Author Topic: External Hangars/Docking Ports  (Read 853 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adseria

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • A
  • Posts: 45
Re: External Hangars/Docking Ports
« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2018, 04:32:12 PM »
Well then. . .  It sounds like you are asking for twice the Hangar Bay capacity in the same amount of hull space, at the cost of all the other stuff Hangar Bays do that isn't "hold ships."  I fail to see how that would make Aurora more fun.  All I can see that it would do is unbalance the game further in favour of fighters/small craft -- something I think the game already suffers from.

In short, I think it is a terrible suggestion and I am opposed to it.

I made a suggestion, and tried to answer people's questions about a component that I feel would fit well into the game as it stands at the moment. Now, you're saying it's a bad suggestion because it doesn't fit with your opinion of how the game should be played? Or did I misunderstand?
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • S
  • Posts: 7234
  • Thanked: 2383 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: External Hangars/Docking Ports
« Reply #16 on: October 09, 2018, 05:11:27 PM »
I made a suggestion, and tried to answer people's questions about a component that I feel would fit well into the game as it stands at the moment. Now, you're saying it's a bad suggestion because it doesn't fit with your opinion of how the game should be played? Or did I misunderstand?

No, I think he is concerned that would not be balanced. When designing ships you should be faced with a series of choices that usually involve a trade-off between two or more competing factors. If that decision is obvious because one option is far better than the other, then it isn't a real choice, which is weak game design.

When adding anything new to Aurora, it should provide one of these trade-off choices and not simply be a replacement for an existing option, unless there is evidence the existing option is unbalanced (i.e weak original design). Because of this, people on the forums are often looking for a reasoned argument as to why the new choice represents either a new trade-off or improved game design. This has led to many very lively but well-informed debates conducted with mutual respect for other people's opinions.

In fact, I often seek competing opinions to my own just to make sure that my own view stands up to scrutiny. This forum is invaluable for Aurora in that regard. This is also true in my day job where I would only hire someone if I firmly believed they would stand up to me when they disagreed.

So when someone disagrees with you on here, they are not attacking you personally. They are just not convinced by the evidence you produced to back up your idea.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2018, 05:15:22 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 
The following users thanked this post: Father Tim, davidb86, DIT_grue, Kelewan, King-Salomon

Offline Adseria

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • A
  • Posts: 45
Re: External Hangars/Docking Ports
« Reply #17 on: October 10, 2018, 07:41:19 AM »
I made a suggestion, and tried to answer people's questions about a component that I feel would fit well into the game as it stands at the moment. Now, you're saying it's a bad suggestion because it doesn't fit with your opinion of how the game should be played? Or did I misunderstand?

No, I think he is concerned that would not be balanced. When designing ships you should be faced with a series of choices that usually involve a trade-off between two or more competing factors. If that decision is obvious because one option is far better than the other, then it isn't a real choice, which is weak game design.

Well, I'm sorry, but I don't see how it would be unbalanced. Yes, you get more fighters, but they take longer to refuel, and can't reload box launchers.

Oh, one other thing:

All I can see that it would do is unbalance the game further in favour of fighters/small craft -- something I think the game already suffers from.

something I think the game already suffers from.

something I think

Sounds like opinion to me.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • S
  • Posts: 7234
  • Thanked: 2383 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: External Hangars/Docking Ports
« Reply #18 on: October 10, 2018, 10:20:44 AM »
Sounds like opinion to me.

It is an opinion. :)

As I said in my post "I often seek competing opinions to my own just to make sure that my own view stands up to scrutiny". All I am saying is that you have a better chance to convince other forum members to support your idea if you provide some evidence or calculations to show why that idea will fit in well with the current mechanics, without breaking anything or taking away meaningful decisions.

See below for a recent thread that is a good example. As a result of the evidence produced by different people to support their arguments (opinions), I made some changes to the ground combat values.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10164.0

BTW the above applies to Aurora, not real life. It's been my experience that, in general, relatively few people require evidence before forming an opinion :)
 

Offline Paul M

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • P
  • Posts: 1270
  • Thanked: 22 times
Re: External Hangars/Docking Ports
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2018, 12:27:24 PM »
Fighters as a weapon system in starfire and based on my experience aurora are a binary weapon system:  one has enough fighters to overwhelm the enemy or one does not.  It is a pure numbers game and the simple fact is that you can't have too many fighters, you can have not enough but not too many.   This suggested system allows for up to a 50% increase in strike group size which increases the chance that the fighter force has "enough" fighters rather than "not enough."

Leaving aside considerations such as speed calculations this is going to make it easier to overwhelm an enemy force, making fighters progressively more dangerous and as was pointed out more used.  Not being able to re-arm while externally docked is only relevant when the fighter in question requires re-arming.  So one could use a hybrid design and save valuable internal hanger space by docking your Space Superiority Fighters/Recon Birds/Tankers on the outside.

It is only micromanagement costs that show up as you can always find a way to re-arm the birds...either some internal hangers on the carrier or another carrier with internal hangers.   

I am dubious it becomes  a "no brainer" to use this...however, it certainly isn't going to be a system one thinks too much about before using it if you are playing a fighter using race.   There is no serious drawback to docking the fighters externally...even if it slows the carrier down or they are easier to destory or you need a creative solution to re-arming the strike.   The most important point is that you get more fighters on your ships.  More fighters is always good.

I don't see this as a needed system, and if it adds complications to the speed calculation I'm really not seeing it as a useful addition.  That is my opinion yes.   But I also don't see how you can add in a system that increases fighter capacity by 50% and "balance" it easily.   If the external hanger was just that an external hanger (outside armour) that was cheaper to build with increased rearming and repair times then as an alternate system...especially at say reduced R&D cost it may make some sense, I don't know other people can chime in on that.
 

Offline Adseria

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • A
  • Posts: 45
Re: External Hangars/Docking Ports
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2018, 12:46:20 PM »
Fighters as a weapon system in starfire and based on my experience aurora are a binary weapon system:  one has enough fighters to overwhelm the enemy or one does not.  It is a pure numbers game and the simple fact is that you can't have too many fighters, you can have not enough but not too many.   This suggested system allows for up to a 50% increase in strike group size which increases the chance that the fighter force has "enough" fighters rather than "not enough."

Leaving aside considerations such as speed calculations this is going to make it easier to overwhelm an enemy force, making fighters progressively more dangerous and as was pointed out more used.  Not being able to re-arm while externally docked is only relevant when the fighter in question requires re-arming.  So one could use a hybrid design and save valuable internal hanger space by docking your Space Superiority Fighters/Recon Birds/Tankers on the outside.

It is only micromanagement costs that show up as you can always find a way to re-arm the birds...either some internal hangers on the carrier or another carrier with internal hangers.   

I am dubious it becomes  a "no brainer" to use this...however, it certainly isn't going to be a system one thinks too much about before using it if you are playing a fighter using race.   There is no serious drawback to docking the fighters externally...even if it slows the carrier down or they are easier to destory or you need a creative solution to re-arming the strike.   The most important point is that you get more fighters on your ships.  More fighters is always good.

I don't see this as a needed system, and if it adds complications to the speed calculation I'm really not seeing it as a useful addition.  That is my opinion yes.   But I also don't see how you can add in a system that increases fighter capacity by 50% and "balance" it easily.   If the external hanger was just that an external hanger (outside armour) that was cheaper to build with increased rearming and repair times then as an alternate system...especially at say reduced R&D cost it may make some sense, I don't know other people can chime in on that.

...Someone clearly hasn't bothered to read the rest of the discussion first. Most of the above has already been answered.

BTW the above applies to Aurora, not real life. It's been my experience that, in general, relatively few people require evidence before forming an opinion :)

Can't say I disagree. As I think I myself have proved in this very thread. :)

I mean, that's not to say that I've changed my mind. I still think external docking ports would be a good addition to the game.

But then again, I'm only just starting my 2nd game (well, technically it's my 11th attempt, and my 3rd in the latest version. It's that kind of game), so I don't really know how it would work in practice. I had a suggestion, and threw it out to see if anyone would bite.

Clearly not. Maybe I should just go back to Stellaris? At least I have some vague idea of what I'm doing in that game :D
« Last Edit: October 10, 2018, 12:48:03 PM by Adseria »
 

Offline Paul M

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • P
  • Posts: 1270
  • Thanked: 22 times
Re: External Hangars/Docking Ports
« Reply #21 on: October 10, 2018, 02:55:54 PM »
My point is simple:  with fighters it is purely a numbers game, more is always better; as more is likely to be "enough" fighters to overwhelm the enemy.  This is a fact, it is a mathematically quantifable aspect to combat...how many squadrons are required to destroy an enemy vessel of a certain class?   How many missiles are required to render the enemy defenses no longer a factor?  How many fighters are required to carry those missiles?   A book on modern naval tactics will cover most of the math involved.

Nothing you have ever said changes the fact this system simply allows for an up to 50% increase in strike capacity with no significant drawback.   Its blindingly obvious after a few seconds of thought that it will give any fighter using force an edge to use this technology.  The only question this system requires of the player is "how will I use it?" because after you decide to use fighters it is just too obviously an advantage to use it.

As my feeling on space fighters shades to "unprintable obscenities" I most certainly am not in favour of anything that adds more of them into the game system.

I also missed one post somewhere in the middle my apologies I would have just said the above.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 869
  • Thanked: 16 times
Re: External Hangars/Docking Ports
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2018, 03:24:43 PM »
You would just bring a commercial ship with a maintenance module and re-arm the fighters anyway. Very cheap and while they re-arm slower it would not increase micro almost at all.

Or you just add a small 500t (or whatever size) internal hangar and the rest external and re-arm them that way with allot of micro-management.

We will get commercial hangars in C# and I think they are different enough to satisfy my preferences.
 

 

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