C# Suggestions

[Bluebreaker]

QoL
I think it would be usefull to have buttons to display only colonies with Construction factories / Shipyards / Research Labs

[Voltbot]

I think adding some kind of airport would be nice.

As far as I understand planetary invasions (I might be wrong), you would attack after you destroyed enemy defence fleet.  That leaves defenders without any ability of using fighters in ground combat (because they probably won't have any carriers nearby).
In VB you had PDC.  Despite the fact, that fighters weren't able to support ground forces, you had possibility to launch them from a planet.  My idea is the installation, that would be able to hold some fighter tonnage (for example 5000 tons per level/installation), perhaps giving researchable tonnage per level/installation increase, and allow to launch them.  At the time, when fighters are on ground, the might not even be using MSP and won't be using maintenance facilities, because of that.

If someone suggested that earlier: I'm sorry.  I'm simply too lazy to check for it in over 158 pages of posts.

I probably made a lot of grammar mistakes, so sorry for any of these.

[alex_brunius]

  At the time, when fighters are on ground, the might not even be using MSP and won't be using maintenance facilities, because of that.

Are you sure about that? When I tested recently fighters seemed to worked just fine using normal maintenance facilities…

[nuclearslurpee]

  At the time, when fighters are on ground, the might not even be using MSP and won't be using maintenance facilities, because of that.

Are you sure about that? When I tested recently fighters seemed to worked just fine using normal maintenance facilities…

Currently fighters work like normal ships when not in a hangar, so they require maint facilities and consume MSP like every other military ship. I think the suggestion would imply that fighters in a hangar would not use MSP at all, which would be more like VB6 but I think a rather poor idea for C# given the design goal of unifying the mechanics instead of adding exceptions.

I don't particularly like the idea of planetside hangars, as it doesn't add anything mechanically (removing MSP consumption would take away something mechanically, if anything) and doesn't really solve the problem as any defensive fighters will just be blown up by an attacking fleet when they do leave the hangars, wither GSFs or space fighters. I would rather see a more elegant solution to the GSF problem such as making GSFs into a ground unit class and unifying those mechanics.

[GodEmperor]

I have no idea if anyone suggested that but having "loadouts" profiles for ammo/fighters could be cool.

At this time you have to change the missiles loadouts in design screen and then you have every ship of this class change it - having an option to customize it on at least individual fleet basis would be cool.
Some of the X Class destroyers could benefit from loading the faster more agile but weaker missiles to deal with Y NPR spamming fighters and FAC's while the X class destroyers on other end of your Empire would still load the usual bigger heavy hitting missiles because Z NPR running around their backyard is using capital ships.
Same with fighters.

[nuclearslurpee]

You can actually do this to a degree already. When viewing a single ship in the Naval Organization window, you have the option to set a ship-specific loadout on the ordnance tab, which IIRC can be copied to other ships of that class in a fleet as well. It is not quite having multiple profiles that can be swapped around but it is something useful.

[GodEmperor]

You can actually do this to a degree already. When viewing a single ship in the Naval Organization window, you have the option to set a ship-specific loadout on the ordnance tab, which IIRC can be copied to other ships of that class in a fleet as well. It is not quite having multiple profiles that can be swapped around but it is something useful.

Really? Never noticed that, i guess i have to check it out.
Still - proper loadouts would be cool thing to have.

[Kiero]

Since in 2.0 there will be an option to retain dead or retired commanders. It would be cool to have an option medal setup that would automatically change DNR status.

That way if someone did something significant he/she will be retained automatically.

[Warer]

Additional Internal HTK to Ships/Stations Component ie Bulkheads/Structural Reinforcement

A component to help make more durable ships without having to add armor/shields, the trade-off being since their internal components they don`t block damage to vital components merely give the enemy nonvitals to shoot.

[ArcWolf]

Additional Internal HTK to Ships/Stations Component ie Bulkheads/Structural Reinforcement

A component to help make more durable ships without having to add armor/shields, the trade-off being since their internal components they don`t block damage to vital components merely give the enemy nonvitals to shoot.

would be nice, though you can already do something like this by making miscellaneous components. an actual bulkhead component could be more space efficient then a miscellaneous component but also more expensive in duranium.

[Froggiest1982]

Introduce the option to remove Orbits also to Stars, not only Planes, Moons, and Asteroids.

Reasons here: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12886.msg158058#msg158058

[Garfunkel]

Introduce the option to remove Orbits also to Stars, not only Planes, Moons, and Asteroids.

Reasons here: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12886.msg158058#msg158058

And before anyone misunderstands, Froggiest means orbits of stellar companions as the main star of course never has an orbit.

[Bluebreaker]

I think it would be useful to have class prefix of the ships clases on the Shipyards panel when Retoling Shipyard and all the shipyard tasks (Construction, Refit, Repair, Scrap, Autorefit)
Currently these only show the class name without the prefix, while assigned class does show the prefix.

[nuclearslurpee]

I think it would be useful to have class prefix of the ships clases on the Shipyards panel when Retoling Shipyard and all the shipyard tasks (Construction, Refit, Repair, Scrap, Autorefit)
Currently these only show the class name without the prefix, while assigned class does show the prefix.

From the 2.0 changes list:

Hull abbreviation for classes and ships shown in construction options on Shipyard and Industry tabs of Economics window.

[xenoscepter]

  At the time, when fighters are on ground, the might not even be using MSP and won't be using maintenance facilities, because of that.

Are you sure about that? When I tested recently fighters seemed to worked just fine using normal maintenance facilities…

Currently fighters work like normal ships when not in a hangar, so they require maint facilities and consume MSP like every other military ship. I think the suggestion would imply that fighters in a hangar would not use MSP at all, which would be more like VB6 but I think a rather poor idea for C# given the design goal of unifying the mechanics instead of adding exceptions.

I don't particularly like the idea of planetside hangars, as it doesn't add anything mechanically (removing MSP consumption would take away something mechanically, if anything) and doesn't really solve the problem as any defensive fighters will just be blown up by an attacking fleet when they do leave the hangars, wither GSFs or space fighters. I would rather see a more elegant solution to the GSF problem such as making GSFs into a ground unit class and unifying those mechanics.

 --- I'd like to see a planetside hangar personally, but not for defense of the planet it's on, so much as defense of the system it's in. As for fighters in it not using MSP, I think that's fine so long as the facilities themselves at least do. At any rate, the reason I want them for this and not "just use hangars lol" is that they wouldn't show up on sensors if planetside, so you could scatter these around a few planetoids / asteroids with a DSTS or two and have an effective anti-piracy network that can also respond to light attacks. Mechanically I see no reason these couldn't be reworked to allow missile bases as well, creating yet another way to protect a system and making invasion potentially that much more dangerous after the initial jump assault.