Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Jorgen_CAB

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 47
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Loki-B class CQB Corvette
« on: January 22, 2018, 04:59:57 PM »
The easiest way to break the rules and overwhelm missile defences are simply to make several versions of the same missile.

If you load Missile (A, B, C, D, E) and fire them with the same missile fire control they each become their own salvo.

C# Aurora / Re: Research changes planned?
« on: January 20, 2018, 06:07:09 AM »
This may be slightly off-topic (although it's still semi-related), but I've been doing some thinking on this topic lately and... Is there really even that much of a historical justification for a tall empire being capable of truly succeeding as a long-term thing? Why are people so obsessed with this idea across strategy games in general? It seems like a "tall" empire wouldn't even be an empire at all. I think of "Tall" as being more of a transitional state between fully exploiting Sol and conquering the galaxy more than I do as something I'd want to continue indefinitely.

Even if you fix science so that research rates are independent of empire size, the bigger empire should still be at an advantage even with the implementation of tech spread.
Aside from some geopolitical factors (e.g a coalition attacking the large empire on several fronts) and geographical factors (e.g tall empire has nothing but bottleneck systems bordering you), I don't see a scenario in which the sprawl empire doesn't roll over the tall one every single time or at least win the long game. People seem to have this fantasy where that's not the case, or that it shouldn't be "in the name of realism".

This is not how things actually work in reality, if it did then Earth would be governed by one super power by now. No... nothing is really binary and games such as Aurora do not model most of the things that impact any nations ability to influence another. Those you have to do with RP in this game.

The condition you ascribe to any power only exist in games. In real life no one would aspire to be either tall or wide, that would be a state one would be in for some reason or another in comparison with something else.

You sometimes need abstract mechanics to sort of simulate the more dynamic and complex part of life that is difficult to represent in details in a game. Things like politics, philosophies, social factors and the like. There always is a balance between what is fun and what is realistic. In most cases this is due to games allowing the player to simply control too many things and allowing the player to be too many functions at the same time that would otherwise not be able to cooperate as efficiently in reality, thus producing rather binary results that are not even remotely realistic.

Aurora is no exemption from this but the difference between Aurora and most other games is that it is a framework for RP which is why it allow you that freedom to decide when you want to restrict certain part of the game or introduce real life politics, unrest or even revolutions into your games.

This does not mean we can improve om some of the basic ideas such as a changing research or economy to make them less binary by nature but still retain allot of freedom.

C# Aurora / Re: Research changes planned?
« on: January 19, 2018, 02:16:25 PM »
It would be quite interesting to have diminishing returns for throwing resources at a particular research line... but to some extent that is already taken care of by exponentially increasing research cost, in a mechanically simple and elegant way.

It does not work well for reducing the gap much between small and low industry empires though because you still need the same amount of research and labs increase in effect linear not according to a logarithmic scale.

With direct diminishing return you can stave of the worst kind of pure specialization and speed ahead of the opposition with raw industrial power. The current system have a huge snowball effect which is not quite a realistic model.

I thin kit would be more interesting if you had diminishing returns and the administration level could sort of change the curve a bit instead of limiting the amount of labs on each scientist. This way you both encourage spreading the science and focusing it on those with the best administrative skill. Simply allow specialization to double the science output and leave it at that, no extra fuss needed for that.

I also like the scientists on ships exploring being able to provide research bonuses somehow.

And of course, no instant upgrade of stuff, that is only perpetuating the snowball effect. The more complex and bigger a society is the more costly it will become to spread innovation to all corners of said society.

I also would no mind less huge leap in research in general, quite often one level feels very superior to the level before.

The Academy / Re: Commander logistic in a fleet of freighters
« on: January 18, 2018, 10:06:03 AM »
If only a few of the freighters have a commander with logistic, how the speed up in loading/unloading is computed? The top level commander gives his logistic, this is averaged, or everybody wait for the slowest ship?

I'm pretty sure it is only the Task Force commander that give bonuses in this instance. But I'm not 100% sure it even works.

C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: January 17, 2018, 10:41:33 AM »
Doesn't this already exist with the delay, repeat, and cycle orders? It's not indefinite, but you could just set the repeat counter to 999 or something.

There are two problems with this.

1. It only works one time, after an order recycle it ignores the delay setting.

2. You often want to set wait periods in more than one place during long patrol orders for different reasons.

You can set up a long patrol now but it will have to be as one order. As soon as you hit recycle it does not remember the order delay. It would also be good if you could specify it with a drop down selection menu in seconds, minutes, hours or days. It would also be good it the delay is viewable in the order window so you can easily see it. The best way would be if you inserted it as if it was a separate delay order into the queue

It is quite fiddly to do it right now.

C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: January 17, 2018, 02:21:07 AM »
I have one request I really would like to be added to C# Aurora that would be a very nice quality of life for RP purposes.

Make it possible to set up proper patrols with ships. With this I mean an ability to have ships sit and wait at a specific location for a number of days/seconds.

It is especially important if I want ships to stay in port for a few days to rest the crew so they can continue patrolling after visiting friends and families, this way I can set up perpetuating patrols and only remove them for maintenance. Even better if you could save patrol routs. It will also make it easier if you want to set up commercial routes and have them rest their crew as well for RP reasons. But mainly this is for setting up patrols with regular patrol ships that you don't want or need long deployment times for. It does feel a bit immersion breaking that you put like 1-2 years deployment time on a local patrol ship just because it is tedious to rest the crew after a few months.

It could also be good if possible to set up fighter patrols from carriers so you can dock, wait for a specified time and then start over the patrol pattern.

Thanks for all your hard work!

C# Aurora / Re: Research changes planned?
« on: January 16, 2018, 08:15:09 PM »
I'm not sure I see why it would take longer to upgrade mines or factories in a large but compact empire rather than a small sprawling empire? But you did inspire me to think about an alternative, that each such change has a fixed implementation time (lets say 3 months) irrespective of empire size, before the gain happens. And during that implementation time wealth is consumed based on total number of facilities being upgraded?

So the time to implement for a large empire is the same as for a small empire, but it costs a lot more wealth.

Did I say it would take longer in a more compact empire than a more spread out one. I said it would be based on some algorithm based on whatever parameter that would impact the rate it would take to upgrade.  ;)

Adding an additional Wealth cost seem pretty appropriate as well as a slightly diminished capacity during the upgrade in the beginning.

C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: January 16, 2018, 06:20:43 PM »
IIRC Mothballing did exist in the early days (it certainly was there in the SA antecedent).

Steve removed it because of the problem of a perceived exploit by building directly into mothballs, resulting in the capability of surging huge (albeit inexperienced) fleets in short order without paying the maintenance in the intervening years.  This could result in very large unprotected empires, which could in a matter of months mobilise truly stupendous fleets for offence,  overwhelm small empires and then mothball the lot again. 

I think that this was more of a problem with the Starfire environment because of the relative ease of refitting to more modern tech, whereas Aurora refitting is a lot more restrictive, and more resource intensive.

Yes, I know it did exist before but I don't think this would be a problem due to exactly what you say. It wold be a huge amount of waste of resources to build huge amount of ships only to mothball them unless you know there will be a war in a decent short time frame. The cost to refit old designs will be very expensive and time consuming.

But mothballing part of a standing fleet as a reserve could be a good strategic option. You actually might want to mothball older designs rather than refit them. Even older fleets can become decent platforms with only a few rudimentary refits or even as is. A missile frigate can be quite useful with just new modern missiles and a refit to their targeting system.

Advanced Tactical Command Academy / Re: Freighter Modules
« on: January 16, 2018, 02:45:19 PM »
I always imagined cargo transport in space more like trains rather than trucks as it is right now. Each wagon would be a small module and you could then add more or less an unlimited number of modules. You could then add a number of engine section based on the speed you would like the whole thing to be transported in.

Transports would be completely automated, no point in a crew. I think you would rather send out a repair and support crew to the ship if something happens during its travel to its destination.

C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: January 16, 2018, 02:35:46 PM »
Some simple mothballing functionality would be nice. The ship would only cost roughly 1/5 regular maintenance and take up roughly 1/5 of a normal ship for maximum hull size.

The downside should be that it takes five times to start up the ship from a regular overhaul and you would have to start it up with fresh crew.

Seems fair to me.

C# Aurora / Re: Research changes planned?
« on: January 16, 2018, 01:47:57 PM »
While I would applaud the realism of having a time/cost to roll out new tech, there is a danger of horrible micro-management. I imagine we all remember the tedium in other 4x games of researching "Mining 3" and then having to click on every planet in the empire to upgrade their level 2 mines to level 3 mines. No thank you.

So any suggestions here would need to be automatic for me. I can't think of an easy to way to do that without adding a whole load of extra calculations and mechanics for Steve to have to implement.

As a simple example, if you have a time lag for implementation of a new tech is that centered on your capital, or where the tech is researched? Is implementation solely based on distance? If so is it modified by engine speed? Are new facilities automatically going to be built with the new tech or the local tech?

Steve have commented on this before and he would not want to have something complicated or something that cause micromanagement.

Something simple would be a tech level on each category for the empire and when you increase to a new level the time for implementation would scale with some algorithm based on number of colonies and population that carry installation of that technology, or some such mechanic. Then that would decide the time it take to implement the new technology. Under this time you first start with a penalty of -15% and then end up with the +20% you get for the new tech (if that is the increase) slowly over time.

This would produce a more costly implementation for larger empires and less costly for smaller empires. It would be automatic and easy to implement since the end result is an empire wide modifier to all colonies.

You could make the modifiers time stamp individual for each colony based on an algorithm which would only add one extra parameter per colony.

C# Aurora / Re: Research changes planned?
« on: January 15, 2018, 09:52:20 AM »
I think he means more in the sense of stuff that literally is just an arbitrary game balance decision, like the flat research penalty in Stellaris.

You can view such mechanics as an abstracted way of penalize a bigger empire from having technologies reach out to all of their colonies everywhere.

A smaller empire will need much less effort to implement new technologies from a logistical and infrastructure standpoint. Then there is also the fact that the larger a bureaucracy become the more resources it need to support by even more bureaucracy.

C# Aurora / Re: Research changes planned?
« on: January 15, 2018, 09:44:04 AM »
For some things the global research makes sense, like Military technology where all the steps of distribution are pretty accurately modeled in game ( need to make racial techs + design ships + retool shipyards + build actual ships ) before the new tech is out in the field.

I also think it makes fairly decent sense in situations like Civilian liners that won't put new tech into production until it's replacing decommissioned ships ( might need a few tweaks to be perfect ).

But I do agree that it doesn't make a whole lot sense how all your mines and factories even in the fringe systems instantly upgrade overnight after completing research.

Diminishing returns I think would be a great idea to give smaller empires a better chance to be high tech too, and prevent massive empires being able to brute force research by just throwing hundreds of labs at all problems at once.

It would also be interesting to be able to pick some quality vs quantity approach to your academies ( either crank out more low quality leaders or fewer high quality leaders ) in the same spirit.

Yes, the way military technology is researched and implemented is realistic and my main concern was exactly what you also pointed to, the ones that have en immediate effect on game-play. These technologies should have a similar system to military just a bit more automated because it is not part of the core game-play.

C# Aurora / Re: Research changes planned?
« on: January 15, 2018, 01:37:32 AM »
I don't like a global research system because first of all it is unrealistic and not fun.

To increase decision making I would instead propose that each area have dedicated labs and the more points you put into one project it will have diminishing return. You could allow labs over several planets to cooperate at some penalty.

You should then have just one page which have all your labs (with locations) so you easily could assign them, you should not do it per planet.

This could also be coupled with a system of research needing to get into society as well and not just instantly upgrade everything which just allow for the snowball effect to grow larger which is contradictory to how technology distribute through a real society.

C# Aurora / Re: Colony Automation
« on: January 15, 2018, 12:51:56 AM »
This really only caters to, again, a specific roleplay. What if I'm playing a hive mind? Or an incredibly autocratic society?

To expand, right now you can RP anything. If you want to say that corporations, for instance, play a major role in the defense of the empire (something I did in the one AAR I wrote up) then you can. The fact that you control them is unrelated to the RP aspect. It might be nice if there were some mechanism to allow your suggestion, but I don't think blanket forcing it on all empires is the right choice, because some people don't want to RP their empire that way. And once it's out of their control it can no longer be RP'd as something it isn't. I think that if we're going to add an expanded civilian sector it would need to be tied to something, perhaps government type or whatever and it could become really complicated, perhaps not worth the effort.

Frankly though, I think the large amount of control you have is the best place for the RP side. If you control things, you can make them behave how you want and thus roleplay them as anything you want.

Perhaps, but the current model already have civilians and corporations running around doing things and you already have a civilian economy in the game so I don't think it would hamper much in that regard, it would just make this part of the game less tedious and simpler yet a bit more involved in decision making. You would just need to make the decisions less frequently, you still would make decisions on your economy as before.

You could simply add an option to turn off population morale so contract will always be followed without question. Morale on population as it is now must still be a problem for that kind of RP though. So being able to turn it off could be good as it is right now too for such RP.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 47