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 - boggo2300

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 51
1
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: December 11, 2017, 02:45:39 PM »
Wait, does this mean there's no point in building more than one or am I misunderstanding something?

That's exactly what that means 8)

2
C# Aurora / Re: Robotic Sub-race
« on: December 06, 2017, 03:07:45 PM »
I've been turning it on as the first thing I do when starting the program since before there was an Aurora,  so by this stage I couldn't even have told you that!

3
C# Aurora / Re: Robotic Sub-race
« on: December 03, 2017, 02:55:21 PM »
P. S.  use SM is not the solution for my personal opinion

This is pretty much the reason SM is in Aurora, to adjust it to simulate things that Steve hasn't programmed in.  I can't think of a time when I ever actually disabled SM

4
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« on: November 14, 2017, 03:17:20 PM »
Now a missile silo might work better on the ground instead ( seeing how it needs logistics and storage for missiles, and how any hits to magazines could provide a risk meaning more need for protection ).

Actually I'd be fine with things like that,  Single use facilities that can be built just like other planetary infrastructure,  like a Missile Silo facility, A Hangar Facility, a Bunker Facility (increased protection for ground troops) sort of thing

5
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« on: November 13, 2017, 02:30:19 PM »
I just think that building a massive missile base into a mountain range to defend a planet is a cool thing to do

AMEN!

6
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« on: November 08, 2017, 02:53:44 PM »
My excitement for C# Aurora suddenly dropped like a stone ... ;(  :'( :'(

I sort of agree,  hell North Korea has multiple PDC's now

7
Aurora Chat / Re: What's going on in your empire/planet/battlefield?
« on: November 08, 2017, 02:51:59 PM »
What is this invade thing you speak of? surely theres only glass the surface from Orbit
or have I been doing it wrong all these years?

8
Announcements / Re: Out of Town
« on: October 03, 2017, 03:31:11 PM »

I believe that's a sword not a hammer...

9
Aurora Suggestions / Re: Semi-Official 7.x Suggestion Thread
« on: October 02, 2017, 03:54:04 PM »
You are right, I forgot a step (switching from long guns to short guns), but razee frigates were generally the ships equipped with carronades. Mostly because normal frigates were a little fragile for the throw weight a carronade battery could offer, so they needed to be more sturdily built in comparison. Razees were perfect for that because all the other bits were already in place and all that was needed was removing the superfluous top gun deck.

It also meant you had a use for captured ships of the battle you couldn't maintain on that level. Well, for more than spare parts anyway.

No carronades were actually very widely used, most ships of the line carried a deck of them as well as long guns, and most frigates used them as their primary guns with Long guns in a secondary role for some range,  carronades giving you more bang for the weight so to speak.

H.M.S. Indefatigable (sticking with Hornblower) though a Razee (though so many British Frigates were Razees rather than Frigate built it could be considered the norm) had;
twenty-six 24-pounder guns on her gundeck, and mounted eight 12-pounder guns on her quarterdeck and a further four on her forecastle, as well as four 42-pounder carronades on her quarterdeck and two on her forecastle.

Incidentally because of this,  Indefatigable was much more dangerous at close range AFTER she was Razee'd than before as a 64 gun third rate!

10
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« on: September 24, 2017, 04:37:35 PM »
Thanks for all the comments and suggestions. I am going away for a week on holiday so I won't be posting (or working on Aurora). I'll start work on ground units when I get back.

DOOOOOOOMMM!!!!

11
Aurora Chat / Re: Bigger = Better?
« on: September 24, 2017, 04:33:05 PM »
to the original question;
No

at least not in my opinion

Biggest (military) ship I've ever made was a 55,000 ton carrier.

usually I have
Sloop/Corvette           <1,000 ton
Frigate/Destroyer       1,000-2,500 ton
Cruisers                     2,500-10,000 ton
Battleships                 9,000-40,000 ton
Carriers                    10,000-55,000 ton

with the vast majority of classes being at the low end of the range.  My favourite game had no ship larger than 10,000 tons  though it was a quite odd ball game with 3 fledgling moon colonies in orbit around the same gas giant trying to er "unify" and everyone was dead within 10 years in game time

12
The Academy / Re: RamDisk
« on: September 19, 2017, 04:28:18 PM »
next year maybe

13
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: August 27, 2017, 04:39:53 PM »
I really hope you're going to allow us to er disallow titans,  last thing I'm gonna want is my NPR running around with giant robots

14
Aurora Bugs / Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« on: August 01, 2017, 04:42:55 PM »
So it's a Heisenbug.

I'm uncertain what you mean Erik!

15
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: July 18, 2017, 04:29:25 PM »
Aurora is too detailed to do real time, you just could not give the game justice to get everything done in a real time fashion. Also next thing if it was real time then we see the dumbing down or automation of the game. Because of the fact you cannot control everything.

HOWEVER is there is to be any realtime, my recommendation is only for the 5 sec tick option, which instead of the current select the number of tick to happen it just is 5 sec on and 5 sec off button, this would work better in this version due to speed improvements and would make battles a little more easier. I never know how many ticks to do and the tick off button is not very responsive when you have more then you wanted ticks and need to turn it off.

And more importantly RTS games are usually about as strategic as a game of hockey

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 51