Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 252 new replies have 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:

Verification:
What color is the sky?:

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

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Whitecold
« on: Today at 05:10:50 PM »

A small change to the missile design UI:
Currently they are rated by hit chances against targets at certain speed. This is inconvenient most of the time, much more meaningful would be stating the target speed a missile achieves 10%, 50% and 100% hit chance for example.
Sure, the values are easily convertible enough, but 10kkm/s is far below the target speed of any  AMM
Posted by: Father Tim
« on: Yesterday at 05:07:54 PM »

Has the military recruitment been talked about yet? Being able to choose if your armed forces are conscripts or volunteer-based professional military force, that sort of thing.

Naval Crew and Officer academies will still have an 'experience level' setting, so your empire can produce much fewer high-quality Crew personnel, or a large number of standard-experience Crew.

There has been no discussion of apply the same system to ground force training, and thus being able to take longer to produce higher XP (or Morale, or whatever) units.
Posted by: Marski
« on: Yesterday at 04:06:39 PM »

Has the military recruitment been talked about yet? Being able to choose if your armed forces are conscripts or volunteer-based professional military force, that sort of thing.
Posted by: Tree
« on: November 11, 2018, 10:21:27 AM »

Would it be possible to add shipyard complexes activities to the "Player Race Production Overview" window? Adding slipway constructions, retoolings and the 1000/5000/10000/etc buildups to the "Shipbuilding" tab would be nice, along with the continual expansion up to a certain cap if you implement that, of course.

Since you're adding variant starts rules now, how about one that turns Jupiter into a small red dwarf, making the galilean moons inhabitable or close to? Oops, typing it now I remember how different are secondary stars treated from planets, might not be the easiest addition.
Posted by: Rabid_Cog
« on: November 07, 2018, 09:22:29 AM »

Almost as expensive as building a new shipyard AND spending about 5 years increasing its size to where it can build your expensive ship? Somehow I doubt it.

Regardless, now that you put it that way, it sounds quite realistic and as if it adds depth to the game, forcing you to plan your construction a bit ahead.

Not only working as intended, but already in the game as well.
Posted by: Titanian
« on: November 07, 2018, 06:16:13 AM »

I am strongly opposed to that feature. In the end, that means that tooling a new shipyard to a freighter first, and then a terraformer wastes lots of materials compared to doing it the other way around, which makes no sense. For expensive commercial designs (terraforming, maintainence), it even means that building a new shipyard is only marginally more expensive than retooling, and has the added benefit of having an additional shipyard.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: November 06, 2018, 01:08:49 PM »

That was more to model the the shipyard being "built for spec" the first time. In effect, the cost of retooling for your first ship is included in the cost of the shipyard itself.

In other words, working as intended  :P

Yes, that's correct.
Posted by: Rabid_Cog
« on: November 06, 2018, 12:38:57 PM »

That was more to model the the shipyard being "built for spec" the first time. In effect, the cost of retooling for your first ship is included in the cost of the shipyard itself.

In other words, working as intended  :P
Posted by: Garfunkel
« on: November 06, 2018, 11:58:50 AM »

It was and it is. I don't think Steve is changing it for C#
Posted by: alex_brunius
« on: November 06, 2018, 11:37:15 AM »

Even in VB6 Retooling cost is never higher than it would be for an empty shipyard. The cost is checked for empty or converting from the current tooled class. If converting is cheaper than empty, then that number is used. Otherwise empty is used.

Wasn't VB6 retooling free for the first time you did it, assuming it was part of the shipyards initial construction cost to build it in such a way that the first design could be built?

( I don't agree it should be, unless the desired class of ship is locked at an early stage ).
Posted by: TMaekler
« on: November 06, 2018, 09:26:46 AM »

Would it be possible to set a limit on the shipyards continuous capacity expansion.  For example I want to build the shipyard up to 80,000 ton capacity I can either set it to continuous expansion and monitor when this is reached, or I can use several commands over time to build up to the eventual size required.  If instead when I start the continuous expansion I set a limit of 80,000 and then have the shipyard stop expanding, It would be simpler and cause less micromanagement as well.

Brian
Such an option would be great - and would make obsolete all prefixed value. Just imput target size and no of slipways - voila.
Posted by: Person012345
« on: November 06, 2018, 06:24:52 AM »

Unrest should increase when unemployment rate is too high. People do want jobs! - Or if unemployment rises over a certain percentage, the civilian sector will begin employing those people into service industries. Takes them away from you if you later need them for production. However, if it switches around and you begin to have need of workers, and service industries do have more people empoloyed than they per game rules should have, they will (slowly) release those people which then will fill up your empty industries.

This would mostly be for cosmetics - maybe there should be a reasonable punishment for your "service overemployments" applied. But I have no idea at the moment what could be reasonable. Maybe people get lazy and the overall productivity reduces.
This isn't a good thing because Aurora does not model commercial sector and non-TN industrial sector requiring work force. Logically, either there is a massive invisible population that produces trade goods, or those goods are actually produced by the unemployed population. This also doesn't mesh well with RP-scenarios where a nation only uses a portion of its real population for TN - for example I usually cut down 3rd world populations to simulate the general low education level as well as a balance measure.

Thus Steve would need to add a fourth sector to each colony - environment, service, commercial and TN-industry, and the relevant mechanism for populations to switch jobs. After all, not many nations can just command people to quit their day job at the mobile phone assembly line and instead start making missiles.

I think this is something that should be part of a larger population and economy overhaul, far down the line.

It's been a while since I played aurora, been waiting for the update since it was called 7.2, but I'm fairly convinced I remember that only a small proportion of the workforce was available for TN pursuits whilst the rest went into "services" or something of the sort. I assumed this modelled the civilian economy. It doesn't have to literally just be services.
Posted by: JustAnotherDude
« on: November 06, 2018, 05:59:11 AM »

I didn't realize. Thank you for clarifying!
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: November 06, 2018, 03:17:13 AM »

Shipyards should be able to be detooled for either no or minimal cost, to stop you from having functionally useless shipyards that will never have a new class assigned to them due to retooling costs.

Even in VB6 Retooling cost is never higher than it would be for an empty shipyard. The cost is checked for empty or converting from the current tooled class. If converting is cheaper than empty, then that number is used. Otherwise empty is used.
Posted by: QuakeIV
« on: November 06, 2018, 01:54:54 AM »

I agree and in fact if possible that would be a vastly superior alternative to the old system.
Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54