C# Suggestions

[Bluebreaker]

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.

You can uncheck the "Select Random Name from Theme" which almost does what you want when you use "rename all"

[nuclearslurpee]

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.

Seconded!

You can uncheck the "Select Random Name from Theme" which almost does what you want when you use "rename all"

This only works if you want the names in the same order as the name theme, which is a pretty severe restriction - especially since many of the themes have names listed in alphabetical order which looks silly if you don't select at random.

[Kamilo]

A method to transport minerals from one colony to another would be pretty nice. It could work like the already existing civilian contracts.

The demanded minerals could be set on one colony. This could work like demand x amount of mineral y.
The colony which provides these minerals could be set on supply x amount of mineral y.

The already existing civilian lines will transport the mineral from one colony to another.

Possible problems are maybe negative difference of the minerals on the supplying planet and message like mineral y can't be loaded etc. Through the continuous mining this shouldn't happened if amounts are set correctly. Demanding/supplying the mineral on more than one colony shouldn't be a problem either, or not more than with infrastructure.

What do you think of this new function?

[mtm84]

I believe you can already set this up using standing orders and setting mineral limits at colonies, it just requires a little more front end management to set it up.  I don't think Steve would be interested in letting the player automate such a system outright though.

[nuclearslurpee]

I believe you can already set this up using standing orders and setting mineral limits at colonies, it just requires a little more front end management to set it up.  I don't think Steve would be interested in letting the player automate such a system outright though.

I think what is being requested is a way to have the civilian freighter lines handle this instead of player-built freighters, which wouldn't be unwelcome though maybe since we have mass drivers it is not very necessary?

[Droll]

I believe you can already set this up using standing orders and setting mineral limits at colonies, it just requires a little more front end management to set it up.  I don't think Steve would be interested in letting the player automate such a system outright though.

I think what is being requested is a way to have the civilian freighter lines handle this instead of player-built freighters, which wouldn't be unwelcome though maybe since we have mass drivers it is not very necessary?

Mass drivers help but what I want is to have the option of having the civilian sector handle the interstellar transportation of minerals and focus the state transports on moving critical military infrastructure.

So IMO it is pretty necessary though my time on this forum has revealed there are plenty who don't agree.

[Kamilo]

I believe you can already set this up using standing orders and setting mineral limits at colonies, it just requires a little more front end management to set it up.  I don't think Steve would be interested in letting the player automate such a system outright though.

I think what is being requested is a way to have the civilian freighter lines handle this instead of player-built freighters, which wouldn't be unwelcome though maybe since we have mass drivers it is not very necessary?

Mass drivers help but what I want is to have the option of having the civilian sector handle the interstellar transportation of minerals and focus the state transports on moving critical military infrastructure.

So IMO it is pretty necessary though my time on this forum has revealed there are plenty who don't agree.

It is true that mass drivers help with local transport of minerals. Interstellar transport has to done manual (the order has to be set up to be be made kind of automatic). It would be nice to have even though it is fully understandable to not like/want it. In situations where you want to transport minerals from a contested the civilian lines would probably come to its limits, plus the rp aspect of it is respectively important.

[Droll]

I believe you can already set this up using standing orders and setting mineral limits at colonies, it just requires a little more front end management to set it up.  I don't think Steve would be interested in letting the player automate such a system outright though.

I think what is being requested is a way to have the civilian freighter lines handle this instead of player-built freighters, which wouldn't be unwelcome though maybe since we have mass drivers it is not very necessary?

Mass drivers help but what I want is to have the option of having the civilian sector handle the interstellar transportation of minerals and focus the state transports on moving critical military infrastructure.

So IMO it is pretty necessary though my time on this forum has revealed there are plenty who don't agree.

It is true that mass drivers help with local transport of minerals. Interstellar transport has to done manual (the order has to be set up to be be made kind of automatic). It would be nice to have even though it is fully understandable to not like/want it. In situations where you want to transport minerals from a contested the civilian lines would probably come to its limits, plus the rp aspect of it is respectively important.

Yes it makes sense that civies would only really transport minerals in the event a "core" sector gets established where routes are all well defended and secure. That's what's nice about it as it lets the player focus on the areas that really need attention even in a large game.

[mtm84]

I fear I did not fully understand what was being asked, and that's my fault. I think it would be a good addition if we had a mechanism for telling Civilian ships to move minerals around in the same manner that we can ask for installations to be moved.  This still limits Civilians to built gates but that's nothing new and a reasonable trade off for "free" transport.  Might not be exactly fully automated but would be inline with a currently existing mechanism.

[unkfester]

 I think it would be a good addition if we had a mechanism for telling Civilian ships to move minerals around in the same manner that we can ask for installations to be moved.  I like this idea

[skoormit]

I often give fleet orders that consume more than 80% of a fleet's fuel before refueling.
This causes a lot of not-useful Low Fuel messages in the Events window.
I can suppress those messages for all ships of a given design by marking that design as a Tanker and specifying 0 minimum fuel.
But that's overkill. I don't want to never get those messages for a given design; I just don't want to get those messages when I have knowingly given orders that will cause a fleet to drop low on fuel before refueling.

So, suggestion: A per-fleet option to disable the Low Fuel event.

• A "Disable low fuel warning until refuelled" checkbox on the fleet Miscellaneous tab would work.
• By default, the box is unchecked. (Even for fleets detached from a fleet with the box checked.)
• When checked, the box remains checked until the fleet completes any Refuel order.

This seems like a small amount of coding (to someone who hasn't actually seen the code) for a non-trivial QOL improvement.
One new fleet property bound to one new checkbox bound to one new DB field.
One new condition when checking for the Low Fuel event.
One new statement when completing a Refuel order.

[nuclearslurpee]

I am once again asking for your financial support Steve to remove the caps on numbers of starting installations at race creation.

Mainly because I'm really just tired of playing high population/high starting tech games where the NPRs are not any threat because they can only develop up to maybe Ion Drive tech, if that, because they are capped at 50 labs no matter what their starting population is (or for that matter the difficulty level - if I want a difficult game, shouldn't the difficulty level...work?). Frankly I cannot see any reason for a cap on the numbers of any installation which is proportional to population - minimums perhaps, but not caps.

Please, Steve, the NPRs need the help. Won't someone think of the poor NPRs? 

[Vandermeer]

I am once again asking for your financial support Steve to remove the caps on numbers of starting installations at race creation.
[...]
Please, Steve, the NPRs need the help. Won't someone think of the poor NPRs? 

-----
I also have one suggestion regarding civilian tech advance. Whenever you reach a new age of engine tech, civilians seem to adapt it pretty rapidly. Given that the player needs additional time to both research the new tech as engines, and then build and train ships with it, I don't quite like that all the pioneer work is suddenly falling into the hands of citizen science.
In short, I would just like to see like an era of 'secret military tech' where your government and navy actually leads while the economy catches up with the solar panels and eye surgery lasers etc. some (potentially many) years later. Just an RP thing I guess.

[Steve Walmsley]

I am once again asking for your financial support Steve to remove the caps on numbers of starting installations at race creation.

Mainly because I'm really just tired of playing high population/high starting tech games where the NPRs are not any threat because they can only develop up to maybe Ion Drive tech, if that, because they are capped at 50 labs no matter what their starting population is (or for that matter the difficulty level - if I want a difficult game, shouldn't the difficulty level...work?). Frankly I cannot see any reason for a cap on the numbers of any installation which is proportional to population - minimums perhaps, but not caps.

Please, Steve, the NPRs need the help. Won't someone think of the poor NPRs? 

The 50 RL limit is intended to avoid making research too fast for a player in the early game, but can be overridden. I've removed the limit for NPRs in v2.0.

[Steve Walmsley]

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.

Currently, the name for a ship is chosen at the point you decide to build it and that naming step doesn't exist for fighters or space stations. Therefore, when you build a fighter using fighter factories or a space station using construction factories in v2.0, it will run the same code that generates a suggested name for a new ship in the Shipyard tab. In other words, v2.0 will use the class theme for naming fighters and space stations.