Post by: Balibar on January 30, 2010, 08:12:58 AM
Post by: Father Tim on January 30, 2010, 08:26:07 AM
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 30, 2010, 09:50:59 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
My portal survey team found a jump point, but it has a red box around it. I assume this is a Jump Gate built by somebody else. Does this imply I have found an NPR? Or could this be a Precursor? Or could it be an ancient and now extinct civilization? Does Red mean I am KOS on the other side? Or is this just a default until I make contact?Yes, this is a jump gate bulit by someone else. It could be an ancient precursor-built gate or an NPR could have built it recently. There is no way to tell the difference.
Steve
Post by: Balibar on January 30, 2010, 10:35:37 AM
Post by: Balibar on January 30, 2010, 04:34:38 PM
I put the fleet on Task Force Training thinking that would cancel overhaul. The fleet went out on maneuvers, but the destroyer is still listed as on overhaul. Now the fleet is out of orbit and if I give a move to Earth command I get an error saying that ships on overhaul cannot accept orders.
Is there any way to cancel the overhaul?
Post by: sloanjh on January 30, 2010, 06:32:13 PM
Quote from: "Balibar"
How do you cancel an overhaul? I gave an order for Battle TG to return to Earth, refuel, resupply and overhaul. So far, so good. The fleet has a cruiser and a destroyer. The cruiser was too large for the maintenance facility and I got a message that it could not be overhauled. The destroyer had an indication for overhaul. So far, so good.
I put the fleet on Task Force Training thinking that would cancel overhaul. The fleet went out on maneuvers, but the destroyer is still listed as on overhaul. Now the fleet is out of orbit and if I give a move to Earth command I get an error saying that ships on overhaul cannot accept orders.
Is there any way to cancel the overhaul?
There is an "Abandon Overhaul" order available, just like "Move To" - try clicking on Earth and you'll see it. Note that it takes time to abandon an overhaul, since it's kind of hard for the ship to sail when its engines are lying in pieces on the deck.
The behavior you described about maneuvers sounds like a bug (the TG should refuse all orders when in overhaul) - you should probably post it to the Bugs thread....
John
Post by: Balibar on January 30, 2010, 07:07:05 PM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
The ship being overhauled does not have an 'Abandon Overhaul' order available. I am guessing that is because it is not in port. I will post in the Bugs Forum.Quote from: "Balibar"How do you cancel an overhaul? I gave an order for Battle TG to return to Earth, refuel, resupply and overhaul. So far, so good. The fleet has a cruiser and a destroyer. The cruiser was too large for the maintenance facility and I got a message that it could not be overhauled. The destroyer had an indication for overhaul. So far, so good.
I put the fleet on Task Force Training thinking that would cancel overhaul. The fleet went out on maneuvers, but the destroyer is still listed as on overhaul. Now the fleet is out of orbit and if I give a move to Earth command I get an error saying that ships on overhaul cannot accept orders.
Is there any way to cancel the overhaul?
There is an "Abandon Overhaul" order available, just like "Move To" - try clicking on Earth and you'll see it. Note that it takes time to abandon an overhaul, since it's kind of hard for the ship to sail when its engines are lying in pieces on the deck.
The behavior you described about maneuvers sounds like a bug (the TG should refuse all orders when in overhaul) - you should probably post it to the Bugs thread....
John
Post by: Balibar on January 30, 2010, 07:16:15 PM
Post by: sloanjh on January 30, 2010, 08:06:43 PM
Quote from: "Balibar"
I was able to use SM mode to move the ship into a TG that was in port. At that point, the 'Abandon Overhaul' order was available. Thanks for the info.
I see you're getting the hang of the workarounds
John
Post by: Balibar on January 31, 2010, 11:32:41 AM
I can think of two possible reasons. The first is to make use of governor bonuses, but it doesn't seem likely that 20% bonus would justify the infrastructure and effort to have minerals stockpiled in both places. The second would be that mines take half the resources of automated mines. In this case, one would see a lower rate of increase in mineral output until the factory count on the mining planet was over half the number of factories being used on Earth to make automated mines for a non-populated mining colony.
Are there other economic issues?
Post by: Father Tim on January 31, 2010, 12:05:01 PM
That said, I've frequently played (or more accurately, NPR'd) races that squat on their homeworld and bring resources to it. Asteroid miners, automated mines, sorium harvesters, freighters and jump ships go out, harvest whatever minerals are available, and carry everything back to the homeworld where all the industry & population are located. They also feature an extremely cautious exploration strategy, strip-mining a single system for everything that can be gathered before moving into the next.
Post by: sloanjh on January 31, 2010, 12:20:22 PM
That being said, I think Aurora has always supported the "why bother" argument of anti-manned spaceflight folks. I don't think this is due to any bias of Steve's, I think it's just the way the economics work out. One of the reasons, IIRC, to put trade in was to provide an economic return for colonizing habitable planets with no minerals. This is also a major reason for putting the mineral levels of Earth where they are - mineral shortages eventually drive your mining off the planet.
One more note: automated mines are a LOT worse in economic terms than manned mines, as long as the manned mines are on a planet with zero infrastructure cost (although with the new civie infrastructure, the infrastructure cost is now a societal cost that's hidden from the player). Roughly speaking, an automated mine's return on investment is 1/2 that of a manned mine - this is a huge barrier to overcome. So the message is to build up a terraforming fleet (or set of installations) and move them to cost~2 worlds to make them cost 0, after which manned mining is essentially free.
John
Post by: Balibar on February 01, 2010, 08:14:58 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Are the Terraforming installations moveable? They are much cheaper in resource costs that a simple Terraformer ship.
So the message is to build up a terraforming fleet (or set of installations) and move them to cost~2 worlds to make them cost 0, after which manned mining is essentially free.
John
Thanks to both Father Tim and John for their thoughtful replies. My early mistake was to try to do everything at once. I have to go back to basics and look at my initial mining output to see what activity (and at what level) is sustainable in the short run. Then I have to look at the goal of finding mineral sources and the most efficient way to exploit them. I think the mine cost vs automine cost is the key.
Post by: Balibar on February 01, 2010, 08:18:46 AM
Post by: sloanjh on February 01, 2010, 08:21:31 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
How does one save the game for future reload? Let's say I want to experiment with something, but I want to be able to come back to the branch point if it doesn't work out as I intended. Also, how would one, say, save a file to distribute as a contest game? Give everyone the same start conditions and see what they do with it.
LOL - I just put in an FAQ about this last night....
John
Post by: sloanjh on February 01, 2010, 08:24:34 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
Are the Terraforming installations moveable? They are much cheaper in resource costs that a simple Terraformer ship.Yes. They're 5x a construction factory (25 holds total) in size.
Quote
Thanks to both Father Tim and John for their thoughtful replies.You're welcome.
Quote
My early mistake was to try to do everything at once. I have to go back to basics and look at my initial mining output to see what activity (and at what level) is sustainable in the short run. Then I have to look at the goal of finding mineral sources and the most efficient way to exploit them. I think the mine cost vs automine cost is the key.Yep, that's how we all learned, and what Steve was going for with creating a game with a ton of trade-offs.
John
Post by: Balibar on February 01, 2010, 08:42:33 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Thanks! The FAQ answered my question nicely.Quote from: "Balibar"How does one save the game for future reload? Let's say I want to experiment with something, but I want to be able to come back to the branch point if it doesn't work out as I intended. Also, how would one, say, save a file to distribute as a contest game? Give everyone the same start conditions and see what they do with it.
LOL - I just put in an FAQ about this last night....
John
Post by: Father Tim on February 01, 2010, 09:13:24 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
Are the Terraforming installations moveable? They are much cheaper in resource costs that a simple Terraformer ship.
No. Er, yes. I think so. I believe they are now (they weren't before) but in multiple trips, like research labs, being larger than 25,000 tons cargo.
Terraforming Modules used to be FAR superior to TIs, when the latter were immobile and TMs cost less than they do now. I still think TMs are the better way to go since they don't require population - and a world you're terraforming is probably very light on population, and requires infrastructure to support that population. It's a lot easier to put 20 Terraforming Modules in orbit of a world than to land enough population & infrastructure to get 1 million workers manning 20 TIs.
Post by: Balibar on February 01, 2010, 10:06:23 AM
Quote from: "Father Tim"
Thanks! One of the difficulties I am having is getting rid of strategy biases from other games.Quote from: "Balibar"Are the Terraforming installations moveable? They are much cheaper in resource costs that a simple Terraformer ship.
No. Er, yes. I think so. I believe they are now (they weren't before) but in multiple trips, like research labs, being larger than 25,000 tons cargo.
Terraforming Modules used to be FAR superior to TIs, when the latter were immobile and TMs cost less than they do now. I still think TMs are the better way to go since they don't require population - and a world you're terraforming is probably very light on population, and requires infrastructure to support that population. It's a lot easier to put 20 Terraforming Modules in orbit of a world than to land enough population & infrastructure to get 1 million workers manning 20 TIs.
Post by: Balibar on February 02, 2010, 11:06:37 AM
Post by: Canaris on February 02, 2010, 11:40:05 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
I have a question about the Research queue. Let's say I am researching a Construction tech with Connie Construction as the leader. I want to research a Power tech next with Peter Power as the leader. What is the best way to avoid losing the research from time of completion to time of the next interrupt? As I understand the queue, I can only queue projects with the same leader as the current one.
As you understand it, it is correct. My suggestion? Just check periodically (once a month, for example) which research projects will be finished and when. Then use smaller increments to get to them. I don't know of any other way - perhaps there is a way to make the game pause when a research project is completed.
Also, you don't lose accumulated research points if you cancel the project, in case you're wondering.
Post by: Hawkeye on February 02, 2010, 01:26:03 PM
Quote from: "Canaris"
Quote from: "Balibar"I have a question about the Research queue. Let's say I am researching a Construction tech with Connie Construction as the leader. I want to research a Power tech next with Peter Power as the leader. What is the best way to avoid losing the research from time of completion to time of the next interrupt? As I understand the queue, I can only queue projects with the same leader as the current one.
As you understand it, it is correct. My suggestion? Just check periodically (once a month, for example) which research projects will be finished and when. Then use smaller increments to get to them. I don't know of any other way - perhaps there is a way to make the game pause when a research project is completed.
Also, you don't lose accumulated research points if you cancel the project, in case you're wondering.
I don´t think this would work, as research (as construction) is only checked every 5 days. What you _can_ do is reducing the number of allocated research labs to the point it takes just those 5 days ´til the next update. This, however, is a lot of micromanagement, I am personaly not willing to spend. I´d very likely just queue the new project, cancel after the next update and create it anew with the desired leader.
Yes, there will be some researchpoints lost, but a few points are not worth the hassle IMO.
Post by: Balibar on February 02, 2010, 09:39:22 PM
Quote from: "Hawkeye"
I´d very likely just queue the new project, cancel after the next update and create it anew with the desired leader.I went with this option. I was satisfied that I get the RP for the entire 5 days. If losing the leader bonus is a problem, one could always queue up the next tech planned in that research group, then cancel and start the tech one wanted next with the right leader. My biggest concern was losing points while researching those racial techs for my FAC design.
Yes, there will be some researchpoints lost, but a few points are not worth the hassle IMO.
Thanks for the advice.
Post by: sloanjh on February 03, 2010, 12:25:22 AM
The way I run my research is to try to have at least my top researcher in each field active with a single lab. Actually, I try to have my top 3 researchers active (so that if/when the best one dies, there's two behind him that are trained up). If a research has a good (~25% or more) bonus, I'll give him 3 labs. These three researchers for each field are working on the top 3 projects in that field, and any who are going to finish soon always have another project queued up. Again, the reason for doing this is not the research per say, it's an investment in my research efficiency by training scientists.
For actual project prioritization, I rank-order among the various fields - am I growing missiles, or productivity. Then starting at the highest priority field, I max out the best researcher in terms of labs, then max out the best researcher in the second field, etc. The reason for playing the "I'm either maxed out or minned out" game is that this gives you the quickest return on your research investment - on average any project you're focusing on will be "half done", and a half-done project doesn't do you any good, so you want to minimize the number of them (which maxing out on a few projects does).
John
Post by: Balibar on February 03, 2010, 07:28:29 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
I would try to have both Connie and Peter active, because only active leaders improve their skills. So at the start, give Connie 1 lab and Peter the rest. Also, queue the next project in Peter's specialty for him, so that any excess RP won't be wasted at project completion. When Peter's project finishes and the next one starts, subtract labs from Peter until he's at 1 lab, and add them to Connie (who might have increased in % or capacity in the mean time). ...Thank you very much for these wonderful pointers. You might want to put this in Erik's tips thread.
John
Post by: Balibar on February 03, 2010, 10:11:52 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
I would try to have both Connie and Peter active, because only active leaders improve their skills.I was wondering whether this applies to governors as well. Should one make a colony to have a governor govern even if one does not make immediate use of the colony? Or are there overhead issues to an empty colony?
Post by: sloanjh on February 03, 2010, 09:16:44 PM
Quote from: "Balibar"
No overhead issues (other than if you make a ton of them, you might slow the game down :-)Quote from: "sloanjh"I would try to have both Connie and Peter active, because only active leaders improve their skills.I was wondering whether this applies to governors as well. Should one make a colony to have a governor govern even if one does not make immediate use of the colony? Or are there overhead issues to an empty colony?
John
Post by: Balibar on February 03, 2010, 10:02:46 PM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
No overhead issues (other than if you make a ton of them, you might slow the game down :-)Thanks! That answered the question I asked in the Mechanics forum on the GeoSurvey Teams as well.
John
Post by: sloanjh on February 03, 2010, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: "Balibar"
Quote from: "sloanjh"No overhead issues (other than if you make a ton of them, you might slow the game down :-)Thanks! That answered the question I asked in the Mechanics forum on the GeoSurvey Teams as well.
John
Not quite - I don't know what the current GeoSurvey rules are; I'm just training them off-world in case Steve's still got things set up so that low-skill teams are more likely to exhaust the resources (which I understand from a game-play sense, but not from a techno-babble sense)
John
Post by: Balibar on February 04, 2010, 08:19:36 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Not quite - I don't know what the current GeoSurvey rules are; I'm just training them off-world in case Steve's still got things set up so that low-skill teams are more likely to exhaust the resources (which I understand from a game-play sense, but not from a techno-babble sense)The moon seems a good place to start training the geologists as it is the first place to be surveyed. I like that idea. There is historical precedent based on Apollo and moon rocks.
Post by: Balibar on February 05, 2010, 09:39:20 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
No overhead issues (other than if you make a ton of them, you might slow the game down :-)After re-reading the Mechanics Forum thread on Geo Survey Teams, I am wondering whether these teams work on moons or asteroids. There is no mention of using them anywhere other than planets. I take it that you have tried a team on Luna. Did it work? Have you ever used a team on an asteroid?
Post by: sloanjh on February 05, 2010, 09:43:20 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
Quote from: "sloanjh"No overhead issues (other than if you make a ton of them, you might slow the game down :-)After re-reading the Mechanics Forum thread on Geo Survey Teams, I am wondering whether these teams work on moons or asteroids. There is no mention of using them anywhere other than planets. I take it that you have tried a team on Luna. Did it work? Have you ever used a team on an asteroid?
Steve has said they do IIRC, and I'm pretty sure I recently had one find something on an asteroid or comet.
John
Post by: Balibar on February 05, 2010, 09:55:50 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Steve has said they do IIRC, and I'm pretty sure I recently had one find something on an asteroid or comet.Thanks!
John
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 05, 2010, 09:56:07 AM
Post by: Balibar on February 05, 2010, 06:40:48 PM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
It's my understanding that any body that you can establish a colony on can be surveyed by a survey team. Note that most bodies can have a colony established for automated mining but can't be populated with colonists.I can confirm that the survey team works on Luna. I am trying an Asteroid next. Unfortunately I discovered that, somehow, I screwed up the game creation and Mars has a colony cost of 36 or something like that.
Back to the drawing board.
Post by: Balibar on February 06, 2010, 08:49:05 AM
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 06, 2010, 09:07:16 AM
Best bet for defeating them is being able to stay outside thier engagement range and salvo missiles.
Post by: Balibar on February 06, 2010, 09:40:04 AM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
800t with meson sounds like swarm but 4k/kps doesn't. At least not in my limited experience with them.Thanks!
Best bet for defeating them is being able to stay outside thier engagement range and salvo missiles.
Post by: Balibar on February 08, 2010, 08:16:40 AM
Post by: Balibar on February 08, 2010, 08:27:51 AM
Is this all correct?
What happens with a ship overhaul? It appears that the clock is rewound a bit each day in overhaul. The costs were unclear to me. Can you predict ahead of time how long the overhaul will take? The other question I am completely unsure of is what happens to the crew and their training. Do the crew remain with the ship? Or does the trained crew go into the crew pool? If they go into the crew pool, do they come out trained LIFO? Or does their training just raise the average training of the pool?
Post by: Hawkeye on February 08, 2010, 09:59:33 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
A question about missile loading. I forgot to put in the ordinance in a design. The design is locked. I was able to manually load missiles into the ship. Is there a way for me to change the default loadout for my ship so that I can use a group (fleet) order to load and it will happen automatically rather than me manually loading it from the ship screen?
Have you tried to set a new default loadout? Because I´m pretty sure you don´t need to unlock a design to do this.
Post by: Hawkeye on February 08, 2010, 10:15:09 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
This question is about maintenance. The post in the Rules forum seems out of date. I understand that the military class ships have a ticking maintenance clock. As the clock advances, breakdowns become more likely. I believe the Engineering sections affect how quickly the clock advances, but also they contain maintenance supplies for doing immediate repairs. You can trade maintenance supplies between ships in a fleet. You can reload your maintenance supplies at a colony if it has maintenance supplies. You can build maintenance supplies with your industrial output.
Is this all correct?
Yes
Quote from: "Balibar"
What happens with a ship overhaul? It appears that the clock is rewound a bit each day in overhaul. The costs were unclear to me. Can you predict ahead of time how long the overhaul will take? The other question I am completely unsure of is what happens to the crew and their training. Do the crew remain with the ship? Or does the trained crew go into the crew pool? If they go into the crew pool, do they come out trained LIFO? Or does their training just raise the average training of the pool?
The Crew and training rating stay with the ship, otherwise, there would be no point in training a ship up.
Re. calculating how long an overhaul takes: You probably can.
The most relevant entry I could find is this: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1537 (http://aurora.pentarch.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1537)
According to this, to get rid of one year, you have to spend 3 months in overhaul.
Post by: Balibar on February 08, 2010, 10:55:23 AM
Quote from: "Hawkeye"
The Crew and training rating stay with the ship, otherwise, there would be no point in training a ship up.Thanks for the info and that thread. I will see how long my ship overhaul takes and see if the 3 month/year rule works. I will try your suggestion on the missile loading tonight. I had assumed that locked meant locked and I was looking for something on the ship window rather than the design window.
Re. calculating how long an overhaul takes: You probably can.
The most relevant entry I could find is this: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1537 (http://aurora.pentarch.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1537)
According to this, to get rid of one year, you have to spend 3 months in overhaul.
Post by: sloanjh on February 08, 2010, 08:08:41 PM
Quote from: "Hawkeye"
Actually, I think it's "not quite". The engineering sections don't affect how quickly the clock advances; instead they set the "base" rate of failures (as the clock advantage the rate of failures is some additional factor times this base rate).Quote from: "Balibar"This question is about maintenance. The post in the Rules forum seems out of date. I understand that the military class ships have a ticking maintenance clock. As the clock advances, breakdowns become more likely. I believe the Engineering sections affect how quickly the clock advances, but also they contain maintenance supplies for doing immediate repairs. You can trade maintenance supplies between ships in a fleet. You can reload your maintenance supplies at a colony if it has maintenance supplies. You can build maintenance supplies with your industrial output.
Is this all correct?
Yes
John
Post by: Balibar on February 08, 2010, 09:24:09 PM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Actually, I think it's "not quite". The engineering sections don't affect how quickly the clock advances; instead they set the "base" rate of failures (as the clock advantage the rate of failures is some additional factor times this base rate).Thanks for the clarification.
John
Post by: MoonDragon on February 09, 2010, 01:39:58 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
I had assumed that locked meant locked and I was looking for something on the ship window rather than the design window.
After you lock a design, you can still change some aspects of the class. Things like default names scheme, command level required, etc. It is quite possible that you can change the default loadout. Especially as new missiles becomes available, it would make sense to change the loadouts of your missile ships, without having to design a new class identical in every way but the missile loadout.
Post by: Balibar on February 09, 2010, 06:38:37 AM
Quote from: "MoonDragon"
In this case the implementation is a welcome deviation from the literal meaning. It is much more functional this way.Quote from: "Balibar"I had assumed that locked meant locked and I was looking for something on the ship window rather than the design window.
After you lock a design, you can still change some aspects of the class. Things like default names scheme, command level required, etc. It is quite possible that you can change the default loadout. Especially as new missiles becomes available, it would make sense to change the loadouts of your missile ships, without having to design a new class identical in every way but the missile loadout.
Post by: Balibar on February 09, 2010, 08:37:59 AM
Post by: Brian Neumann on February 09, 2010, 08:53:37 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
A question about the Events Log. I am playing around with the colors to make it easier to spot certain event types. I would like a clearer marker for the separator between reports: the one that says xxx time elapsed. The background is a very subtle darker shade of grey compared with other events. I would like to change that to make the separator stand out better. I am focused on the current report and sometimes it is hard for me to find where the current report begins. Some of the problem is the small text and my elderly eyesight.
Try giving the race itself a colour. There is a check box at the bottom of the screen to do this. I find that it helps alot. If the race colour is not different enough you can change it on the race detail screen.
Brian
Post by: Balibar on February 09, 2010, 09:55:02 AM
Quote from: "Brian"
Try giving the race itself a colour. There is a check box at the bottom of the screen to do this. I find that it helps alot. If the race colour is not different enough you can change it on the race detail screen.Thanks! I will try this tonight.
Brian
Post by: Balibar on February 09, 2010, 10:06:35 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
The way I run my research is to try to have at least my top researcher in each field active with a single lab. Actually, I try to have my top 3 researchers active (so that if/when the best one dies, there's two behind him that are trained up). If a research has a good (~25% or more) bonus, I'll give him 3 labs. These three researchers for each field are working on the top 3 projects in that field, and any who are going to finish soon always have another project queued up. Again, the reason for doing this is not the research per say, it's an investment in my research efficiency by training scientists.I would like to revisit this issue. Does a researcher have to be working on a project in his specialty to gain bonus %? Or could he be working on a project in another specialty? I have 3 scientists with Construction bonus and no scientist with Defense or Logistics bonus. I found some ruins and need to research the Troop Module, but it is not my immediate need and I don't have a researcher with that skill to give him as a training project. If the project area doesn't matter to gaining skill, I would give one of my Construction specialists the Troop Module to work on with 1 lab until I get my immediate need finished.
Post by: sloanjh on February 09, 2010, 10:10:14 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
Quote from: "sloanjh"The way I run my research is to try to have at least my top researcher in each field active with a single lab. Actually, I try to have my top 3 researchers active (so that if/when the best one dies, there's two behind him that are trained up). If a research has a good (~25% or more) bonus, I'll give him 3 labs. These three researchers for each field are working on the top 3 projects in that field, and any who are going to finish soon always have another project queued up. Again, the reason for doing this is not the research per say, it's an investment in my research efficiency by training scientists.I would like to revisit this issue. Does a researcher have to be working on a project in his specialty to gain bonus %? Or could he be working on a project in another specialty? I have 3 scientists with Construction bonus and no scientist with Defense or Logistics bonus. I found some ruins and need to research the Troop Module, but it is not my immediate need and I don't have a researcher with that skill to give him as a training project. If the project area doesn't matter to gaining skill, I would give one of my Construction specialists the Troop Module to work on with 1 lab until I get my immediate need finished.
As far as I know, no. The researcher can be working on anything and still have the potential for getting trained up.
John
Post by: Balibar on February 09, 2010, 10:21:25 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
As far as I know, no. The researcher can be working on anything and still have the potential for getting trained up.Thanks!
John
Post by: Steve Walmsley on February 09, 2010, 11:31:51 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
The researcher can be working on anything and still have the potential for getting trained up.Yes, that's correct
Steve
Post by: Balibar on February 09, 2010, 05:24:32 PM
Quote from: "Brian"
Try giving the race itself a colour. There is a check box at the bottom of the screen to do this. I find that it helps alot. If the race colour is not different enough you can change it on the race detail screen.That did the trick. Thanks!
Brian
Post by: Balibar on February 09, 2010, 05:25:32 PM
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Thank you for taking the time to answer.Quote from: "sloanjh"The researcher can be working on anything and still have the potential for getting trained up.Yes, that's correct
Steve
Post by: Balibar on February 12, 2010, 09:55:13 PM
Post by: sloanjh on February 12, 2010, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: "Balibar"
A question on Colony Cost. I reviewed the tutorial, but I did not see Water covered. I found a planet that has a temperature in range (10.0) and an oxygen pressure of 0.303. The colony cost is 2 because the atmosphere is not breathable, but it would take only 3 Terraformer-years to remove enough oxygen to make the atmosphere OK. There is no water on the planet. What will the colony cost of this planet be when the atmosphere is breathable?
I thought it was supposed to be 1.0, but the last time I was in this situation it came out as 0.0. So I don't know
John
Post by: Balibar on February 13, 2010, 05:57:19 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
I thought it was supposed to be 1.0, but the last time I was in this situation it came out as 0.0. So I don't knowThanks for your reply. I will report my result when I get that far.
John
Post by: ZimRathbone on February 13, 2010, 06:56:15 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
A question on Colony Cost. I reviewed the tutorial, but I did not see Water covered. I found a planet that has a temperature in range (10.0) and an oxygen pressure of 0.303. The colony cost is 2 because the atmosphere is not breathable, but it would take only 3 Terraformer-years to remove enough oxygen to make the atmosphere OK. There is no water on the planet. What will the colony cost of this planet be when the atmosphere is breathable?
0.0
Colony cost only relates to whether the atmosphere is breathable or not, and the temperature. As far as i can see the hydrosphere only affects the albedo and hence the temperature, and you cant change it
Post by: Balibar on February 13, 2010, 02:44:34 PM
Quote from: "ZimRathbone"
Colony cost only relates to whether the atmosphere is breathable or not, and the temperature. As far as i can see the hydrosphere only affects the albedo and hence the temperature, and you cant change itThanks for the information.
Post by: Balibar on February 13, 2010, 10:52:57 PM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
It's my understanding that any body that you can establish a colony on can be surveyed by a survey team. Note that most bodies can have a colony established for automated mining but can't be populated with colonists.I can confirm that geology teams can successfully survey an asteroid.
Post by: Balibar on February 15, 2010, 09:32:54 AM
I am trying to deal with my mineral shortages. The first one to go into negative balance was Vendarite. Second was Gallicite. Third was Sorium. I was dealing with it by mining asteroids near to Earth and everything was fine until the Sorium petered out on the asteroid. I have two choices:
1. There is a great asteroid 3 system jumps away with lots of all 3 minerals (and a few others). The accessibility is 1 for Sorium, 0.9 for Vendarite and 0.8 for Gallicite. The amounts are over 100,000 for each one. The problem is how long it takes my freighter to move 1 automine.
2. There is a good stopgap asteroid near Earth with enough Sorium to cover the gap, but no Vendarite or Gallicite.
In order to use #2, I have to use 2 or 3 sources to capture all three minerals at high accessibility. I need to figure out how much is being used by which activities. I can calculate my factory inputs based on the material available. The maintenance is approximated, but it is fairly small anyway. The big question mark is mineral consumption from ship building. How do I calculate total wealth cost and mineral consumption rate for a given slipway based on the project? I can get the mineral costs for the ship, but I cannot figure out how to determine how fast the slipway works on the project.
In order to rely on #1, I will need civilian help. Do I set up a supply X automines from Earth and demand X automines from Asteroid #XYZ ? Are there any other steps needed to help the process along? Making more of my own freighters would help, but it will not solve the immediate problem.
I will proceed with moving automines to the asteroid 3 systems away. But I would like to determine how many automines to move quickly within Sol and satisfy all my mineral requirements for the time necessary to get System Kruger up to the necessary output.
Post by: sloanjh on February 15, 2010, 10:38:58 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
Two questions related to the same problem.Welcome to Aurora :-) especially if your asteriod in Sol is on the way to Kruger. If you notice your run rate has gone positive and you've still got automines left, you can start shipping those directly to Kruger.
I am trying to deal with my mineral shortages. The first one to go into negative balance was Vendarite. Second was Gallicite. Third was Sorium. I was dealing with it by mining asteroids near to Earth and everything was fine until the Sorium petered out on the asteroid. I have two choices:
1. There is a great asteroid 3 system jumps away with lots of all 3 minerals (and a few others). The accessibility is 1 for Sorium, 0.9 for Vendarite and 0.8 for Gallicite. The amounts are over 100,000 for each one. The problem is how long it takes my freighter to move 1 automine.
2. There is a good stopgap asteroid near Earth with enough Sorium to cover the gap, but no Vendarite or Gallicite.
Note that the dilemma that you're in is standard, and is at the heart of the game. Also note that neither of the two mining options you've found look good to me - I always try to find mineral sources that have duranium at 0.5 or more in addition to the secondary mineral that I'm looking for. Otherwise (as you point out) you have to build multiple mines per factory to keep your industry going, which is a bad (from the economic growth perspective) situation to be in. Finally, this is why it's a good idea to start cranking out freighters from day one - you're going to be in these sorts of situations a lot, and it helps to have your own shipping capacity to move things around.
John
Post by: Balibar on February 15, 2010, 08:11:59 PM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
The first Sol Asteroid has at this point:
Note that the dilemma that you're in is standard, and is at the heart of the game. Also note that neither of the two mining options you've found look good to me - I always try to find mineral sources that have duranium at 0.5 or more in addition to the secondary mineral that I'm looking for.
Dur 112,564 (1)
Ven 13,524 (1)
Gal 9,055 (1)
I have 33 automines on it.
The second Sol Asteroid started out with Dur (1), Sor (1), Corun (1) and Gal (1). The Duranium has been exhausted and the Sorium is down to (.65). I am switching my Asteroid Mining TG which has 5 ships x 10 mining modules per ship from this asteroid to a new one with this:
Dur 9,031 (1)
Bor 2,919 (1)
Ven 523 (1)
Sor 5,559 (1)
Uri 2,742 (1)
The Kruger asteroid has:
Neu 102,392 (.9)
Corbo 176391 (1)
Tri 172,216 (1)
Bor 36,092 (.9)
Mer 159,992 (.9)
Ven 60,017 (.9)
Sor 105,616 (1)
Gal 159,953 (.
I agree with your point about the Duranium, but I thought the other deposits were worth it. And Earth had a decent Duranium deposit to start with plus my geology team found another 100,000. At this time Earth has Dur 252,740 (1) so Duranium is a low priority for me at this time.
Quote from: "sloanjh"
I have been going from one bottleneck to another in this game. I started out not knowing I was burning through wealth faster than the US Congress, so I had to fix my wealth generation. Then I was making ships too fast so I ended up with a -10 grade crew. So, I am trying to increase the military academy and I have several slipways on pause. I should have been pumping out freighters, as you said, but that is just one boo boo out of many for me in this game.
Otherwise (as you point out) you have to build multiple mines per factory to keep your industry going, which is a bad (from the economic growth perspective) situation to be in. Finally, this is why it's a good idea to start cranking out freighters from day one - you're going to be in these sorts of situations a lot, and it helps to have your own shipping capacity to move things around.
John
Thanks for the pointers.
Post by: Steve Walmsley on February 16, 2010, 04:36:06 PM
Quote from: "Balibar"
I have been going from one bottleneck to another in this game. I started out not knowing I was burning through wealth faster than the US Congress, so I had to fix my wealth generation. Then I was making ships too fast so I ended up with a -10 grade crew. So, I am trying to increase the military academy and I have several slipways on pause. I should have been pumping out freighters, as you said, but that is just one boo boo out of many for me in this game.Everyone does this
. Aurora is all about managing shortages and bottlenecks. It does reduce the 'rich get richer' problem that you find in many 4x games. You have to manage your economy or it can crash and it can take some time to recover.Steve
Post by: Nabobalis on February 16, 2010, 04:41:36 PM
Post by: Steve Walmsley on February 16, 2010, 04:46:10 PM
Quote from: "Nabobalis"
What does racial wealth do in the game? I can't seem to find anything about it on the forum, I must be blind.Everything you build, you have to pay for using wealth. Also research costs 1 wealth per research point. If you look at the Wealth tab on the F2 window, it shows what you are spending and where your wealth is coming from.
Steve
Post by: Nabobalis on February 16, 2010, 04:49:16 PM
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "Nabobalis"What does racial wealth do in the game? I can't seem to find anything about it on the forum, I must be blind.Everything you build, you have to pay for using wealth. Also research costs 1 wealth per research point. If you look at the Wealth tab on the F2 window, it shows what you are spending and where your wealth is coming from.
Steve
I see, I can't believe I never went onto that screen. Thanks.
Post by: Balibar on February 19, 2010, 08:14:50 PM
Post by: mikew on February 19, 2010, 08:31:44 PM
Quote from: "Balibar"
My XenoArcheology Team Deciphered a Ruins. I have Engineers working on recovering artifacts. One of my Engineer Brigades recoverd 22 x Nuclear Pulse Engine 0.9. This is obsolete tech for me. Can these be scrapped as I could use the Gallicite? Are they transported with Cargo Holds or is there a special transport device needed for parts?
Yes, you can scrap them. Go to the industry tab of the economics form, and click on the stockpile button. You can then select the items and scrap them (or disassemble them to attempt to gain info on the technology, which is not a factor in this case). Using freighters you could ship the components in holds, or scrap them in place and then ship the minerals.
Mike
Post by: Balibar on February 20, 2010, 06:57:48 AM
Quote from: "mikew"
Yes, you can scrap them. Go to the industry tab of the economics form, and click on the stockpile button. You can then select the items and scrap them (or disassemble them to attempt to gain info on the technology, which is not a factor in this case). Using freighters you could ship the components in holds, or scrap them in place and then ship the minerals.Thanks!
Mike
Post by: Balibar on February 21, 2010, 07:02:07 AM
1. I need a ship with a flag bridge to have a roving task force.
2. Once I have such a ship, I create a Task Force, assign a Task Force Commander and transfer the location of the Task Force to my ship with the flag bridge.
3. The new task force sub-command slots should appear in the Leader Window under Staff.
4. The Survey Bonus of the Survey Officer is applied to all ships in the Task Force if they are in the same system.
5. 1/8th of the Survey Bonus of the Task Force Commander is applied to all ships in the Task Force if they are in the same system.
Are these correct?
A secondary question: Once my survey of Sol has been completed, does my Survey officer in the Home Fleet Task Force do anything? Does he somehow help Sensor operations in Sol?
Post by: Hawkeye on February 21, 2010, 08:15:19 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
A Queston about Task Forces and Command Staff. Let's say I want to create a Survey Task Force. The purpose of the Task Force is have a command staff coordinating survey efforts in one of those systems with a gazillion asteroids. As I understand it:
1. I need a ship with a flag bridge to have a roving task force.
2. Once I have such a ship, I create a Task Force, assign a Task Force Commander and transfer the location of the Task Force to my ship with the flag bridge.
3. The new task force sub-command slots should appear in the Leader Window under Staff.
4. The Survey Bonus of the Survey Officer is applied to all ships in the Task Force if they are in the same system.
5. 1/8th of the Survey Bonus of the Task Force Commander is applied to all ships in the Task Force if they are in the same system.
Are these correct?
To my knowledge, yes
Quote from: "Balibar"
A secondary question: Once my survey of Sol has been completed, does my Survey officer in the Home Fleet Task Force do anything? Does he somehow help Sensor operations in Sol?
I don´t think so. Actually, I don´t think anything improves sensor operations.
Post by: Balibar on February 21, 2010, 09:08:22 AM
Quote from: "Hawkeye"
To my knowledge, yesThanks!
I don´t think so. Actually, I don´t think anything improves sensor operations.
Post by: Balibar on February 26, 2010, 07:23:36 PM
Post by: sloanjh on February 26, 2010, 08:02:44 PM
Quote from: "Balibar"
Were Sensors/Fire Controls Changed with the 5.0 Update? It seems the names for designs are different and it seems I need twice as large a sensor as I did before. Was the EM sensitivity in the range calculation before?
Yes. No.
There was a thread where Steve wanted to get rid of the certainty associated with the distance at which an enemy active sensor would detect your ship - in 4.9 this was known exactly since both power and resolution were reported. The original thought was to remove the resolution information entirely, but it was felt that that was a bit unrealistic/drastic, since one should be able to tell the difference between an anti-missile (resolution 1) and anti-ship (resolution ~100) sensor from its emissions. What ended up getting implemented was to make the detection range depend on the EM sensitivity - this means that you know approximately what the range of an enemy sensor was by guessing the enemy's EM sensitivity, but would be off if your guess was off. The technobabble is that an active sensor has to detect the signal that it bounces off the enemy ship, and so increased passive technology would allow one to build better active sensor suites.
I think the break-even vs. 4.9 is around strength-8 or so.
John
PS - thanks for bringing this up. I'd forgotten about it and so haven't been focusing much on EM passives....
Post by: Balibar on February 27, 2010, 09:49:32 AM
Quote from: "sloanjh"
Yes. No.Thanks!
Quote from: "sloanjh"
I think the break-even vs. 4.9 is around strength-8 or so.Based on your answer and looking at the formula given in the Create Research Project Window,
it appears that the new factor is EM_Sensitivity / 10, so
I am guessing that EM Sensitivity of 10 would create the same relationship between Sensor Size and Strength that existed in 4.9.
Post by: Steve Walmsley on February 28, 2010, 09:40:26 AM
Quote from: "Balibar"
Based on your answer and looking at the formula given in the Create Research Project Window,Yes, that's right. Compared to v4.9, low tech sensors will have a little less range and high tech will have a little more. The alien sensor ranges shown on the galactic map assume an EM sensitivity of 10
it appears that the new factor is EM_Sensitivity / 10, so
I am guessing that EM Sensitivity of 10 would create the same relationship between Sensor Size and Strength that existed in 4.9.
Steve