Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread

[alex_brunius]

- All magazines, fuel tanks and maintenance to be given a transfer rate. Ie msp per minute / litres per minute with civilian versions having a decidedly worse rate. These rates would then be used to make such transfers take time rather than the instantaneous transfers done today.

That´s something I would love to see.

I really like tension of carrier fighters reloading against the clock of approaching enemies, so having this apply to all refueling / resupplying / ammo transfer too would be extremely cool.

The only problem is having it scale with size in a way that makes sense. It should for example not take 3 min to refuel a 5,000 liter fighter fueltank but also not 48 hours to refuel a 50,000,000 liter mega carrier fueltank ( both using the same liter/min speed ).

[Whitecold]

You could use a limit per tank/storage unit/magazine, with the limit also depends on the size of the installation. Transferring between ships, the lower total limit is used, for planets it is the maximum rate for the ship.
So if your carrier with 100kl/min is refueling a 2kl/min fighter, the cap is 2'000l, but 50 fighters can be refueled simultaneously. If your supertanker or a planet refuels the carrier, the cap is 100kl/min.

[alex_brunius]

Another option would be that fuel tanks are turned into components designed just like magazines, with the option to spend more/less space on refueling mechanism ( also added to magazines as a separate factor ).

This would allow for more flexible sized fuel tanks and for you to design many small tanks with high transfer speed for vehicles that need to refuel quickly in parallel ( like a carrier refueling many small fighters ).

[Whitecold]

Another suggestion from me, I'd like if in the design window only items were shown you have all the technologies to design. While experienced players probably know about spoiler tech, newcomers won't and it would make it possible to add new spoiler gimmicks without everyone immediately knowing something new is in.

[Whitecold]

Some suggestions for shipyards:
Retool costs should be based only on the cost of new components used, similar to refit costs, except there shouldn't be a size penalty, as you're building new ships. So if you have a new freighter design with just new engines, only the price of the engines is used as cost of the ship for calculating the retool costs.
It would also be good if the expansion could be done by continual expansion to a target size. So if I want to upgrade 7k yards to 15k I don't have to either keep an eye on the size to not end up with oversized yards or have to go through multiple steps to reach the desired size.

[swarm_sadist]

Some suggestions for shipyards:
Retool costs should be based only on the cost of new components used, similar to refit costs, except there shouldn't be a size penalty, as you're building new ships. So if you have a new freighter design with just new engines, only the price of the engines is used as cost of the ship for calculating the retool costs.
It would also be good if the expansion could be done by continual expansion to a target size. So if I want to upgrade 7k yards to 15k I don't have to either keep an eye on the size to not end up with oversized yards or have to go through multiple steps to reach the desired size.

Expanding on this, have it so that ships can be retrofitted while still being built. Lots of battleship hulls in WW2 were converted on the fly into carriers midway through construction. If the ship is 1% built, then changing the ship class should be rather cheap and with very few limits in terms of size and cost; if the ship is 99% done, then there should be the same cost and penalties associated with normal retrofitting.

Also, a repair component for ships. A repair ship capable of repairs and overhauls following my fleet would be a welcome addition.

[IanD]

Allow standard Freighters to transport troops and missiles etc but they can only load and unload from planets with a commercial spaceport. The amount unloaded or loaded per day could  be governed by the level of commercial spaceport.

Ian

[waresky]

Civilian Officer-potential Assignement windows : FILTERING on : UNASSIGNED Planets ONLY. (now are ALL Planets with or without mines,Colonyes)

The lists of Planets become very boring, and ive "only" 121 System in Map.

[Whitecold]

FAC's should be assignable to squadrons, to make management easier.

[Vandermeer]

FAC's should be assignable to squadrons, to make management easier.

If you are fit with the management tab however (task force window), you can have really easy control already, including such quick squadron launches. Slightly better than the fighter window even imo, because you do organization and orders in the same window, and can easily split and connect groups.

[Whitecold]

Thanks, never thought of the fleet management to handle carrier operations.
Two interface suggestions.
Could the classes in the design window and fleets in the fleet management be handled in a list instead of a drop-down box, so one can see them all at once? Also in the design window that the sorting option is remembered, right now it always jumps back.

[davidr]

If survivors from a friendly NPR wreck are rescued they are classed as POW's by the game system even though they are from a friendly race and interrogation takes place once landed

My suggestion is that I should be able to return these survivors to their homeworld or another of their colonies to be able to earn "Brownie points" from the grateful NPR.They should not be tagged as POW's.


There is at present no mechanism to differentiate friendly survivors humanitarily rescued from Hostile POW's captured and interrogated.

DavidR

[Witty]

A repost from my earlier topic, as starting a whole new thread was the wrong move on my part


This is just a small, minor suggestion.   Assuming that NPRs generate with the same government variety options as you do, showing us the government type of an NPR once your relations have become positive enough would be a nice addition RP wise.   Not just would it give a glimpse into the society of an NPR, it would also allow for a bit more tactical choice diplomacy wise.   Might not want to befriend the fascist NPR empire and their high xenophobia against everyone else.

[Haji]

It would be nice to be able to rename individual stars in case of a binary (or larger systems) stars.

[Whitecold]

Battle Management of anything larger than a few ships is currently a micromanagement nightmare.
In my opinion the biggest problem is that combat is managed by player ship. You pick a ships and decide what it fires on. However usually I don't care which one of my ship fires on what, the only thing that matters is how many missiles are assigned to each target, not the launch platform.
My proposal is the implementation of a 'Battle Management' screen/tab. Fire Controls can be set to Battle Management System similar to setting a PD mode; once set they are available.
Battle Management screen would show contacts only. Here a priority and a number of missiles can be assigned to each contact, all contacts, a specific class, and then the BMS does its thing, using the Fire Controls to fire the requested number of missiles in priority order at the targets.
Refinements would include to drop the priority of ships that get crippled, and options to spread fire or concentrate it among equal priority targets, and how the firing platform is selected (Distance, remaining ordnance, ...).
Multiple channels could be implemented to allow firing anti fighter missiles and heavy shipkillers at the same time without mixing up the targets.
The current combat management would still be available, for those cases where the player wants something very specific.