Post reply

Warning - while you were reading a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Kurt
« on: Today at 11:06:15 AM »

A quick question on decoy launchers. 

After reviewing the section on the 2.20 changes list on decoy missiles and launchers, I'm left a bit confused and wondering if I've done something wrong.  After recent reverses, my navy is looking to install decoy missiles and launchers on its capital ships.  Easy enough.  I used the missile designer to design a decoy missile for a new 30,000 ton strike cruiser design.  The resulting missile is 150 MSP (375 tons), with a decoy signature of 30,000 tons.  As intended.  The problem arises in trying to design a launcher.  The section in the create research project window for designing the decoy launcher gives the largest size launcher as 99.  This appears to mean that I cannot have a decoy missile for anything larger than 19,800 tons.  Is this correct? 

I feel like I'm missing something.  Is there a research branch I'm missing? 

Kurt
Posted by: nuclearslurpee
« on: June 19, 2025, 06:02:22 PM »

Quote from: Sigaur on June 19, 2025, 02:24:54 PM
Hello, what is the view of the community regarding MCP (Model Context Protocol) ?
From what I understand it should be allowed as this is not a mod, it reads a copy of the db same as aurora marvin and provide logs to an AI to provide after action report/roleplay.
Would I be correct ?

Attached, a sample of skirmish report generated by it.

Generally, interacting with the DB is fine as long as you don't report bugs from a modified DB.

AI may receive a more mixed reception from the community, depending on the individual. :)
Posted by: Sigaur
« on: June 19, 2025, 02:24:54 PM »

Hello, what is the view of the community regarding MCP (Model Context Protocol) ?
From what I understand it should be allowed as this is not a mod, it reads a copy of the db same as aurora marvin and provide logs to an AI to provide after action report/roleplay.
Would I be correct ?

Attached, a sample of skirmish report generated by it.
Posted by: ty55101
« on: June 18, 2025, 01:32:14 AM »

Quote from: Primus Pilus on June 17, 2025, 04:54:41 AM
Greetings - I'm wondering how to save custom starting scenarios and how to load them in game? Is it possible to include custom NPRs outside of the player starting system?

The only way to save scenarios is by copying the database ("AuroraDB" in your main folder of the game) . This is your entire set of games.

When you start a game there is a checkbox for custom starting NPRs and the options there are what we have access to.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: June 17, 2025, 07:10:44 AM »

Quote from: Protomolecule on June 15, 2025, 07:28:58 PM
I am sorry if this has been asked before, but how viable would using very large missiles to emulate massive spinal guns be?

For example, a size 50 missile with a short range (5-10m km), very high speed and a lot of (10+) decoys ?

I don't have access to a computer now, so I cannot run simulations or "fleet exercises".

I have used size 24 missiles as 'normal' ordnance with ranges less than 10m (as WH40K 'torpedoes') so size 50 isn't too much of a stretch. A large, spinal plasma carronade is the cheapest energy option.
Posted by: Primus Pilus
« on: June 17, 2025, 04:54:41 AM »

Greetings - I'm wondering how to save custom starting scenarios and how to load them in game? Is it possible to include custom NPRs outside of the player starting system?
Posted by: gpt3
« on: June 16, 2025, 11:48:55 PM »

Quote from: Protomolecule on June 15, 2025, 07:28:58 PM
I am sorry if this has been asked before, but how viable would using very large missiles to emulate massive spinal guns be?

For example, a size 50 missile with a short range (5-10m km), very high speed and a lot of (10+) decoys ?

I don't have access to a computer now, so I cannot run simulations or "fleet exercises".
It's certainly doable, albeit extremely expensive and only appropriate as an anti-capital weapon. You'll also have to have a roleplay explanation if the missile gets shot down by PD (perhaps someone managed to deflect the projectile).
Posted by: Froggiest1982
« on: June 15, 2025, 11:41:27 PM »

Quote from: Protomolecule on June 15, 2025, 07:28:58 PM
I am sorry if this has been asked before, but how viable would using very large missiles to emulate massive spinal guns be?

For example, a size 50 missile with a short range (5-10m km), very high speed and a lot of (10+) decoys ?

I don't have access to a computer now, so I cannot run simulations or "fleet exercises".

This is probably not the answer you after, but it's the only one I can provide. Everything is possible in Aurora, and if you tie any RP reasons, then you can do what you are saying and beyond.

I would argue that when it comes to missiles, the only drawback is costs. A Size 50 missile very fast will be extremely expensive in terms of minerals as it will consequentially require larger launchers, larger magazines, more fuel, and so on. Research points and production points are also to be considered. A 50 size may also have a large warhead that could result in massive overkills, increasing wastage and, again, expenses.

So, as stated previously, if this is the solution to your RP or specific requirement to do not use the current spinal weapons setup, then it will be possible but counterproductive on many fronts such as costs, detection, and displacement.
Posted by: Protomolecule
« on: June 15, 2025, 07:28:58 PM »

I am sorry if this has been asked before, but how viable would using very large missiles to emulate massive spinal guns be?

For example, a size 50 missile with a short range (5-10m km), very high speed and a lot of (10+) decoys ?

I don't have access to a computer now, so I cannot run simulations or "fleet exercises".
Posted by: randakar
« on: June 09, 2025, 01:10:32 AM »

Quote from: Steve Walmsley on April 14, 2025, 11:37:27 AM
Quote from: blue emu on April 14, 2025, 10:27:48 AM
Thamks, Steve.

We're facing what looks like a nasty Jump Point assault.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/sirius-business-a-c-aurora-forum-game-v2-5.1621469/post-30289452

Yes, I really need to read through the whole thread. Looks like you are having fun :)

We started the assault: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/sirius-business-a-c-aurora-forum-game-v2-5.1621469/post-30440938

Yup, definitely a lot of fun.
Posted by: smoelf
« on: June 06, 2025, 03:05:42 PM »

I'm working on establishing a new game with a multi-faction start (first time trying this) and it seems there is a behavior I have not previously noticed with financial centres. Do they provide wealth to all colonies on a planet? I have created 5 factions on Earth (conventional start) and given 2 of the factions 5 financial centres each, but after passing time for the first month, it seems that all 5 factions gain wealth from financial centres. Some more than others based on factors that I can't quite divine.

Is this an intentional mechanic of financial centres that I just didn't know about before a multi-faction start? Is there a different way of giving one faction an economical advantage?
Posted by: nuclearslurpee
« on: June 06, 2025, 11:33:32 AM »

Quote from: skoormit on June 06, 2025, 10:44:29 AM
The change made to the fleet detection code for 2.0 states:

Quote
In v2.0, for increments of one hour or more, Aurora will check the movement of all ships where the destination is either a hostile ship contact or a waypoint where hostile ships are also present.

I've kind of just assumed that "waypoint" here meant any fleet order destination (a planet, a JP, etc), rather than meaning only literal waypoints.

Is that correct?
Or is it the case that the specialized detection logic won't be in effect when a fleet just happens to be moving to where a hostile fleet is (without having that contact or a waypoint there as the destination)?

The post you linked goes on to say that the waypoint part is added because NPRs use waypoints to mark hostile fleet locations. In other words, NPRs effectively use waypoints as a "move to hostile fleet location" surrogate in a way players don't really do.

This change I think was mostly meant to handle the problem where NPRs move close to a player fleet and immediately open fire before the player can react. It doesn't really apply for players in practice since players will use short increments when approaching a hostile fleet with ill intent. So I don't think it applies to movement order targets like bodies, etc. because a NPR will move to the target fleet directly if they intend to open fire. In theory, a player could move to a body as a way to cheese this check, but there's no benefit in doing so.
Posted by: skoormit
« on: June 06, 2025, 10:44:29 AM »

The change made to the fleet detection code for 2.0 states:

Quote
In v2.0, for increments of one hour or more, Aurora will check the movement of all ships where the destination is either a hostile ship contact or a waypoint where hostile ships are also present.

I've kind of just assumed that "waypoint" here meant any fleet order destination (a planet, a JP, etc), rather than meaning only literal waypoints.

Is that correct?
Or is it the case that the specialized detection logic won't be in effect when a fleet just happens to be moving to where a hostile fleet is (without having that contact or a waypoint there as the destination)?
Posted by: paolot
« on: June 01, 2025, 10:08:43 AM »

To increase the Intelligence of an ELINT ship, which "Command and Control" module should I add to the ship? or do we need a new one?
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 21, 2025, 04:19:18 AM »

Quote from: Langer on May 20, 2025, 06:23:55 PM
Hydrographic extent is 19.04 at the moment, water vapor in atmo is .0032, which should still be within Desert guidelines.

Mars has a slightly eccentric orbit. It's possible that as the distance from the sun changes, the environment on Mars might change so that previous terrain is no longer supported.