Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
The Academy / Re: Task Force Training and 'edge cases'
« Last post by vorpal+5 on Today at 12:22:47 AM »
ok thanks. I was concerned by non-combat parasites aboard carriers.
The Academy / Re: Task Force Training and 'edge cases'
« Last post by TheDeadlyShoe on Yesterday at 10:56:51 PM »
The slowest to respond ship in a tg determines movement delay. Firing delay is on a per ship basis though. 

Docked parasites don't matter.

If you are bringing tankers etc. with your battlefleet, consider creating a militarized tanker. It doesnt have to be military, but armor, CIWS, speed, and training is nice in a pinch.  Personally, i usually prefer to extend ship range a little and/or create forward fuel dumps.
The Academy / Re: So how do you ...
« Last post by TT on Yesterday at 05:43:59 PM »
One factor that advocates for refit vs scrap and rebuild is tha you retain the training level of the crew when you refit.  There are times when I build a special training version of a ship and then refit it to keep the training level.
The Academy / Shooting in the dark
« Last post by vorpal+5 on Yesterday at 11:58:39 AM »
Wanting to recon a suspected alien world at a mere 22b of a jumppoint, I launched a drone against a waypoint1 nearby the planet position. The drone has a range of 38b and an active sensor. And then, as time passed, it did not move at all from its original location, even if the original message was that it was targeting WP1 with something like 90 days of travel time.

So I'm confused. I had no active sensor or anything around the WP, but it should not be a problem? I tried again in Sol, both under coverage of an AS and outside, and it worked, against 2 waypoints. That's a mystery...
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by sloanjh on Yesterday at 09:00:45 AM »
The gameplay reason is to avoid having very large hierarchies filled with formations with no commanders and relatively junior officers at the top.

An alternative that crossed my mind while asking the question would be to have some sort of "time in grade" requirement for promotion, with a game mechanic that allows (but penalizes) "out of zone" promotions by the player.  I didn't mention it because I couldn't think of a way to make it work, but since that's one of your concerns I think I'll throw it out there and see if anything sticks.... 

The idea is to let players quickly move good commanders up in rank (they are good commanders, after all), but have resistance to that movement from experience/political realities (to avoid the failure mode you're concerned about).  A few thoughts:

1)  Have an "experience/time in grade" clock, which sets the pace for normal advancement.  The idea is that a brand new Captain will have lower skills (read bonuses) than one who's been commanding a major combatant for 2 years.  So a newly promoted officer would get penalties to his/her command bonuses that would decay away over time.  If an officer got promoted up the chain too quickly, these penalties would compound and destroy the utility of said rapid advancement.  This is why navies have time-in-grade requirements for promotion; to avoid too-rapid promotion.

To be clear, the time-in-grade clock would be compared to a "can promote" duration (e.g. 5 years); if the officer has been in grade longer a promotion would be allowed and the clock would reset.  There might also be a "auto-promote" duration (e.g. 7 years) which would force promotion for political officers.

2)  Allow modifiers to the clock.  The big example here is battle experience: every battle where the officer was in command of an element might advance the clock by a fixed time; if the officer was serving in a staff role that time would be lower (I think this is what the medal mechanic is supposed to do in the current system).  In the absence of combat, a position in command of a ship or on a fleet staff might also run the clock faster than other positions; "unassigned" might run the clock more slowly.

3)  If you go down this road, I actually think you might want two clocks: one for experience and one for time in grade.  That way the political bonus could affect how quickly officers are promoted (time in grade clock would run more quickly for high political bonus), without running their clock faster on the experience front.

4)  Ageod's American Civil War (I & II) handles this in a cool way, except I don't see how to port the mechanic into Aurora.  When generals win battles, they rise or fall on the seniority chart for that rank, and occasionally become promotable.  The trick is that you can only promote the most senior general at a rank without paying a political penalty (negative effect on National Morale IIRC which affects productivity).  In Aurora terms, if you promote a politically un-connected officer past one with a high political rating, you would pay a price in terms of your empire's efficiency.  I can't think of such a morale rating in Aurora, though, to hook this into. If you can figure out a good penalty, then you could just allow out-of-zone promotions in the current system and not worry about the clock stuff discussed above.  Hmmm - maybe a penalty to command (and/or other) ratings that decays away with time, to abstract away inexperience and/or lack of legitimacy in the minds of the crew and/or superiors. If you did this, the decay should only happen when the officer is assigned - that defeats the exploit of rapid-promoting early, then putting the commander on a shelf while the penalty decays away.

Actually, now that I think of it, AACW is trying to do exactly the same abstraction that you are: a small number (~100?) of exceptional commanders in a sea of unnamed officers.  They abstract it through their "command points" abstraction, where bigger formations get an overall efficiency hit if they don't have a (named) commander with enough command points to manage the formation.  So the highest ranking general at a rank might only have a seniority of 3 (low numbers are higher rank).

5)  Not an idea for the above change, but something that just occurred to me: in chain-of-command succession, it seems like named officers always win over unnamed.  In other words, if I've got 6 ships in a TG, and only one has a named commander, that commander is in command of the TG even though there's 5 other unnamed ones that might be senior to the named one.

Like I said - I don't see a way to make this (out of zone promotions) work in Aurora, but it seems like a good way to reduce the burden of the "officer pyramid" if you can.  To be clear, the problem I think this solves is that the number of officers required to get to a new highest-level rank grows exponentially, so players end up tracking and assigning tons of low-level officers to support the much smaller set of captains and admirals.  It would be nice if the highest rank (read organizational skill) available in a fleet was more closely related to experience than to raw numbers.

Another thought: It would be nice if there were a mechanism where named officers could be "noticed" at all levels and have stats rolled at that point (or if the game managed unnamed officers behind the scenes with stats already rolled, but didn't display them to the player until some rank  threshold is reached).  This probability could then be skewed to let players focus more on the higher ranks, e.g. all admirals would be named, 1/2 the captains, and only 10% of the junior officers.  This would also solve the "problem" with named commanders always out-ranking unnamed commanders - if the ships with unnamed commanders had an actual commander assigned and displayed to the player, then one of their commanders might end up senior.  (You'd need to set it up so that popping a named commander onto a ship then removing him didn't change the unnamed commander to prevent players churning unnamed commanders to unnaturally get low ranking ones in command of ships.)  Even more interesting would be to have the unnamed officer stats actually affect combat, without the player being able to know the modifiers that are being applied. :)

C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by King-Salomon on Yesterday at 06:49:34 AM »
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=9679. msg105668#msg105668 date=1513511071
HQs will need to be on the same planet.

Like most of it :)

but what I am wondering - for ships it is possible to get a bonus even if the ships are in an other sol system from there parent "HQ" - ground-units get it only when they are at the same planet?

Maybe it would be great if there could be some kind of "communication unit" which allows a high-class HQ to be in communication with a "System-HQ"/Army-HQ (maybe a new installation, costs 2400) which represents army-military staff for the whole sol-system (but not outside the sol-system)

the boni from that could be restricted to non-fighting skills as in a battle short communication is needed (on the other hand, fighting boni are allowed atm for ships)

just my thinking. . .  it seems just inconsistently to allow ships boni from outside but not for ground-units
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Yesterday at 05:44:31 AM »
Great stuff Steve!  Had a few questions regarding HQ/commander bonuses:

Will units at the bottom of a command hierarchy receive the full bonuses of each HQ commander in that hierarchy or will they receive fractions of each HQ commander's bonuses? Also, will there be different types of bonuses for an HQ leader - say more strategic bonuses for higher ranking leaders and more tactical bonuses for lower ranked leaders?  Also, at what point (distance) will the command hierarchy be broken (will all units need to be on the same planet,system,sector, etc)?  Finally, if an HQ unit is damaged, does it still provide its full bonus(es)?

HQs will need to be on the same planet. If an HQ unit is destroyed, the commander will be killed if it is the only HQ unit in the formation. You can have multiple HQ units within a single formation, in which case, the chance of the commander being killed is equal to 1 / Number of HQs. If there are no HQ units remaining, you lose the commander benefit for that formation and for any formations lower in the hierarchy.

I should have mentioned at some point that an HQ unit will be needed to assign a commander to a formation :)

Lower level units will gain bonuses from higher level units in the hierarchy, albeit at reducing benefits for higher levels. So a very high point in the hierarchy will provide a very small bonus to a lot of units.

I haven't decided yet on if there will be any new bonus types.  I will tackle that when I get to the ground combat code.
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Yesterday at 05:35:52 AM »
A couple of questions:
Do those limits include the HQ itself?

Can we get integer multiples between each size? (Currently it's 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2.5, 5, 4, 4 - Which just seems odd. Especially as a multiple of 2 feels inefficient.)

Everything up to 20k is assumed to be for a single formation, or small group of formations, so I have added a variety of sizes (some players may want different size base formations). 50k+ is intended for brigades, divisions and higher. The size of the HQ component is fixed at 500 tons (and therefore the same cost) from 50k, so that should be fine. If you have a division that is 150k, use the 250k HQ for example. There would be no difference in cost for a 150k HQ.

However, a formation cannot be attached to another formation with an equivalent or lower command rating, so is there is still a reason not to select the highest possible command rating.
The Academy / Re: So how do you ...
« Last post by Paul M on Yesterday at 02:44:38 AM »
Destroying the PDC...there are two ways to do that.  One removes the PDC with no wreck and the other (Destroy) leaves a wreck in 6.10 (the version I use).  It may have changed, but I destroyed a PDC by accident and then was able to salvage the wreck it was the first action my salvager did.

Refit is something that you should do when the ships get minor updates.  If you are basically rebuilding the ship you are often better off to scrap the ship and build it new.  This gives you the components from the old ship that you can then either scrap or reuse.  The whole scrap and rebuild can be astonishingly fast, especially if a lot of major components get recycled.  The Spaceframe Renewal Program the NCC launched did a great job and the ships were back in service quickly.

Where Refit really sucked was in updating my PDCs...there the cost and time of the action was greater than a newly constructed PDC.  If engines are getting changed I'd almost be tempted to scarp the ship and rebuild it because I find Galacite in short supply and being able to recover from the old engines yields a fair amount of the mineral.  But as with many things if that makes sense for you depends on your exact boundary conditions.
The Academy / Task Force Training and 'edge cases'
« Last post by vorpal+5 on Yesterday at 12:13:36 AM »
Having seen the virtue of having some decent TFT, I started to question myself on that: as all ships, even civilians have TFT, are civilians ships within a TG under combat slowing its reaction, by reducing average TFT? Should I train also my civilian tankers?
What about boarded fighters? I have non armed fighters used for various utility roles. Are they factored in the average TFT?
Is the average weighted by mass? My 30% trained carrier counting the same weight as a 125-tons pinnace?

So for now, I'm training everyone. It uses fuel though... So I would gladly like to have more precisions on TFT  :)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10