Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 63 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: MultiVitamin
« on: November 12, 2019, 01:32:02 AM »

Actually, would it be possible to make research trees for the Ground Force components? Just generic ones to increase their effectiveness, number of shots, etc? Or maybe make it so that we can design them?

So for example there'd be a few fields

Type - Anti-Personnel, Anti-Vehicle, Bombardment, Anti-Aircraft, Autocannon, or HQ (CE would stay the same)

Size - (Light, Medium, Heavy, Super-Heavy, Ultra-Heavy)

AP - (Dropdown menu from 1 to 50)

Damage - (Dropdown menu from 1 to 60)

Shots - (Dropdown menu from 1 to 6)

CIWS - (Can be blank, choose from pre-made CIWS made for ships, just resized maybe?)

FFD - (Dropdown menu from 1 to 3)


And various research could upgrade the ranges of these higher and higher. Just a suggestion I thought of while anticipating the renaming of components when a unit is designed, thought of "why not just build the components with research to make them better, and have that be designable?". It adds a lot more variety and player decision making for Ground Forces, like when you design the weapons, powerplants, defense, engines, etc for ships, just not as intense. Also helps solve the "Can't think of anything for Ultra-Heavy" problem you mention about having a while ago in (I think) a different thread.

If no on the designing the components themselves, what about just research to improve components?

Actually thinking on this, if steve does add more esoteric components later, this might not work out. I also don't fully know all of the research techs already in place for ground units other then the bio-enhancements for infantry.
Posted by: Father Tim
« on: November 11, 2019, 04:54:45 PM »

Yes Stars! was a great game.
Their mass driver implementation was interesting.
I liked their build queue system. You could queue up a certain amount of each building as recurring each build cycle and then put extra build items behind those and all excess build points would go to the extra items once the recurring items were done.

This seems like it would differ from Aurora's implementation in that the player has to do the math instead of the game.  Instead of setting 10% of your production to build more mines, 10% to more factories, and 10% to research facilities, you'd set it to one mine, one factory, and one research facility per production cycle. . . and then realize that that leaves no excess production since a research facility is twenty times the size of the other two.  You'd also have to figure out when your production capacity doubles and change all the numbers.  Aurora makes this a lot easier, but still suffers from the problem.
Posted by: clement
« on: November 11, 2019, 06:42:47 AM »

Any of you play that old 4x game Stars!  ?
The way they did mass drivers is each tech allowed you to send packets at a specific speed (and the recipient needed to be able to handle that). So maybe you could send at what was in the game warp 10. You could intercept them by going faster, or simply intercepting from the side or in front. Worked pretty well I thought.

Yes Stars! was a great game.
Their mass driver implementation was interesting.
I liked their build queue system. You could queue up a certain amount of each building as recurring each build cycle and then put extra build items behind those and all excess build points would go to the extra items once the recurring items were done.
Posted by: Nori
« on: November 10, 2019, 06:22:27 PM »

Any of you play that old 4x game Stars!  ?
The way they did mass drivers is each tech allowed you to send packets at a specific speed (and the recipient needed to be able to handle that). So maybe you could send at what was in the game warp 10. You could intercept them by going faster, or simply intercepting from the side or in front. Worked pretty well I thought.
Posted by: SerBeardian
« on: November 09, 2019, 09:25:55 PM »

Not sure if already mentioned, but I would very much like to be able to self-destruct missile salvos from the main system map, since trying to figure out which set of 10 mines out of 300 identical ones in the system is the one that just blew it's load all over the enemy fleet from the "missiles in flight" screen is pretty much impossible.

Having mines sitting there that you think have payload but don't is rather dangerous to your empire security.
Posted by: Bremen
« on: November 09, 2019, 03:46:51 PM »

Okay, but now you have the situation where a guy whose job is supposed to be fighting is worse at it than a guy whose job is cleaning the gunk out of the soup nozzles.

What we've seen so far from Steve's AARs (admittedly quite a small sample size) is that dedicated boarding troops tear through defending crew at a ratio of 80 or 100 to 1.  If we make defenders any weaker, they are going to inflict zero casualties.  We're already at the point where 90% of attacker's casualties are from the drop attempt rather than fighting on board.

To be fair, in Steve's AAR the attackers seem to have a significant tech advantage. They also tore apart actual ground troops with vehicle support. Assuming equal tech the fight between boarders and crew might be less one-sided.
Posted by: Jorgen_CAB
« on: November 09, 2019, 02:11:02 PM »

If possible a Ship Mass driver Module would be grat :) make mining ships so much easyer to handle  ;D


I've been lobbying for the opposite for quite some time.  I think Aurora should remove mass drivers entirely and move everything by ship so my -- and Xenoscepter's -- privateers and pirates and militia and such have much more to do.  As I understand it, mass drivers were only added because the AI to handle civilian freighters wasn't up to the job of regular mineral collection.

But if Aurora is going to keep mass drivers, it desperately needs to make their packets detectable & stealable in deep space.  FAC squadrons with big nets to come along behind them and scoop 'em up, or freighters with oversize doors to fly in front of them and very slightly slow down so the minerals load themselves.

I agree... a way to interact with them and an option to play without them where the civilian ships move minerals from civilian complexes automatically to the closest colony. The production could still be somewhat abstracted and the cargo on ships going between colony and base should then load based on the type of minerals complexes produce.

It is sometimes interesting to play campaigns where you imagine a world where mass-drivers moving minerals is not a thing.
Posted by: Father Tim
« on: November 09, 2019, 01:23:13 PM »

If possible a Ship Mass driver Module would be grat :) make mining ships so much easyer to handle  ;D


I've been lobbying for the opposite for quite some time.  I think Aurora should remove mass drivers entirely and move everything by ship so my -- and Xenoscepter's -- privateers and pirates and militia and such have much more to do.  As I understand it, mass drivers were only added because the AI to handle civilian freighters wasn't up to the job of regular mineral collection.

But if Aurora is going to keep mass drivers, it desperately needs to make their packets detectable & stealable in deep space.  FAC squadrons with big nets to come along behind them and scoop 'em up, or freighters with oversize doors to fly in front of them and very slightly slow down so the minerals load themselves.
Posted by: Father Tim
« on: November 09, 2019, 01:11:14 PM »

--- What about a 1 Ton kit for Garrison / Security Forces? With the caveat that they require external support or else suffer damage? That support could be in the form of Logistics Units, Colonies with a great than 'X' population, Colonies with a equal to or greater than  'X' population but only if the planet has a greater than 'X' Colony Suitability Cost, and being on board a ship with Troop Transport capabilities? A 1.5 Ton kit would be also be nice as a 'heavy' option, for those empires that would splurge on 'Elite' bodyguards or for officers or something like that.

 --- I rather like the idea of 'cheap' defense units; that are dedicated to defense, mind you. Such units wouldn't NEED the overhead of attacking forces because they could have everything "right at home" so to speak. Likewise, security forces for Logistics Bases, Forward HQs, or Artillery Detachments (an admittedly weird proposition, but IRL countries make weird choices all the time so... yeah). These forces would be cheap for the sake of peacetime or cheap for the sake of their rear guard status. They really should have low stats, though.

 --- Garrisons could have defense equal to light infantry, but have attack that was only half of it. Security units could have defenses equal to half of light infantry, with a quarter of that attack, but be even cheaper to produce than a garrison. Security and Garrison should just be 1 Ton however, to represent the absolute bare minimum, but Security would just have cheaper stuff to reflect their more 'Specialized' role. The 1.5 ton 'heavy' versions would be better and more expensive of course.

 --- Another interesting idea would be dedicated Marine Garrisons for space stations, ships w/ Troop Transport abilities and such. Same idea, with the 1 Ton kit and maybe the 1.5 ton 'heavy' kit, and the same with the caveat that they require dedicated logistics support from their ships, space stations, colonies or whatever. Not sure WHY you would put Marines on a colony, but then again I do like building colonies on airless hell holes... so yeah, there's that. (sooper sekrit soviet spess koloni for built stronk tenk) Still, while Marines would mostly be a bad choice to defend a colony, they could still be support just like any troops.

Just some thoughts, cheers! ;D

Okay, but now you have the situation where a guy whose job is supposed to be fighting is worse at it than a guy whose job is cleaning the gunk out of the soup nozzles.

What we've seen so far from Steve's AARs (admittedly quite a small sample size) is that dedicated boarding troops tear through defending crew at a ratio of 80 or 100 to 1.  If we make defenders any weaker, they are going to inflict zero casualties.  We're already at the point where 90% of attacker's casualties are from the drop attempt rather than fighting on board.
Posted by: Hazard
« on: November 09, 2019, 11:29:56 AM »

Arty, it's a good thing that industry build space stations can't get engines. It'd break the game because now shipyards no longer matter except possibly for repairs and refits of ships.
Posted by: arty
« on: November 09, 2019, 04:29:45 AM »

If possible a Ship Mass driver Module would be grat :) make mining ships so much easyer to handle  ;D

and if the industrie build space stations could get civilian engines than you dont have to refit them ?!
Posted by: xenoscepter
« on: November 09, 2019, 03:06:56 AM »

I protest the lack of civillian shipping subsidies! I wanna be a space commie dammit all! Subsidize EVERYTHING!

Now that I've gotten that out of my system, I had some thoughts on what could be done moving forward. And thought I might share them here.

 --- It's been mentioned about piracy and such before, but I did think of something I'd like along the lines of that. Militia forces. Militia ships, Militia navy, militia ground troops. ALL THE MILITIAS!

 --- I think privateering is a cool avenue to explore as well, alongside private security firms, and mercenary units / bounty hunter groups. These could be like Commercial Mining Colonies in that you need a certain amount of "growth" before they can exist. Not just wealth, but also weapons and ships, to represent not just the economic growth to sustain it but also the technological growth as well. Military units typically have the top shelf guns, while civilians would have (if any... I'm American so this is far more normal to me.) the 'civilian version' or the military's old surplus sold to them. Would be a nice organic thing to add some depth to the game, but I'm very much for it being a check box option to toggle on and off. Same with Militias, doing something akin to The Expanse would be better served by disabling the functionality so NPRs don't have it... or do. Maybe separate parameters and a random gen option? Meh, I don't jack about programming, but that sounds like a lot of work.

 --- Still, tanks for all the great work Steve, hope these ideas can be of some use.

Cheers!  ;D
Posted by: xenoscepter
« on: November 09, 2019, 02:57:35 AM »

Quote
Given that the 3 tons requirement for Light Personal Weapons also includes things like all the equipment necessary to not die instantly in vacuum, a high pressure environment, freeze to death in a pool of liquid nitrogen or burn the instant you get close to a lava planet all at the same time, I would be okay with the concept of a unit/component type/modifier that's exclusive to infantry that literally can't fight in environments that aren't in the species' 0 colonization cost tolerance for a lower cost.

That'd basically be your boarding defense parties. Don't try to send them into enemy ships and expect to get a happy ending, especially if their species has very different tolerances

~Hazard

Quote
I don't think it would.  I think the rule is 3 tons for Personal Weapon (Light) Infantry, and 5 tons for Personal Weapon Infantry.  PW INF is already the baseline from which all other ground forces were developed.  They have no special training, no special defenses, and -- until we added Personal Weapon (Light) Infantry -- no 'lesser version'.

Now you want another lesser version of the lesser version of combatant we already have.  You think Military Police are too powerful because they might -- might -- have a submachinegun?

Or are you hung up on the idea that it takes 3 tons' displacement to feed, care for, and maintain one of them?  That each troop's share of the group showers, mess facilities, machine shops, training rooms, armoury, etc., should be less than that, or should be counted in the 'headquarters' or 'supply' unit type?

~Father Tim

 --- What about a 1 Ton kit for Garrison / Security Forces? With the caveat that they require external support or else suffer damage? That support could be in the form of Logistics Units, Colonies with a great than 'X' population, Colonies with a equal to or greater than  'X' population but only if the planet has a greater than 'X' Colony Suitability Cost, and being on board a ship with Troop Transport capabilities? A 1.5 Ton kit would be also be nice as a 'heavy' option, for those empires that would splurge on 'Elite' bodyguards or for officers or something like that.

 --- I rather like the idea of 'cheap' defense units; that are dedicated to defense, mind you. Such units wouldn't NEED the overhead of attacking forces because they could have everything "right at home" so to speak. Likewise, security forces for Logistics Bases, Forward HQs, or Artillery Detachments (an admittedly weird proposition, but IRL countries make weird choices all the time so... yeah). These forces would be cheap for the sake of peacetime or cheap for the sake of their rear guard status. They really should have low stats, though.

 --- Garrisons could have defense equal to light infantry, but have attack that was only half of it. Security units could have defenses equal to half of light infantry, with a quarter of that attack, but be even cheaper to produce than a garrison. Security and Garrison should just be 1 Ton however, to represent the absolute bare minimum, but Security would just have cheaper stuff to reflect their more 'Specialized' role. The 1.5 ton 'heavy' versions would be better and more expensive of course.

 --- Another interesting idea would be dedicated Marine Garrisons for space stations, ships w/ Troop Transport abilities and such. Same idea, with the 1 Ton kit and maybe the 1.5 ton 'heavy' kit, and the same with the caveat that they require dedicated logistics support from their ships, space stations, colonies or whatever. Not sure WHY you would put Marines on a colony, but then again I do like building colonies on airless hell holes... so yeah, there's that. (sooper sekrit soviet spess koloni for built stronk tenk) Still, while Marines would mostly be a bad choice to defend a colony, they could still be support just like any troops.

Just some thoughts, cheers! ;D
Posted by: MultiVitamin
« on: November 08, 2019, 08:48:32 PM »

Actually, would it be possible to make research trees for the Ground Force components? Just generic ones to increase their effectiveness, number of shots, etc? Or maybe make it so that we can design them?

So for example there'd be a few fields

Type - Anti-Personnel, Anti-Vehicle, Bombardment, Anti-Aircraft, Autocannon, or HQ (CE would stay the same)

Size - (Light, Medium, Heavy, Super-Heavy, Ultra-Heavy)

AP - (Dropdown menu from 1 to 50)

Damage - (Dropdown menu from 1 to 60)

Shots - (Dropdown menu from 1 to 6)

CIWS - (Can be blank, choose from pre-made CIWS made for ships, just resized maybe?)

FFD - (Dropdown menu from 1 to 3)


And various research could upgrade the ranges of these higher and higher. Just a suggestion I thought of while anticipating the renaming of components when a unit is designed, thought of "why not just build the components with research to make them better, and have that be designable?". It adds a lot more variety and player decision making for Ground Forces, like when you design the weapons, powerplants, defense, engines, etc for ships, just not as intense. Also helps solve the "Can't think of anything for Ultra-Heavy" problem you mention about having a while ago in (I think) a different thread.

If no on the designing the components themselves, what about just research to improve components?
Posted by: Stryker
« on: November 08, 2019, 02:10:38 PM »

Would it be possible on the assign systems to sector screen to include the total population for the selected sector?  Additionally, a total empire population entry would be nice.

Alternatively, or in addition to, the option to sort by sector on the population and production screen with this information would also be useful.
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 55