# Suggestions

[QuakeIV]

I feel like this must have been suggested before, but it would be nice if in the ship design menu, you had the same window as the 'select name' window from the shipyard screen.  It would make it a lot easier to figure out what the different name themes have to offer.

Sorry if I miss understanding what you are saying, but  the same screen is available. Third button top row.

Hmm, I mean with respect to the miscellaneous tab in the ship design window (actually called class design turns out) when you are picking the ship naming theme.  I just checked and I cant find what you are referring to so I believe we are talking about different windows entirely.

[Cobaia]

I feel like this must have been suggested before, but it would be nice if in the ship design menu, you had the same window as the 'select name' window from the shipyard screen.  It would make it a lot easier to figure out what the different name themes have to offer.

Sorry if I miss understanding what you are saying, but  the same screen is available. Third button top row.

Hmm, I mean with respect to the miscellaneous tab in the ship design window (actually called class design turns out) when you are picking the ship naming theme.  I just checked and I cant find what you are referring to so I believe we are talking about different windows entirely.

Picture 1 was the option you were talking about right?

Picture 2 is the same button on the class design window.

Is it the same?

[QuakeIV]

Oh ok its in the main tab, that makes sense.  Its for picking the name of the class rather than picking the naming theme of the ships that get built, but its at least more localized.

[Panopticon]

Reading the latest AAR from Steve and I noticed that he said population growth on Earth is more or less keeping up with evacuation. Humans are pretty idiotic at times but I think maybe if the planet was gonna crash into the sun soon we might not be reproducing like rabbits in the meantime. Maybe add an option to remove or reduce population growth on bodies effected by a disaster?

[Vastrat]

You gotta do something while waiting for the planet to plunge into the sun. 

[amram]

Reading the latest AAR from Steve and I noticed that he said population growth on Earth is more or less keeping up with evacuation. Humans are pretty idiotic at times but I think maybe if the planet was gonna crash into the sun soon we might not be reproducing like rabbits in the meantime. Maybe add an option to remove or reduce population growth on bodies effected by a disaster?

I'd think a large number of people would be indulging more.  The saying is to live today as if its your last day, and for the majority of humans, it would be, I would not be surprised if the birthrate skyrocketed in such scenario.

[QuakeIV]

Thats silly, birth control is super easy.  Maybe people wouldn't normally go out of their way to use it, but if the planet is literally about to explode it seems like they might be more willing to avoid children at that point.

Maybe a setting of 'evacuation' to go along with 'destination of colonists' 'source of colonists' etc setting would trigger that kind of behavior for when you are trying to get as close to reducing a colonies population to zero as possible before its destroyed.

e: Honestly it would actually be really cool if an 'evacuation' colony let you effectively cause all of your civilian shipping to drop what its doing and start evaccing that planet (though that might be going a bit too far).  (for instance imagine when capella or vasuda was being evacuated in freespace 2)

[Panopticon]

Yeah, I'm not sure it would be realistic to drop pop growth to zero entirely, but I know that if the world was ending in a few years I certainly wouldn't be bringing a child into it, and TN birth control has to be pretty effective right?

I also think that it might be too much to apply pop growth controls wherever you want, which is why I suggested tying it to disasters, since it will probably take the literal end of the world to get humans to stop reproducing so much.

[QuakeIV]

Even if it opens the road to be a bit cheesy I'd kindof like to be able to move people off of a planet that I know is going to die.  Its not like there are huge negative side effects of overpopulation that you need to avoid in this game so there isnt any huge incentive to cheese that that I know of.

[S1mancoder]

Designing yet another combat jump-capable fleet I relaized that you are pretty much forced into roughly same sized ship for efficient utilizing of a jump drive potential and having all ships kinda equal size is kinda. . .  boring.

So apparently I think there is an easy and rather consistent solution: instead of having Squadron Size as a number of ships, we could have it as a multiplier to tender tonnage with resulting number defining total jumping tonnage.  Squadron Size 2 would mean that with a jump tender of tonnage X any number of ships with total tonnage of X can jump as squadron (so total of 2*X), Squadron Size 4 would mean that for tonnage X any number of ships up to totall tonnage 3*X can jump (so total of 4*X).  So Squadron Size would define total sqadron tonnage including jump ship.

This way we can have some fancy RP-ish fleets with a jumping supercaptial/supercarrier and a fleet of escorts utilising the jump wormhole created by that supership, which I think would be very nice  and more fun than just all 5k/10k/20k/30k ships to keep up with current tender mechanics.

[xenoscepter]

 - I think that's brilliant. Simple, elegant, effective and most importantly of all it would add so much to the game...

[Cobaia]

Designing yet another combat jump-capable fleet I relaized that you are pretty much forced into roughly same sized ship for efficient utilizing of a jump drive potential and having all ships kinda equal size is kinda. . .  boring.

So apparently I think there is an easy and rather consistent solution: instead of having Squadron Size as a number of ships, we could have it as a multiplier to tender tonnage with resulting number defining total jumping tonnage.  Squadron Size 2 would mean that with a jump tender of tonnage X any number of ships with total tonnage of X can jump as squadron (so total of 2*X), Squadron Size 4 would mean that for tonnage X any number of ships up to totall tonnage 3*X can jump (so total of 4*X).  So Squadron Size would define total sqadron tonnage including jump ship.

This way we can have some fancy RP-ish fleets with a jumping supercaptial/supercarrier and a fleet of escorts utilising the jump wormhole created by that supership, which I think would be very nice  and more fun than just all 5k/10k/20k/30k ships to keep up with current tender mechanics.

I don't get the difference from the system we have in place now. I use 18.000t ship that has the Jump Drive and I can jump any ship from 0t to 18.000t, isn't that the same concept? I can jump a 2.000.000t fleet as long as the tonnage is lower. Right?

[Droll]

Designing yet another combat jump-capable fleet I relaized that you are pretty much forced into roughly same sized ship for efficient utilizing of a jump drive potential and having all ships kinda equal size is kinda. . .  boring.

So apparently I think there is an easy and rather consistent solution: instead of having Squadron Size as a number of ships, we could have it as a multiplier to tender tonnage with resulting number defining total jumping tonnage.  Squadron Size 2 would mean that with a jump tender of tonnage X any number of ships with total tonnage of X can jump as squadron (so total of 2*X), Squadron Size 4 would mean that for tonnage X any number of ships up to totall tonnage 3*X can jump (so total of 4*X).  So Squadron Size would define total sqadron tonnage including jump ship.

This way we can have some fancy RP-ish fleets with a jumping supercaptial/supercarrier and a fleet of escorts utilising the jump wormhole created by that supership, which I think would be very nice  and more fun than just all 5k/10k/20k/30k ships to keep up with current tender mechanics.

I don't get the difference from the system we have in place now. I use 18.000t ship that has the Jump Drive and I can jump any ship from 0t to 18.000t, isn't that the same concept?

No, what he is saying that with a squadron size 3, your 18000t jump tender would be able to squadron jump any number of ships as long as the total tonnage of the squadron is under/equal to 54000t (18000t x 3) and no single ship in the squadron is above 18000t.

Right now with the way squadron jumping works, a squadron jump size of 3 means you can support up to 3 ships regardless of overall tonnage. So a 50k ton jump tender would be able to jump at most 3 ships even if they are tiny 2000t corvettes, Whereas with this new system that same tender would be able to jump 75 of those corvettes.

I think this change is inspired since it removes the end game squadron size cap of 12 and places that limit in the hand of the player with how they design their jump tenders.

[Cobaia]

Designing yet another combat jump-capable fleet I relaized that you are pretty much forced into roughly same sized ship for efficient utilizing of a jump drive potential and having all ships kinda equal size is kinda. . .  boring.

So apparently I think there is an easy and rather consistent solution: instead of having Squadron Size as a number of ships, we could have it as a multiplier to tender tonnage with resulting number defining total jumping tonnage.  Squadron Size 2 would mean that with a jump tender of tonnage X any number of ships with total tonnage of X can jump as squadron (so total of 2*X), Squadron Size 4 would mean that for tonnage X any number of ships up to totall tonnage 3*X can jump (so total of 4*X).  So Squadron Size would define total sqadron tonnage including jump ship.

This way we can have some fancy RP-ish fleets with a jumping supercaptial/supercarrier and a fleet of escorts utilising the jump wormhole created by that supership, which I think would be very nice  and more fun than just all 5k/10k/20k/30k ships to keep up with current tender mechanics.

I don't get the difference from the system we have in place now. I use 18.000t ship that has the Jump Drive and I can jump any ship from 0t to 18.000t, isn't that the same concept?

No, what he is saying that with a squadron size 3, your 18000t jump tender would be able to jump any number of ships as long as the total tonnage of the squadron is under/equal to 54000t (18000t x 3) and no single ship in the squadron is above 18000t.

Right now with the way squadron jumping works, a squadron jump size of 3 means you can support up to 3 ships regardless of overall tonnage. So a 50k ton jump tender would be able to jump at most 3 ships even if they are tiny 2000t corvettes, Whereas with this new system that same tender would be able to jump 75 of those corvettes.

I think this change is inspired since it removes the end game squadron size cap of 12 and places that limit in the hand of the player with how they design their jump tenders.

OK so it's a multiplier instead of an hard number. Sorry I updated the reply. My question is: one 18.000t Jump Drive can jump any number of ships not just the 3 as long as it is in the JP, so a fleet composed of x number of ships with tonnage < 18.000t and y total fleet tonnage > 18.000t can jump trough right?

Maybe I'm just confusing myself :O

[TheTalkingMeowth]

There are two kinds of transits: squadron jump and standard transit.

In a standard transit, one jump drive can handle an arbitrary number of ships as long as they are all smaller than its max size (i.e. 18kt in the current example).

In a squadron transit, one jump drive can handle a fixed number of ships (3 is the starting tech, can be increased at a slight increase in size of the drive). All ships ALSO need to be <= max size (again, 18kt).

The proposal is to modify squadron transits to work on a total tonnage capacity, rather than a number of vessels. So a 3x jump drive at 18kt could jump 3x18kt ships, or 6x9kt ships. But not 1x36kt ship + 1x18kt ship.