C# Suggestions

[xenoscepter]

This has probably been suggested in some form but having cargo bays be able to transport formations consisting solely of logistical elements would be a nice little boost to logistics for protracted ground combat, while also making a good deal of thematic sense. (Logistical elements embedded inside formations don't necessarily 'disappear' when they are used. A batallion of men can't eat a truck, no matter how hungry they are! The transports are simply hauling supplies to replenish the ground forces with)

 --- I don't recall when, where or specifically what, but I do recall saying something of the sort somewhere around here. I don't remember exactly why, but I do remember Steve himself replying about, if I recall correctly, not wanting GSP to be another thing for the player to manage. I believe I said something along the lines of having GSP work like MSP, in that you produced it and ground units consumed it. You'd have the LOG and LOG-S then functioning analogously to the Maintenance Storage Bays on ships, except for Ground Units instead. Take this with a small mountain of salt though, as the memory is vague at best...

[TMaekler]

Instead of turning fuel and MSP production on and off, why not giving them the option for a set value. With tools like AuroraMarvin you can easily see if you begin to run out of fuel or MSP and simply increase your MSP/fuel production accordingly (instead of having to switch them on and off every now and then). Of course, you should not be able to set above planetary maximum. But being able to set to any percentage between 0 and 100 would be a nice QoL.

[xenoscepter]

 - Can we have an option to make Jump Drives Self-Jump only on purpose? I'd like the option for this since each Jump Drive would be cheaper, and because I'd like to make Jump Carriers that don't really need the squadron jump anyway. Maybe have them be smaller too? Options are always nice to have.

[nuclearslurpee]

- Can we have an option to make Jump Drives Self-Jump only on purpose? I'd like the option for this since each Jump Drive would be cheaper, and because I'd like to make Jump Carriers that don't really need the squadron jump anyway. Maybe have them be smaller too? Options are always nice to have.

Self jump-only drives don't have any special cost reduction, so I'm not sure what the point would be as it's not hard to just RP this restriction. Unless you're suggesting reworking how jump drive design works so that self-jump drives are cheaper, which would be a different matter.

[xenoscepter]

- Can we have an option to make Jump Drives Self-Jump only on purpose? I'd like the option for this since each Jump Drive would be cheaper, and because I'd like to make Jump Carriers that don't really need the squadron jump anyway. Maybe have them be smaller too? Options are always nice to have.

Self jump-only drives don't have any special cost reduction, so I'm not sure what the point would be as it's not hard to just RP this restriction. Unless you're suggesting reworking how jump drive design works so that self-jump drives are cheaper, which would be a different matter.

 - http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12035.0 "Jump drive costs are no longer affected by squadron size if the drive is self-jump only." They are cheaper.

[Zap0]

That just means they're the same cost as if you selected squadron size 3, the minimum, I take it, not some extra cost reduction beyond that.

[Kristover]

Suggestion: I have advocated earlier for the addition or readjustment of conditions for medal awarding (example:  Survey 25 Systems, Destroy 50 Missiles, etc).  I was looking at the categories today and I think I'm fine with the existing categories but is it possible to add an adjustment that allows us to change the condition through the game UI?  Say instead of a condition, 'Discover 3 Habitable Worlds' I could adjust it to 'Discover 2 Habitable Worlds' if I wanted without diving into the DB?  I'm not sure this would be hard to add because we already are able to modify the promotion points per medal so it seems that this could be done without a lot of additional work.

[xenoscepter]

That just means they're the same cost as if you selected squadron size 3, the minimum, I take it, not some extra cost reduction beyond that.

 - Ah, that makes sense then. Cheers! In that case though, I would like to instead request a Self-Jump Only option that makes a drive cheaper and slightly more efficient at the cost of being... well self-jump only. Have it be at the bottom of Squadron Jump Size, and have it unlocked by default perhaps? Or unlocked with Squadron Jump Size 3 would be far, FAR simpler. That or a "Compact Jump Drive" tech that is ruins and/or Spoiler only, that only has a Drive Size and Drive Range tech. Make it so that it's cheaper, more efficient and self-jump only. I'm not too amendable to this idea myself, but it could be an option.

 - One other thing would be a Compact Jump Drive that the player can research as a separate tech. It would be way more efficient, but costlier, have no engine restrictions, but be self-jump only. With the added caveat that it could be mounted in addition to a normal Jump Drive, so our Commercial / Military Tenders could mount whatever they needed to move their intended "cargo", and have one for themselves to move... erm, well themselves!

[nuclearslurpee]

Suggestion: I have advocated earlier for the addition or readjustment of conditions for medal awarding (example:  Survey 25 Systems, Destroy 50 Missiles, etc).  I was looking at the categories today and I think I'm fine with the existing categories but is it possible to add an adjustment that allows us to change the condition through the game UI?  Say instead of a condition, 'Discover 3 Habitable Worlds' I could adjust it to 'Discover 2 Habitable Worlds' if I wanted without diving into the DB?  I'm not sure this would be hard to add because we already are able to modify the promotion points per medal so it seems that this could be done without a lot of additional work.

This would be really nice actually, if we could have a single numeric variable for each condition. Would require an extra column in the DB and another UI element but would solve so many complaints about the medal conditions.

[xenoscepter]

 - One other suggestion that sprung to mind when thinking about Self-Jump Drives... using Gravitational Survey Sensors to detect ships Jumping in. Perhaps every one point of Gravitational Sensor translating to 1 billion km of detection? Maybe have Science Department enhance it?

[Droll]

- One other suggestion that sprung to mind when thinking about Self-Jump Drives... using Gravitational Survey Sensors to detect ships Jumping in. Perhaps every one point of Gravitational Sensor translating to 1 billion km of detection? Maybe have Science Department enhance it?

You could perhaps rig it so that based on the various parameters of the Jump drive, upon entering a system it emits an EM pulse for 5-15secs (or maybe during the jump shock period) which can then be picked up on EM passives. You could also have it be on the gravitational sensor which would give that component an actual combat use. However, from an implementation standpoint the EM version is probably easier.

It would definitely make it easier to use static defenses to defend jump points with self-guided active missiles or at the very least make deep space tracking stations much more viable for detection.

[TMaekler]

Could we have waypoints that are linked to an object like a planet and they keep moving with that object? I don't mean directly on that object but more like a patrol point around that object, i.e. at a certain distance. I would love to set up patrol routes around planets and moons - and those "orbital waypoints" would be a great help with this.

[nuclearslurpee]

Could we have waypoints that are linked to an object like a planet and they keep moving with that object? I don't mean directly on that object but more like a patrol point around that object, i.e. at a certain distance. I would love to set up patrol routes around planets and moons - and those "orbital waypoints" would be a great help with this.

Piggyback: the ability to tell a fleet to move to or follow a target at a specified distance and heading. I'm sick of having to eyeball a new waypoint placement every time I just want a fleet to move away from a hostile contact on a 45-degree heading instead of directly opposite.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Could we have waypoints that are linked to an object like a planet and they keep moving with that object? I don't mean directly on that object but more like a patrol point around that object, i.e. at a certain distance. I would love to set up patrol routes around planets and moons - and those "orbital waypoints" would be a great help with this.

Piggyback: the ability to tell a fleet to move to or follow a target at a specified distance and heading. I'm sick of having to eyeball a new waypoint placement every time I just want a fleet to move away from a hostile contact on a 45-degree heading instead of directly opposite.

Yes... I have suggested some similar things before... a waypoint that is tied to another object (range and heading) which could be a ship or a planet would be nice. This would be very helpful for so many reasons.

[TMaekler]

Being able to define for each LaGrange-Point if it should be used or not.