C# Suggestions

[Jorgen_CAB]

I've been thinking of an idea to facilitate longer range missiles, specifically LRAMMs (Long Range AMM). Instead of making MFCs stronger, allowing MFCs to "take over" missiles in flight and guide them to a target.

As a case example of what I mean, consider a scenario where an orbital AMM platform is firing 2-stage LRAMMs against a salvo that is fired at nearby shipping, the stations MFC lacks the range to lock on to the missiles so instead fires the missiles towards a waypoint in the direction of the incoming salvo.

Near that waypoint is a fighter/ship with no missile launchers but equipped with MFC(s) that are within tracking range of the salvo. When the LRAMMs are near the waypoint, the player can assign the missiles in flight to the MFC(s) of the fighter and assign the target as the incoming salvo allowing the fighter to provide terminal guidance to the LRAMMs which will then incercept the salvo.

This would only be possible in the presence of strong thermal detection however since Active sensors against size 6 missiles and smaller lacks the range for this to be useful.

Right now proper PD area defence on a large scale isnt really possible especially since adding range to AMMs doesnt make sense as most NPR missiles can only be tracked at sub 10m km ranges (owing to their <6 MSP size).

In 1.12 you will be able to easily deploy escorts, you can easily deploy several small fighter scouts to extend your AMM detection bubble quite far out... then you can definitely design some long range AMM and engage at a much further distance.

Not saying your suggestion is a bad one, just saying it will be allot easier to pull of in 1.12 when that is released.

For detection this has always been possible - the issue is not detection its FC target aquisition. Those fighters can see the missiles but they cannot provide terminal guidance with their own MFCs. Normally this is not an issue as MFC ranges are quite high however with AMMs the target lock range for size 6 and smaller missiles can be somewhat restrictive. At least for the purposes of providing area defense with AMMs which is their main appeal.

I understood what you meant... but it is not that difficult to build a bigger fire-control to guide the missiles at distances that is reasonable to engage missiles with AMM without sacrificing too much accuracy of the AMM.

I don't think it is a bad idea either... I just think it might have other unwanted side effects that has nothing to do with AMM.

[Droll]

I've been thinking of an idea to facilitate longer range missiles, specifically LRAMMs (Long Range AMM). Instead of making MFCs stronger, allowing MFCs to "take over" missiles in flight and guide them to a target.

As a case example of what I mean, consider a scenario where an orbital AMM platform is firing 2-stage LRAMMs against a salvo that is fired at nearby shipping, the stations MFC lacks the range to lock on to the missiles so instead fires the missiles towards a waypoint in the direction of the incoming salvo.

Near that waypoint is a fighter/ship with no missile launchers but equipped with MFC(s) that are within tracking range of the salvo. When the LRAMMs are near the waypoint, the player can assign the missiles in flight to the MFC(s) of the fighter and assign the target as the incoming salvo allowing the fighter to provide terminal guidance to the LRAMMs which will then incercept the salvo.

This would only be possible in the presence of strong thermal detection however since Active sensors against size 6 missiles and smaller lacks the range for this to be useful.

Right now proper PD area defence on a large scale isnt really possible especially since adding range to AMMs doesnt make sense as most NPR missiles can only be tracked at sub 10m km ranges (owing to their <6 MSP size).

In 1.12 you will be able to easily deploy escorts, you can easily deploy several small fighter scouts to extend your AMM detection bubble quite far out... then you can definitely design some long range AMM and engage at a much further distance.

Not saying your suggestion is a bad one, just saying it will be allot easier to pull of in 1.12 when that is released.

For detection this has always been possible - the issue is not detection its FC target aquisition. Those fighters can see the missiles but they cannot provide terminal guidance with their own MFCs. Normally this is not an issue as MFC ranges are quite high however with AMMs the target lock range for size 6 and smaller missiles can be somewhat restrictive. At least for the purposes of providing area defense with AMMs which is their main appeal.

I understood what you meant... but it is not that difficult to build a bigger fire-control to guide the missiles at distances that is reasonable to engage missiles with AMM without sacrificing too much accuracy of the AMM.

I don't think it is a bad idea either... I just think it might have other unwanted side effects that has nothing to do with AMM.

I guess this is just me wanting to lob AMMs 100m km instead of 10m km against size 6 missiles. The detection range of the larger missiles doesn't really matter to me since I always seem to come up against small ones.

I think as an additional suggestion I could ask for a lower minimum resolution for MFCs which would accomplish the same thing without the mechanical complexity

[TMaekler]

I am thinking about including a deeper exchange system for technology - not necessarily the tech itself but rather selling or leasing ships, fighters, etc. In our world are some countries who build high tech weaponry and others who don’t. Those usually bye them from the high tech countries. And the low tech countries usually can’t afford the research - which is no hindrance in Aurora at all. The cost for a research facility is quite low. So one starting point for this could be a two step change:
A) building cost for a research center could be a lot higher; maybe also adding a kind of maintenance system for buildings in general... . Which would increase the overall costs to maintain being a high tech country.
B) A new research path that starts with a way lower research output for research facilities - so if you want to become a high tech power, you have to do quite an amount of research first to even get there. Included in this would be a starting option to start as a low tech or high tech nation - latter having already done that process and start on what is the current level of research in Aurora.

So as a low tech country you can choose to bye your ships and fighters, or you can invest into research and become one yourself later. Which gives you more options to specialize your nations industry. You could become a money power house but bad in research - or become a research giant and be dependent upon weapon sales to keep your country going... .

[SevenOfCarina]

I think the base reload time for missiles should be reduced to 15s from the current 30s. As things stand, full-sized AMM launchers are too ineffective to act as a countermeasure for box-launched ASMs at low tech levels, which means that combat quickly devolves into fleets of glass cannon vessels attempting to shoot the opposite side first. The only realistic defence is apparently box-launched AMMs.

This would allow AMM launchers to achieve 5s reload times at about the same time beam weapons achieve 5s reloads, and would also make larger AMMs viable at higher tech levels. Since reload times are rounded up, even a slight increase in AMM size in the Fusion eras would increase the reload time from 5s to 10s, which can be crippling since you'd need sensors that are four times as large to fire the same total MSP with an equal displacement in larger launchers.

About the only thing that such a change would do is improve the effectiveness of full-sized AMM launchers against box-launched ASMs. Full-sized ASM launchers are hilariously bad, full-sized AMM launchers are hard-countered by beam point-defence, and I don't think it's significantly different if reduced-size ASM launchers reload every ten minutes instead of every twenty.

[Jorgen_CAB]

I am thinking about including a deeper exchange system for technology - not necessarily the tech itself but rather selling or leasing ships, fighters, etc. In our world are some countries who build high tech weaponry and others who don’t. Those usually bye them from the high tech countries. And the low tech countries usually can’t afford the research - which is no hindrance in Aurora at all. The cost for a research facility is quite low. So one starting point for this could be a two step change:
A) building cost for a research center could be a lot higher; maybe also adding a kind of maintenance system for buildings in general... . Which would increase the overall costs to maintain being a high tech country.
B) A new research path that starts with a way lower research output for research facilities - so if you want to become a high tech power, you have to do quite an amount of research first to even get there. Included in this would be a starting option to start as a low tech or high tech nation - latter having already done that process and start on what is the current level of research in Aurora.

So as a low tech country you can choose to bye your ships and fighters, or you can invest into research and become one yourself later. Which gives you more options to specialize your nations industry. You could become a money power house but bad in research - or become a research giant and be dependent upon weapon sales to keep your country going... .

In my opinion there should perhaps be two different tech buildings... one for theoretical technologies and one for practical engineering of components. Theoretical knowledge should much easily bleed into other factions that has trade with each other while practical engineering of components really don't in the same way. You could then both sell components or even license their production which also eventually transfer the knowledge to build them, sort of bleeding that knowledge to the licensed faction.

I would also like to see a change to how administration and research work... I would like to see a diminishing return on adding labs to projects and the admin rating would flatten that curve instead of being a hard limit, this would make admin rating important directly in a similar way to their skill but in a different way.

We already pay maintenance in labs in the form of wealth so I don't believe that we need to more maintenance, but a diminishing return on research point will effectively have the same effect as you pay more the more labs you put into a specific project (each lab would still cost max wealth for the tech level, not actual RP produces). Having a diminishing return also make spreading the labs around more of a thing and will also reduce the tech progression in a linear manner rather than exponential that we often see now. I have to repeatedly lower the tech rate in my games to seem more of a linear progression so factions don't snowball too hard.

[DEEPenergy]

It would be nice if racial weapon and armor bonuses for ground troops were applied when the troops were being constructed instead of being designed. Or for more complexity and fine tuning allow us to re-research ground units so the design is updated with the most recent armor and weapons tech. Having to remake ground forces is a chore and in the early tech levels, you almost dont want to build them because you're going to blow passed the tech level quickly  Love the game

[Droll]

It would be nice if racial weapon and armor bonuses for ground troops were applied when the troops were being constructed instead of being designed. Or for more complexity and fine tuning allow us to re-research ground units so the design is updated with the most recent armor and weapons tech. Having to remake ground forces is a chore and in the early tech levels, you almost dont want to build them because you're going to blow passed the tech level quickly  Love the game

Your concern is partially addressed in 1.12, much like the missile series of old, there will be unit series. You will be able to add units under your own unit series and designate certain formations as a "replacement formation". The unit at the top of a unit series is the one that is looked for first so you can put the high tech versions of the same unit at the top of its own series and units will automatically fill up formations that lack units.

To read more about it look at the 1.12 changes under the mechanics subsection on the forum

[Barkhorn]

Suggestion: Damage that propagates.  I've been watching a lot of Rule the Waves and Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts content and fire and flooding make damage control much more interesting.  Maybe we could have something similar.

[Droll]

Suggestion: Damage that propagates.  I've been watching a lot of Rule the Waves and Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts content and fire and flooding make damage control much more interesting.  Maybe we could have something similar.

Having ship interiors burst into flames could be cool. Im not sure how you would handle unique situations regarding space combat though. Life support failure is already in and is modelled quite well imo but perhaps you could have hull breaches that stick and require actual damage con to fix.

[StarshipCactus]

Maybe there could be some system of warning shots? So if you make a claim to something that is resisted, you can park a warship nearby and fire a warning shot if the alien ship does not change course. Or they can do the same to you.

[TMaekler]

I would find it a funny option if jump points could be orbital to the stars they are around - so basically they would move like planets around their main star - or even funnier - if they could be orbital around planets or moons... .

Of course optional when you start a new game: jump point orbital mechanics: yes/no

[Annuminas]

I apologize if these suggestions have been suggested or Steve is aware of them and plans to implement them when he gets to low priority stuff.

Could we have the option of transferring ordnance and fuel where I can specifically choose the exact amount being transferred with a slider or text box?

I understand where the ordnance template can come in handy, but when you are scrounging for missiles sometimes I would just like to go "this ship gets 12 of those, this other ship gets 9 of these, this other ship gets 2 of those". Perhaps I am stupid and this is already an option but I haven't seen it. I don't like having a collier go to a fleet and rearm everyone equally to try and fit their template. Sometimes I want certain ships to have more or less ordnance than usual *just once* and I don't want to have to go in, change the template, and then execute.

As for fuel, I understand you can set the minimum fuel, but I would much rather have the system in old Aurora where I can specify for a ship with 10,000,000 liters of fuel: "Transfer 2,350,000 liters at Earth...Transfer 1,200,000 liters at Luna...Transfer X more at Y location..."

[Jorgen_CAB]

In the event windows I would like to add either a text or background colour to the first row (empire name) as well as for the type of event.

When you play a multi-faction game it is way easier to browse specific messages by empire when they have a different colour rather than look at the name.

[Barkhorn]

I know we can color-code events in the event log, but could we also have a separate color for events that trigger interrupts?  In a busy empire, it can be annoying to read through ~50 events, looking for which event was important enough to stop auto-turns.  I know they're usually at the bottom, but a few, like scientist death/retirement are not.

[dlathro1]

One problem I tend to have as my empire grows larger is that managing populations, specifically making sure planetary populations do not drop below the population necessary to run all the installations on the planet.

I have two potential solutions that will significantly decrease the micromanaging of populations:

1. Limit the colonists allowed to leave the body to Available Workers. The attached image shows a mock-up of how I think this could be done. The "Limit Emigration" checkbox, if checked, would limit colonists leaving the body to the number of Available Workers.

2. If the previous solution is too code-intensive, I would be satisfied with a similar checkbox that when checked would automatically switch the setting from "Source of Colonists" to "Stable" if there is a worker shortage. Ideally, the player would be alerted to this change trough an event, preferably one that stops time.

Some notes: I am not at all attached to any phasing or positioning I have put forward in this post, I am just requesting a feature and outlining the basics of how I think it could be implemented.