C# Suggestions

[Sebmono]

I would really love it if civies could build jump capable ships and not require stabilized jump points for inter-system trade/transport. This combined with a "no stabilization" game setting option would be very interesting to play with for me, although I'm guessing that NPRs would have a harder time managing their fleets and empires under this additional constraint.

[Borealis4x]

Instead of killing off excess populace, exceeding capacity for a planet should cause unrest and slow natural growth down to a trickle, with civilian colony ships naturally using it as a pick-up point to reflect the strong emigration push away from the overcrowded planet.

[TMaekler]

Thinking about "moveable jump point stabilisers", mostly for RP purposes. The idea is to construct stations that can transfer ships at jump points. Basically manual jump point stabilisers. Depending on their purposes, they can be equipped with RP modules like "Warp Point Communications Relay" (They basically allow ships to communicate with the empire directly through the relay, rather than having to jump to the other system, to deliver messages).

But also functional modules like:
a) Refuel Equipment
b) Maintenance Storage & Facilities
c) Recreation Facilities
etc.

I was wondering if we could get a new module that can act like the jump point stabilisation does, except it is build into a station. Such a ship could move to another jump point, but it would need to stay at a new jump point location for an amount x of days until it can provide the service of stabilising the jump point.

Additionally it would only allow allied ships to pass through, and, it could be destroyed. So new options for war and politics... .

Most of what you want here is achieved by putting a jump drive on a station and parking it at the jump point.

I think the only thing that can't be achieved with this is allowing Civilian traffic through the jump point, since they require a stabilized JP to travel through.

I thought that any station with a jump drive is capable to jump ships of its own kind, i.e. if I put a civilian jump drive in the station it could jump any civilian ship to its max jump size. Same with a military jump drive. So my idea would circumvent having two jump stations (one civilian, one military) on each jump point.

I also didn't want to have stations there which would need to get an overhaul every once and then...

Or did you mean that civilian companies can't use those stations?

[nuclearslurpee]

Or did you mean that civilian companies can't use those stations?

Yes. Such a station could be used for commercial ships (player-controlled) just fine, but without stabilizing the jump point civilian ships (AI-controlled) would not be able to function for interstellar transport. I think this is a big reason why we pretty rarely see players actually use jump stations - this, and the theoretical downside of stabilized jump points (the enemy can use them too) in practice doesn't matter very much, since NPRs usually have jump ships in their fleets anyways and a stabilized jump point can be defended as well as an unstabilized one, especially with the change to jump shock mechanics in 2.0.

[nakorkren]

This has come up before, so I don't know that mentioning it again with make it any more likely to happen, but...

I would LOVE to see customizable conditional orders (similar to how we have order templates). This would hugely increase the amount of automation available, but still make it feel like you're engaged in that automation because you have to create your own custom automation, if that makes sense. I understand that fully customizable standing orders is a big ask, as there's a lot of programming and debugging. Would it be possible to just get customization for standing orders that already exist and have numeric values?

As an example of why this is useful, in early game I usually have two survey ships in Sol that have a conditional order to return to refuel when they hit 50% fuel. Given that conditional order, you'd think they should never run out, because they spend half their fuel, then they come home. Except that someone moved home base, i.e. Earth moved on its orbit, and how it takes more than 50% of their fuel to get home, so they routinely run out of fuel. I can't fix this (other than tediously keeping an eye on them), because the conditional orders are all for 50% or LESS in the fuel take, i.e. 40%, 30%, etc. What I need is 60%, or maybe 70%. If the conditional orders were customizable, I could set that ot what ever number works for that particular system/area/situation.

[Garfunkel]

The idea itself has merit though I doubt its feasilibty, but the fix to your current problem is to have more fuel in your surveyors and/or better fuel efficiency in your engines. A surveyor should never run out of fuel because of orbital mechanics of Earth itself because the distances in inner system are minuscule compared to the outer system and the Oort cloud. Survey ships should always have low-power / high-efficiency engines to enable massive ranges, or you're asking for trouble.

[nuclearslurpee]

I would LOVE to see customizable conditional orders (similar to how we have order templates). This would hugely increase the amount of automation available, but still make it feel like you're engaged in that automation because you have to create your own custom automation, if that makes sense. I understand that fully customizable standing orders is a big ask, as there's a lot of programming and debugging. Would it be possible to just get customization for standing orders that already exist and have numeric values?

I would not love to see this, however the reason is not because it is a bad suggestion. Rather, if conditional orders are changed so that each one has a user-input number attached, the process of setting up conditional orders especially for multiple ships at once will become even more time-consuming and annoying. It is already a bit of a pain to give several survey ships the same standing orders - survey next five bodies, refuel at 20%, etc. etc.... it would be even more painful if I had to input the numbers every time for each ship.

I think for this kind of thing to work we also need standing order templates, so that once we have the numbers set to satisfaction it takes only one click for each other ship to replicate the orders. Even without this, having such templates would be very useful on their own.

[nakorkren]

Garfunkel: I came to that conclusion as well, and detuned the engines. I was just spoiled concerning survey ship speed coming off my last game and starting over in a new game.

Nuclearslurpee: I didn't make it clear in my original post, but I was assuming that setting the number would create a new standard order, i.e. we'd be able to edit the standing orders from the standing order list, ad they would stay that way until you edit them again, not have a pop-up each time you try to use one, which as you said would add a LOT of additional clicks to setting up new fleets orders. That is different from templates, which would save a complete set of standing orders, which would also be very nice!

[papent]

Being able to set default standing orders/conditional order on the class design screen. but i'm pretty sure that would be complex to do as it would involve ships having some notion of fleet orders.

[Migi]

Being able to set default standing orders/conditional order on the class design screen. but i'm pretty sure that would be complex to do as it would involve ships having some notion of fleet orders.

You could have a button/dropdown that overwrites the fleet's current standing/conditional orders with the s/co from a class within that fleet.
But thinking about it a bit more, that would just be a more complex way of having a set of saved s/co that you can load (like the current order templates).

[Garfunkel]

I would really love it if civies could build jump capable ships and not require stabilized jump points for inter-system trade/transport. This combined with a "no stabilization" game setting option would be very interesting to play with for me, although I'm guessing that NPRs would have a harder time managing their fleets and empires under this additional constraint.

I would not like this as the current situation allows me to control with 100% accuracy when civilians get access to a system. I know I could use the military restriction button but that is per system-basis. Though I admit that a completely no-stabilized-jump-point game would be interesting.

[Black]

Could we get a button that would set an individual fire control to not be involved in Fleet Fire at Will command? Some of my ships have specialized launcher and FC to launch various probes and I have to manually disable them every time I use Fleet Fire at Will command.

[Scandinavian]

I would really love it if civies could build jump capable ships and not require stabilized jump points for inter-system trade/transport. This combined with a "no stabilization" game setting option would be very interesting to play with for me, although I'm guessing that NPRs would have a harder time managing their fleets and empires under this additional constraint.

I would not like this as the current situation allows me to control with 100% accuracy when civilians get access to a system. I know I could use the military restriction button but that is per system-basis. Though I admit that a completely no-stabilized-jump-point game would be interesting.

From the next version you should be able to civilian-restrict individual jump points, no?

[Sebmono]

I would really love it if civies could build jump capable ships and not require stabilized jump points for inter-system trade/transport. This combined with a "no stabilization" game setting option would be very interesting to play with for me, although I'm guessing that NPRs would have a harder time managing their fleets and empires under this additional constraint.

I would not like this as the current situation allows me to control with 100% accuracy when civilians get access to a system. I know I could use the military restriction button but that is per system-basis. Though I admit that a completely no-stabilized-jump-point game would be interesting.

From the next version you should be able to civilian-restrict individual jump points, no?

I thought so too, but I might be misremembering the change that was being added. As a compromise alternative, maybe if we were able to make versions of civilian ships ourselves which they would then use, then this would.be I'm the hands of the player to control. Although it wouldn't change things for NPRs, so less than optimal.

[gpt3]

Would it be possible to have factory-built fighters and space stations use their classes' ship naming theme instead of the default "$CLASS_NAME $NUMBER"?

Right now, if I build a few dozen fighters from my fighter factories and wish to give them roleplay names (e.g. Laura), then I have to either:

• Manually name them one-by-one.
• Use the bulk "rename all" tool. However, this also changes the names of existing fighters.