Posted by: ollobrains
« on: June 05, 2012, 03:13:38 PM »capturing enemy crews if u get enough of them by the sounds of it can be put on a colony planet that might be quite unsuitable for the base species Could be useful just to farm enemy ships
Posted by: Five
« on: May 30, 2012, 07:30:11 AM »Homeport doesn't have to be Earth, here in Japan there are quite a few American ships homeported...same thing.
Posted by: Girlinhat
« on: May 26, 2012, 07:22:05 PM »+1 for using agriculture as a modifier on shore leave effectiveness.
-1 for home port - the idea here is to encourage you to build colonies further out to support your fleet, not to encourage ships staying around home.
-1 for home port - the idea here is to encourage you to build colonies further out to support your fleet, not to encourage ships staying around home.
Posted by: TheDeadlyShoe
« on: May 26, 2012, 12:04:05 PM »Quote
To improve morale, a ship needs to spend time on orbit of a planet with at a population of at least 10,000. This should be enough to provide bars, nightclubs, brothels, art galleries, etc.. Note that maintenance facilities are not required. You just need people. While in orbit, the Last Shore Leave date will increase at the rate of 10x actual time.Random thought: An easy way to distinguish planets would be to have the LSL increase scale with the Services % of a colony, simulating the better and more varied facilities available in a larger colony. Alternatively, it could scale inversely with Agricultural %, representing that hostile environments / frontier planets arn't as hospitable.
Another random thought; Ships could have home ports, which have drastically higher LSL recovery, and/or penalties otherwise. Though the more I think about it, the more trouble it sounds for minor benefit.
Posted by: xeryon
« on: May 13, 2012, 07:21:25 AM »I still like the concept of having more then one officer on a ship: Additional Jr Officers can be assigned based on the modules.
Posted by: oleg
« on: May 13, 2012, 06:28:10 AM »On military ships, you wouldn't want that, you want your Elite crews to stick on one ship.
I agree on that and still your elite crew can't be running that ship for 100% of their time.
That's why I was thinking higher spaceport ranking, the faster a crew can be used again or higher military academy ranking the more elite crews you can compose.
Posted by: Havear
« on: May 12, 2012, 10:39:15 AM »I was against the idea of crew rotation on commercial ships because I felt it added unnecessary complexity and wouldn't follow the maintenance precedent. However, if crew need to be rotated and Steve is willing to change commercial maintenance rules a bit, I wouldn't mind a rare ship exploding for no apparent reason, vaporizing the cargo of whatever I had contracted because the owner decided to pinch a few credits and wait a month longer for the next overhaul.
Posted by: UnLimiTeD
« on: May 12, 2012, 05:30:27 AM »On military ships, you wouldn't want that, you want your Elite crews to stick on one ship.
Posted by: oleg
« on: May 12, 2012, 04:01:42 AM »Would the simplest solution be that a combination of a commercial spaceport and military academy on a planet, flag that population as valid for crew rotation. Since they already have their own levels a simple rule can be checked to calculate the supported rotation rate.
The commercial spaceport concept can be extended to not only technical installations but also to bars, entertainment and brothels that you see around normal ports as mentioned before.
Military academy presence is outputting personnel anyway and by consuming them as relief crew for harboring ships, that loop is closed as well.
By following this idea it increase the need for serious presence in a system as well instead of just having simple forward bases.
The commercial spaceport concept can be extended to not only technical installations but also to bars, entertainment and brothels that you see around normal ports as mentioned before.
Military academy presence is outputting personnel anyway and by consuming them as relief crew for harboring ships, that loop is closed as well.
By following this idea it increase the need for serious presence in a system as well instead of just having simple forward bases.
Posted by: UnLimiTeD
« on: May 11, 2012, 09:55:20 AM »Shouldn't Freighter crews be cycled when reaching a large population?
Posted by: voknaar
« on: April 30, 2012, 02:17:36 PM »My thinking of shore leave is quite a bit different from everyone. I think that it isn't unreasonable to have bars nightclubs brothels etc with a very small population. You are limited by the choice of the options available, in reality, not by having a lack options themselves in small towns. I've seen a guy operate out of a small town brewing his own beer from his garage at night, providing the local bar with beer. While by day he is the towns mechanic using his own garage to service the cars. I think its great ingenuity and is likely passed on colonial thinking. In fact it's quite common to see small towns/villages to be built to accommodate holidaying crews & tourists. Here in New Zealand its absolutely vital to our economic survival. Regardless of the effects of the recession. Christchurch has a port and its own port community called Lyttelton which only has a few thousand people in the whole area. Its well known (but not advertised) to have a very high concentration of nightlife of all variety's. Prostitution was decriminalized here at some point during 2000-2005.
So I guess all I'm saying is crew exchange/holidaying should certainly be doable because there are examples of it working all over the globe in remote spots with lesser numbers. I heard a joke once "If you only have 3 people making up a town, 1 will always be the designated town harlot".
So I guess all I'm saying is crew exchange/holidaying should certainly be doable because there are examples of it working all over the globe in remote spots with lesser numbers. I heard a joke once "If you only have 3 people making up a town, 1 will always be the designated town harlot".
Posted by: bean
« on: April 28, 2012, 06:04:43 PM »--> Opens the door for new longevity/cybertech biology techs that increase pop growth and reduce crew bleed rates.I see that more as an officer retention thing. But it could work for this, too.
Posted by: TheDeadlyShoe
« on: April 28, 2012, 01:03:11 AM »Quote
Also, people should leave the pool. Maybe 5% a year, of average points. There might be a way to stop it, but only in wartime, and I'm not sure how that would work.--> Opens the door for new longevity/cybertech biology techs that increase pop growth and reduce crew bleed rates.
Quote
Third, allow picked crews, and maybe unpicked crews. These have maybe 150% and 50% of normal points, respectively, taking the appropriate number of people and points from the pool, and getting those values when the crew rotates.I like this. It would be a simple and elegant solution to the weirdness of crew grade. Also, when you scrap an older ship, your highly trained crew would no longer vanish into the void. xD
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: April 27, 2012, 03:29:10 PM »I REALLY like this idea - I've been worried about the micromanagement that would need to be associated with my small WP picket stations. The "realistic" way to manage it would be to allow crew rotation through the "CFN", but since that's not representable in Aurora mechanics it's easier just to ignore crewing for commercials. NOTE: In order to avoid exploits, you should probably require something like 3 month's worth of berthing space in order for a design to be classified as commercial (and avoid the morale degradations).
John
Yes, that's not a bad idea. The other option may be to simply let commercials suffer the consequences. In most cases, they aren't going to suffer due to low morale because they won't use crew grade and fleet training very often anyway. On the rare occasions when they do, they will be noticeably less able than warship crews, which might not be an unreasonable scenario.
EDIT: In fact both may be reasonable. A commercial designation requires at least 3 months berthing space to avoid 'gaming the system' but commercials still suffer the effects because they are unlikely to be of consequence.
Steve
Posted by: sloanjh
« on: April 21, 2012, 09:34:36 AM »Split out thread-drift posts into an "Organic Technology vs. Computerized Automation" thread in mechanics.
John
John
