Author Topic: C# Suggestions  (Read 304908 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1381
  • Thanked: 644 times
  • 2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Supporter of the forum in 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Supporter of the forum for 2024
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter :
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1155 on: December 06, 2020, 02:27:27 PM »
Add a station filter so that you don't need to scroll through fleets for refuel, maint, and more.

Can be challenging in busy systems to find what you need.

I currently leave a space before the name so that they always listed on top.

Off-Topic: show
I learned this trick on VB6 when to arrange my fleets without Admin Commands I used 1 or more spaces to sort.
 
The following users thanked this post: db48x

Offline Migi

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 467
  • Thanked: 173 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1156 on: December 06, 2020, 04:11:01 PM »
Add a station filter so that you don't need to scroll through fleets for refuel, maint, and more.

Can be challenging in busy systems to find what you need.

I currently leave a space before the name so that they always listed on top.

Off-Topic: show
I learned this trick on VB6 when to arrange my fleets without Admin Commands I used 1 or more spaces to sort.

I like this idea, but there are more possibilities:
Fleets with stations
Fleets with commercial ships
Fleets with military ships
Fleets with civilian ships (not sure if there is ever a reason for them but anyway)

I'm not so enthusiastic about cluttering up the UI with that many more options, so is there a way they could they be hidden until the fleet box is ticked?
 

Offline Kristover

  • Gold Supporter
  • Lt. Commander
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 261
  • Thanked: 136 times
  • 2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Supporter of the forum in 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Supporter of the forum for 2024
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1157 on: December 06, 2020, 05:06:38 PM »
Feature Request:  Is it possible to put a flag on particular colonies that exempts them from conditional refueling/resupply orders?  I tend to create small fighter/FAC bases in my systems with enough fuel/resupply to see to their needs and kind of tired of having my exploration ships ignoring the giant shipping hub in the same system with 250K fuel/MSP to go grab the 5K fuel/MSP I have stashed at these sites.
 

Offline Kristover

  • Gold Supporter
  • Lt. Commander
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 261
  • Thanked: 136 times
  • 2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Supporter of the forum in 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Supporter of the forum for 2024
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1158 on: December 06, 2020, 05:14:33 PM »
Feature Request:  Is it possible to add a flag to prevent an officer from being assigned to a particular ship class?  I tend to create small commercial sensor platforms on jump points and crank them out with industry - I then load them into a special sensor tender which I then use to drop them.  I tend to overproduce academies so officer shortage usually isn't a problem but I rather not have auto-assign wasting Lieutenants on these.
 
The following users thanked this post: nuclearslurpee

Offline Kristover

  • Gold Supporter
  • Lt. Commander
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 261
  • Thanked: 136 times
  • 2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Supporter of the forum in 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Supporter of the forum for 2024
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1159 on: December 06, 2020, 05:17:42 PM »
Feature Request:  Last one for tonight but I REALLY like the new feature to create 'garbage' modules for ships that allow you to differentiate them for RP purposes - I have already have a list of 100 potential modules that I am going to use for my ships.  It got me to thinking, can one do something similar for colonies?  Create a facility that we can rename to add more 'flavor' for a world?  I would like such a thing plus perhaps a notes pages that allows me to add manual notes to the world entry which I can then use for flavor text - frankly I wouldn't mind such a thing for each of my ships as well but that might get crazy.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3199
  • Thanked: 2542 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1160 on: December 06, 2020, 07:01:44 PM »
Feature Request:  Is it possible to add a flag to prevent an officer from being assigned to a particular ship class?  I tend to create small commercial sensor platforms on jump points and crank them out with industry - I then load them into a special sensor tender which I then use to drop them.  I tend to overproduce academies so officer shortage usually isn't a problem but I rather not have auto-assign wasting Lieutenants on these.

A good "quick fix" for this would be to make newly-created ship classes have a priority of 10 instead of 0, allowing for ultra-low-priority classes like these to exist. That way you should never see a rank-1 officer assigned to one of these when a better XO or freighter posting is open, but excess commanders will still be able to find employment.

Actually I'd like this as a separate feature, both are good.
 

Offline Droll

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • D
  • Posts: 1721
  • Thanked: 608 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1161 on: December 06, 2020, 07:15:01 PM »
A good "quick fix" for this would be to make newly-created ship classes have a priority of 10 instead of 0, allowing for ultra-low-priority classes like these to exist. That way you should never see a rank-1 officer assigned to one of these when a better XO or freighter posting is open, but excess commanders will still be able to find employment.

Actually I'd like this as a separate feature, both are good.

In 1.12 the default priority of new classes is set to 10 so this is already in.
 
The following users thanked this post: nuclearslurpee

Offline Lord Solar

  • See above
  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • Posts: 84
  • Thanked: 28 times
  • Everlasting Glory to the Imperium
  • Discord Username: Lord Solar
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1162 on: December 06, 2020, 09:16:31 PM »
A good "quick fix" for this would be to make newly-created ship classes have a priority of 10 instead of 0, allowing for ultra-low-priority classes like these to exist. That way you should never see a rank-1 officer assigned to one of these when a better XO or freighter posting is open, but excess commanders will still be able to find employment.

Actually I'd like this as a separate feature, both are good.

In 1.12 the default priority of new classes is set to 10 so this is already in.
In addition, 0 = lowest priority now.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3199
  • Thanked: 2542 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1163 on: December 06, 2020, 09:31:55 PM »
A good "quick fix" for this would be to make newly-created ship classes have a priority of 10 instead of 0, allowing for ultra-low-priority classes like these to exist. That way you should never see a rank-1 officer assigned to one of these when a better XO or freighter posting is open, but excess commanders will still be able to find employment.

Actually I'd like this as a separate feature, both are good.

In 1.12 the default priority of new classes is set to 10 so this is already in.

Ignore me I'm blind apparently.  :-[
 

Offline Drakale

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • D
  • Posts: 53
  • Thanked: 18 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1164 on: December 07, 2020, 12:59:08 PM »
So, a small suggestion for NPR AI; They should shoot down any encountered buoy/missiles present in territories they consider 'owned', even from non hostiles entities. It's too easy right now to keep perfect tabs on them by littering their homeworlds with buoy, since they won't shoot them down until war is declared. I guess there could be edge case where you would want to cooperate with a NPR in their territory without them shooting down your probes/mines, but that could be taken care of with relation level or a formal alliance system.
 
The following users thanked this post: QuakeIV, serger, BAGrimm, TheTalkingMeowth, nuclearslurpee

Offline Ghrathryn

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1165 on: December 07, 2020, 03:09:24 PM »
Not sure if any of these have been suggested before, but here's a few potentially useful suggestions.

1) Have an option for a tug fleet to attach to multiple/all ships/stations in another fleet without having to manually select every ship/station you want to have towed (this should probably limit up to either the amount of ships in the tug fleet or the amount of tractor beams in it or the beams' lift capacity).  I'd also suggest allowing the tugs to tow station fleets without breaking said fleets since it's a bit annoying to have a batch of stations (especially ones liable to be moved) be put into a fleet, towed to a site and find your fleet has been broken into individual ship units when it reaches its (possibly temporary) destination.

2) I mentioned this partially in my last post on this thread ala allowing sub-fleet components to spread out so recon or survey could run from a single fleet but multiple separated elements, but it could also be useful to allow full fleets to spread across an amount of territory with being split up (particularly if it's something like a group of terraforming/harvesting/mining stations being dragged into position as above) because they're in motion or they're immobile and there's not enough tugs on hand to move everything at once.

3) Allow us to set up 'colony types' along with base rules for them.  I know Aurora will take what we put at a 'colony' into account to decide whether it's a mining site, populated colony, archaeological dig, listening post, civilian mining site or 'other' and we can limit whether civilians visit, but it could be useful to allow us some extra control like allowing us to set digs to being excluded from civilian traffic by default so we don't suddenly get civilians dropping colonists there because we unearthed some usable building and forgot to say we don't want civilians involved in the site or tag which asteroids/moons/planets are just for mining over population before we start shipping automines over there.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3199
  • Thanked: 2542 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1166 on: December 07, 2020, 06:42:47 PM »
Not sure if any of these have been suggested before, but here's a few potentially useful suggestions.

1) Have an option for a tug fleet to attach to multiple/all ships/stations in another fleet without having to manually select every ship/station you want to have towed (this should probably limit up to either the amount of ships in the tug fleet or the amount of tractor beams in it or the beams' lift capacity).  I'd also suggest allowing the tugs to tow station fleets without breaking said fleets since it's a bit annoying to have a batch of stations (especially ones liable to be moved) be put into a fleet, towed to a site and find your fleet has been broken into individual ship units when it reaches its (possibly temporary) destination.

2) I mentioned this partially in my last post on this thread ala allowing sub-fleet components to spread out so recon or survey could run from a single fleet but multiple separated elements, but it could also be useful to allow full fleets to spread across an amount of territory with being split up (particularly if it's something like a group of terraforming/harvesting/mining stations being dragged into position as above) because they're in motion or they're immobile and there's not enough tugs on hand to move everything at once.

3) Allow us to set up 'colony types' along with base rules for them.  I know Aurora will take what we put at a 'colony' into account to decide whether it's a mining site, populated colony, archaeological dig, listening post, civilian mining site or 'other' and we can limit whether civilians visit, but it could be useful to allow us some extra control like allowing us to set digs to being excluded from civilian traffic by default so we don't suddenly get civilians dropping colonists there because we unearthed some usable building and forgot to say we don't want civilians involved in the site or tag which asteroids/moons/planets are just for mining over population before we start shipping automines over there.

(1) would be great as long as the limit remains one ship per tug. I'm not sure how much work it would be to code, but something similar exists for squadron jumping so it's certainly possible.

(2) Isn't really needed. You can detach a subfleet from a fleet into its own fleet and then have it rejoin later with the "Rejoin as Subfleet" order. Presently this is necessary since Aurora is coded so that every separate formation on the tactical map is a "fleet" and fleets don't have a hierarchy of fleets under them. However, the one reason I can think of why this would be needed would be if you have a flag bridge and want your ships to keep the bonus from that officer when they split off. Maybe a good way to implement this would be that a flag bridge functions like a naval admin command?

(3) I'm not sure what really needs to be added here. Currently we have the ability to ban civilian traffic from a body, civilian shipping as far as I know will not ship infrastructure and colonists to a colony that doesn't already have such things (e.g. a listening post or xenoarcheology dig), and CMCs as far as I know will not establish themselves on any body that already has a racial colony even if the colony is empty. These functions seem adequate to control civilian behavior pretty reliably as-is.
 

Offline liveware

  • Bug Moderators
  • Commodore
  • ***
  • Posts: 742
  • Thanked: 88 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1167 on: December 07, 2020, 11:03:37 PM »
I would really like to see ships be given a maneuver rating similar to missiles which would affect their chance to hit and chance to be hit. Missiles already have this option and it makes for much more interesting design choices than ships currently posses. Implementing maneuverability by way of a new 'maneuvering thruster' component might be a good way to implement it, as the additional component weight of the maneuvering thrusters would compete with hull space which would otherwise be used for other components (like engines/armor).
« Last Edit: December 07, 2020, 11:05:23 PM by liveware »
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline Shuul

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • S
  • Posts: 109
  • Thanked: 29 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1168 on: December 08, 2020, 05:25:30 AM »
Steve, may i suggest to add a new hangar module called "external clamps" or similar ?

It will serve the purpose of transporting small ships but without ability to resupply or repair them in any way, just carry and hold of maintenance clock. Size should be smaller than regular docks.

Im planning to RP Galactic Empire for 1.13 release and really wanted to have ships like Gozanti assault carriers with 4 TIE fighters attached like in this pic

but current hangar types do not really suit it.

I guess this type of dock will also give some interesting RP possibility for others.
 
The following users thanked this post: Drakale

Offline Ghrathryn

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1169 on: December 08, 2020, 07:40:07 AM »
Quote from: nuclearslurpee link=topic=10640. msg144185#msg144185 date=1607388167
(1) would be great as long as the limit remains one ship per tug.  I'm not sure how much work it would be to code, but something similar exists for squadron jumping so it's certainly possible.

(2) Isn't really needed.  You can detach a subfleet from a fleet into its own fleet and then have it rejoin later with the "Rejoin as Subfleet" order.  Presently this is necessary since Aurora is coded so that every separate formation on the tactical map is a "fleet" and fleets don't have a hierarchy of fleets under them.  However, the one reason I can think of why this would be needed would be if you have a flag bridge and want your ships to keep the bonus from that officer when they split off.  Maybe a good way to implement this would be that a flag bridge functions like a naval admin command?

(3) I'm not sure what really needs to be added here.  Currently we have the ability to ban civilian traffic from a body, civilian shipping as far as I know will not ship infrastructure and colonists to a colony that doesn't already have such things (e. g.  a listening post or xenoarcheology dig), and CMCs as far as I know will not establish themselves on any body that already has a racial colony even if the colony is empty.  These functions seem adequate to control civilian behavior pretty reliably as-is.

With regards to 2, I hadn't thought about that, but it's somewhat annoying to have either to a) constantly split and merge fleet containing multiple survey ships if you want them to hit multiple targets at once or if you have two classes of ship and some only work for geosurvey while others only work for gravsurvey but you want them organised into a single fleet most of the time so they can all be sent to different systems together, but split them up every new system to run the survey.  Presuming you've got the standing orders set, you'll be ordering them to split and merge every time you move system.  Being able to use sub-fleets as separate manoeuvre entities would be a big help, even if when tugging a station or damaged ship the entity gets made into a sub-fleet, it'll mean we keep the existing structure and don't have to keep remaking it if things happen or if you need things to move on their own rather than with their assigned fleet.

There's also, as mentioned, point b) You've a station group you want to use together, but from what I've seen as soon as a tug tractors a station, it'll make that station its own fleet meaning you're constantly having to reorganise when you've got stations running mining, fuel gathering, maintenance, terraforming, etc and you need to move them around to a new locale.  (Luna finishes terraforming, move stations to Mars, Venus, Mercury, etc or Jupiter is out of Sorium, shunt the fuel harvester station group to Saturn, Uranus, Neptune or some outsystem gas giant without losing their grouping).

On point 3, the issue I've found is more for arch digs in that as soon as you have a construction ground unit dig up a working civ building, it turns it from a dig to a hab world at which point, particularly if the building is 'x infrastructure', civilian colony ships jump in and deliver population, which you might not want and might not realise until you check the eco screen.  Yes you can tell the civvies not to have anything to do with a colony, but when there's a change due to an event, if you're not checking things when you set a colony, you can wind up having the AI screw you up, particularly if the dig is a high cost planet like Venus, or one you never want colonised even if it's 'viable'.  The other thing for automines is more a visual aid.  Most colonies we create start as 'other' unless they've got a ruin on site, but auto-mine sites change colour in the fleet orders menu, and shuffle around if you've got 'view by role' on the eco screen, allowing a quick reference for where you're aiming to actually colonise/terraform versus where you just want mines prior to sending anything there, particularly if it's something that might take a while to do because you've got to build things first.

It doesn't even need to be much, just allow us to decide without dropping anything what body has a particular classification of colony and don't auto-change it.  Space Empires IV and V allowed you to pick a colony type as a player, so just letting us set and reassign so we keep digs as digs and can see our locales for mines/pops if we have to return to things later and have forgotten what's supposed to be what would help.