Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41
The Academy / Ground Forces. Targeting Priority.
« Last post by gateisgreen on January 13, 2025, 01:53:38 PM »
Noob here, don't kick, please.

Finally, I've researched biggest and baddest Ultra-Heavy Vehicle (siege Cyclop-class mech) for my ground forces.. but discovered a quite troubling matter.
It is the heaviest unit in my roster - 536size with 4xSHAV! Which means, I have very few shots in my disposal after deploying those beasts in a standard formation.
I predict: enemy numbered infantry will soak up all the shots rendering siege machines mostly ineffective (assuming their low number in formation due to size).

Question for players: how to ensure that shots will hit enemy heavily armoured targets? Not be wasted on infantry?

Thank you!
42
The Academy / Re: Struggling with targetting and lunching missles
« Last post by khalimist on January 11, 2025, 09:04:51 AM »
Thank you very much mr. Walmsley!!! It works :) And I learned something new now.
BTW what a great game you've created! It brings me a lot of entertainment. Thank  you for that!
43
The Academy / Re: Struggling with targetting and lunching missles
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on January 11, 2025, 08:21:41 AM »
The fire control to which you have assigned the target has too high a resolution to lock-on to the hostile ships at that range.

A fire control with a resolution of 160 is designed to engage ships of 8000 tons or more. With smaller ships than 8000 tons the range is modified by (Ship Size / 8000 tons)^2. So in this case, to target something of 750 tons, the range would to be less than (750/8000) x (750/8000) x 122.5m, which is 1.08m.

Fortunately, you already have a fire control on the ship than can target small ships or missiles, so you can just move the anti-ship launchers over to the AMM fire control.
44
The Academy / Struggling with targetting and lunching missles
« Last post by khalimist on January 11, 2025, 07:40:17 AM »
Hi Guys,

After hours trying to figure out by my self how to target a hostile ship and lunch missles towards it, I give up and ask for ypur help and advice.
I have a ship with active sensors, adequate fire control and missles, hostile ship in sensors/FC/missle range, but yet I cannot perform attack.
I see hostile ship on my list of potential targets. I order my ships to attack target however i get a error message in event log as following:
ship has an active target that cannot be attacked. It may be an invalid target or out of range of the assigned fire control or weapons.
Please help. Alias civ is marked as hostile if its relevant...

45
C# Tutorials / Re: Creating systems and their jump connections without DB editing
« Last post by LuuBluum on December 04, 2024, 02:59:40 PM »
Quote from: kks on June 29, 2024, 05:56:26 PM
Which is putting up a new question: Given that you have two chains of systems, one ending in system A, one in system B. How can you connect A to B without DB editing?

The following procedure should work, I think. Will test it tommorow.
Explore an JP in A.
If the System is not B, delete it and start from the first step.
Else you succeded.

Problems could arise if you generate a connection to another known system in one of the chains, as you can't delete that. Maybe just delete the JP then? Does that work without issues? I'll report my findings when I test it.
To reply to this (since they never did get back to us), honestly the database edit here is pretty safe to do. Just take an unexplored JP in the database (which will have its "destination" set to 0, indicating unexplored) and set its destination (I can't recall the column name but the value is 0 for any unexplored JP) and set its destination to some other unexplored JP in the desired system you wish to connect to, and vice versa. As long as you make sure that every jump point is a 1:1 pair of unique endpoints (that both actually exist), then everything works just fine.

I know, I know, "without database editing" is the name of the thread, but sometimes it's just easier to edit the database.
46
The Academy / Re: New system entry jump point 3 years from planets
« Last post by bankshot on December 03, 2024, 11:30:37 AM »
I also put one 30% size missile launcher and a small magazine on my geosurvey ships.  It is loaded with survey missiles for planets that are either too dangerous to visit directly or are too far out for convenience.  I also have an extra long range variant for distant binaries with just a few bodies.  At 1,500 km/s the missiles may take several years to get there but I can build a size 4 missile that can deliver a size 1 survey buoy to targets up to 500b distant to convert my 99% system body survey to 100%

Quote from: nuclearslurpee on December 02, 2024, 07:10:35 PM
I'll add for my two cents, Lagrange Points/LPs are really only practical for traveling between distant stars in a binary+ system. For traveling between planets they're rarely of any use due to being offset 60 degrees, so on average you're traveling the same distance regardless of LPs and in any case they don't work well with cycled orders when you're trying to automate, e.g., colony growth shipments.

Two exceptions to this - sometimes gas giants have terrestrial moons that are large enough to stabilize.  Doing so lets you easily access all moons around the giant.  Or if you have a Lagrange point that happens to be near an outer system jump point, but note that the LP will eventually move away depending on the body's orbital period.  And as nuclearslurpee noted that can be very bad for cycled orders.
47
The Academy / Re: New system entry jump point 3 years from planets
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on December 03, 2024, 03:29:49 AM »
Quote from: nuclearslurpee on December 02, 2024, 07:10:35 PM
I'll add for my two cents, Lagrange Points/LPs are really only practical for traveling between distant stars in a binary+ system. For traveling between planets they're rarely of any use due to being offset 60 degrees, so on average you're traveling the same distance regardless of LPs and in any case they don't work well with cycled orders when you're trying to automate, e.g., colony growth shipments.

In this case as long as you can create a LP around whichever star doesn't already have one, it will be useful.

Also, if you plan to create one, use the highest mass planet available, as it will be quicker. The time required is on the System View window in the farthest right column of the system body section.
48
The Academy / Re: New system entry jump point 3 years from planets
« Last post by nuclearslurpee on December 02, 2024, 07:10:35 PM »
I'll add for my two cents, Lagrange Points/LPs are really only practical for traveling between distant stars in a binary+ system. For traveling between planets they're rarely of any use due to being offset 60 degrees, so on average you're traveling the same distance regardless of LPs and in any case they don't work well with cycled orders when you're trying to automate, e.g., colony growth shipments.

In this case as long as you can create a LP around whichever star doesn't already have one, it will be useful.
49
The Academy / Re: New system entry jump point 3 years from planets
« Last post by Garfunkel on December 02, 2024, 06:54:35 PM »
Not at the moment, no, but its existence means you only have to create one additional LP to traverse the system instead of two
50
The Academy / Re: New system entry jump point 3 years from planets
« Last post by Mark Yanning on December 02, 2024, 04:52:25 PM »
Ok, thanks. So that lonly LP is not usefull at the moment it seems :)
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk