Author Topic: Update on Progress  (Read 55321 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1469
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #165 on: January 13, 2019, 07:40:42 AM »
Xmas 2020 : C# under tree.

:D
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7738
  • Thanked: 3769 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #166 on: January 27, 2019, 03:16:58 PM »
Just some quick notes on balance updates and this seems to be the best place to put them.

1) I have updated the Ground-based Geological Survey rules post with higher chances of discovering potential survey sites. It is up from about 1.1 to 1.7 per system now, with around double the chances for the higher end potential.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg107705#msg107705

2) I have updated the New Maintenance Rules post to reflect changes in capacity per maintenance facility. Instead of the progression being 1000 tons, 1200, 1400, 1600, 2400, etc., it is now 1000, 1250, 1600, 2000, 2500, 3200, etc.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg101959#msg101959

3) I have updated the Ground Force Construction Complexes post with the change in population requirement to one million.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg110520#msg110520
 

Offline Xkill

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • Posts: 75
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #167 on: January 29, 2019, 11:45:07 AM »
I wonder if Steve has or will do a serious benchmark experiment. Something like 20 NPRs on some 250 systems. The general changes sound great, and the performance improvements make it seem like this could be doable for normal gameplay. The interrupts sure would suck though...
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7738
  • Thanked: 3769 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #168 on: January 29, 2019, 12:50:50 PM »
I have added an option to disable civilian fuel harvesters to the new game options

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg106373#msg106373

I have changed NPR distances to have both minimum and maximum ranges.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg108824#msg108824
 
The following users thanked this post: SpikeTheHobbitMage, mtm84, PlasmaXJ, pwhk, Stryker

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7738
  • Thanked: 3769 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #169 on: January 29, 2019, 01:29:49 PM »
I have doubled the tax gained from civilian shipping.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg97506#msg97506
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7738
  • Thanked: 3769 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #170 on: February 02, 2019, 02:30:18 PM »
My new campaign is called Cold Sun, because Sol is starting to cool down. As part of the preparation I have been improving the stats of the Sol system to ensure each body uses the same temperature mechanics as the rest of the universe and the stats are up to date. There are a few minor changes with the main one being that Mars is now -61C instead of -48C, which makes it colony cost 2.12, rather than 2.00, and the Galilean Moons are -161C rather than -148C, which makes them CC 6.30 rather than 5.75. They can still become ideal with terraforming.
 
The following users thanked this post: JakeLoustone, SpikeTheHobbitMage, Stryker

Offline Hazard

  • Captain
  • **********
  • H
  • Posts: 450
  • Thanked: 37 times
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #171 on: February 02, 2019, 04:47:50 PM »
Not with that sun cooling option they can.

If anything, it's now plausible to terraform Mercury for eventual entry into the goldilocks zone. Terraforming Venus isn't plausible because that's just a lot more work just to get rid of the massive carbondioxide atmosphere and get it something vaguely breathable.
 

Offline Hamof

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • H
  • Posts: 12
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #172 on: February 02, 2019, 05:44:19 PM »
Not with that sun cooling option they can.

If anything, it's now plausible to terraform Mercury for eventual entry into the goldilocks zone. Terraforming Venus isn't plausible because that's just a lot more work just to get rid of the massive carbondioxide atmosphere and get it something vaguely breathable.
You could stick a bunch of terraforming ships on Venus and just leave them there for however long it ends up taking, that's viable now. (From a, the game will actually last that long, perspective. May not be viable from an affordability perspective.)
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7738
  • Thanked: 3769 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #173 on: February 02, 2019, 05:55:52 PM »
Not with that sun cooling option they can.

I meant for a normal game.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7738
  • Thanked: 3769 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #174 on: February 04, 2019, 11:56:42 AM »
Just noting here that new shipping lines can only be created for each race after the initial shipping line has built its first ship. This is to avoid conventional starts building up multiple shipping lines before any ships are created.
 
The following users thanked this post: SpikeTheHobbitMage, Jovus, Stryker

Offline froggiest1982

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • f
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #175 on: February 04, 2019, 02:35:28 PM »
Just noting here that new shipping lines can only be created for each race after the initial shipping line has built its first ship. This is to avoid conventional starts building up multiple shipping lines before any ships are created.


A tiny little feature, but probably needed. I think you are doing a great job tweaking the conventional start. Starting from the wealth build up and now the shipping lines.
 

Offline Scandinavian

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 82
  • Thanked: 24 times
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #176 on: February 04, 2019, 11:33:19 PM »
With the "subsidize" option removed, shipping lines need to be prevented from issuing dividends in years when they are not making any profits net of vessel depreciation and running costs (to the extent that they pay for those).

In VB6 a line would occasionally liquidate itself by overpaying dividends. Which in reality would be a fair enough way for owners to withdraw from the market, but with spawning new lines being random and without a merger/consolidation mechanic for defunct lines, it leaves you with useless dummy lines.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alucard

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1208
  • Thanked: 122 times
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #177 on: February 05, 2019, 12:01:33 PM »
That's a really good point - it has happened multiple times in my games and the only way to fix it was to use the Subsidize button.
 

Offline SpikeTheHobbitMage

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 99
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #178 on: February 05, 2019, 12:16:39 PM »
If a shipping line liquidates itself (no ships, no money), then it should be removed from the list.  Combined with the rule that a new line can only be created if every existing line has ships, this would limit the number of shipping companies.
 
The following users thanked this post: JakeLoustone, Alucard

Offline froggiest1982

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • f
  • Posts: 54
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Update on Progress
« Reply #179 on: February 05, 2019, 04:55:14 PM »
If a shipping line liquidates itself (no ships, no money), then it should be removed from the list.  Combined with the rule that a new line can only be created if every existing line has ships, this would limit the number of shipping companies.

I agree.

I believe Steve cannot see yet the effects long term on both Subsidize button removed and also the dividend glitch (imported from VB6 version) therefore he is still simply not able to tweak this part yet. I am sure that as soon as he'll go for a stable 100/200 year game test run he will also change a few other things such as maintenance that is looking very expensive at the moment. It is same as the wealth revamp, which was good and then he needed to change again based on the few first tests; he may change that again if he sees that it's not working with larger empires.

It is part of the development and the balance, so I will be prudent before pointing out something radical.

From the 5.12 version which was for long the standard to the 6.0 there were many changes in VB6 which were made after years of intensive gameplay. Based on the fact that fundamentally Aurora C# is the same game but with few more features we can assume that Steve's work is not only influenced by the balance that these new features comport but also by the experiences he had during the whole Aurora development. Especially when it comes to feature interactions.
In fact, on final note sometimes it is not only the single feature (ie shipping lines) but how that feature is linked to all the others. In this case, we have a small tree that could be expanded exponentially but if kept at bare would still be:

Shipping Lines -- Civilian Ship Spawn -- Civilian Ship Design

The above still not touching the Logistic or the Wealth.

I think the key and probably what Steve is also trying to keep under control is the DWARF FORTRESS CHICKENS CPU KILLER EFFECT. If Aurora C# may or may not have the issue with multiple NPCs and Civilian Companies (we don't know that yet) this is not meaning that we could just overkill CPUs (Aurora runs single threaded) with millions of single processes.

Again balance.
 
The following users thanked this post: Lord Vinkel

 

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