v1.12.0 Changes Discussion Thread

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

The recent change to permit ground forces replenishment is absolutely wonderful and gives me a lot of hope for the future of ground combat more generally.

The change I REALLY hope to see is simply to let officers grant a fraction of their skills to units in attached formations, so that it will become worthwhile to have a fleshed out formation hierarchy.

I meant to do this for v1.00 and forgot to add the code, so it will be addressed at some point.

[Marski]

Thanks for addressing several issues and improving ground force design.
Will we see artillery units treated in a similar way as orbital support in the future? As in; assign artillery support to a HQ with infantry formations beneath it and on a dice-roll, said formations and their units receive artillery support in combat.

[Destragon]

I'm liking the sound of that "unit series" system. Do you maybe plan on doing something similar for space ship components?
I would like that a lot. I posted something like that in the suggestions forum a while ago:
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11513.0

[Droll]

This new system is exactly what aurora ground combat needed. My only remaining gripes would be regarding large numbers of CAS being assigned to FFDs and ability to create OOB templates (an infantry division for example) but those are much more minor.

I particularly love the way unit series and replacement templates work now as well. My one question though - the unit series seem to be assigned based on unit type as opposed to what their components are - so if I have a medium armor template with nothing but medium tank destroyers but a replacement template with medium vehicles that are AA vehicles will they be used to replenish the tank destroyer template? Or will the players be able to create their own unit series in order to avoid different types of vehicles/units being replaced?

Of course this concern would be irrelevant if the game only looks at exact component-wise matches to units to look at auto-replacement.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

This new system is exactly what aurora ground combat needed. My only remaining gripes would be regarding large numbers of CAS being assigned to FFDs and ability to create OOB templates (an infantry division for example) but those are much more minor.

I particularly love the way unit series and replacement templates work now as well. My one question though - the unit series seem to be assigned based on unit type as opposed to what their components are - so if I have a medium armor template with nothing but medium tank destroyers but a replacement template with medium vehicles that are AA vehicles will they be used to replenish the tank destroyer template? Or will the players be able to create their own unit series in order to avoid different types of vehicles/units being replaced?

Of course this concern would be irrelevant if the game only looks at exact component-wise matches to units to look at auto-replacement.

You can put whatever you want into a unit series without restriction. The replacement code will just take whatever is in the same series as the unit being replaced and work down the priority list when looking for potential replacements.

[Droll]

This new system is exactly what aurora ground combat needed. My only remaining gripes would be regarding large numbers of CAS being assigned to FFDs and ability to create OOB templates (an infantry division for example) but those are much more minor.

I particularly love the way unit series and replacement templates work now as well. My one question though - the unit series seem to be assigned based on unit type as opposed to what their components are - so if I have a medium armor template with nothing but medium tank destroyers but a replacement template with medium vehicles that are AA vehicles will they be used to replenish the tank destroyer template? Or will the players be able to create their own unit series in order to avoid different types of vehicles/units being replaced?

Of course this concern would be irrelevant if the game only looks at exact component-wise matches to units to look at auto-replacement.

You can put whatever you want into a unit series without restriction. The replacement code will just take whatever is in the same series as the unit being replaced and work down the priority list when looking for potential replacements.

I am a fool, I didnt notice the section on the left where the actual unit series are.

So the highest priority for a formation one with the largest number correct? This is consistent with how officer priority works on ships right?

Edit: Accidentally put my reply in the quote
Edit: Accidentally put steves reply outside the quote

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

So the highest priority for a formation one with the largest number correct? This is consistent with how officer priority works on ships right?

Yes, that correct. From v1.12 higher numbers are higher priority.

[Dutchling]

Will the replacement code try to replace 1 lost unit with another unit, or does it try to match tonnage?

[Stryker]

One thing that would be nice for moving ground combat units with a detailed OOB, would be an order to load the parent formation + the children.  For example: If you load a division, this order would also load the brigades, battalions, companies, etc. that are subordinate to the division.  This would save a lot of clicking for large, detailed formations.

[Froggiest1982]

One thing that would be nice for moving ground combat units with a detailed OOB, would be an order to load the parent formation + the children.  For example: If you load a division, this order would also load the brigades, battalions, companies, etc. that are subordinate to the division.  This would save a lot of clicking for large, detailed formations.

Isn't that already there? Check on the movement orders there should be a flag load all subordinates or such.

[Droll]

One thing that would be nice for moving ground combat units with a detailed OOB, would be an order to load the parent formation + the children.  For example: If you load a division, this order would also load the brigades, battalions, companies, etc. that are subordinate to the division.  This would save a lot of clicking for large, detailed formations.

This already exists, when issuing the load order look for a checkbox "load subordinates" or something like that.

[vorpal+5]

I know that's not something trivial to do (having done that for my work, you need migration procedures to convert old data into new data structures, etc.) but maintaining save game compatibility as much as possible across versions would be nice to have from now on. That's not only a convenience for us players, but if you think about it, having games that last would allow testing things that are rarely tested too. If a game must be restarted each  time a  major version is put out, then chances are that a few things (like multiple large NPR empires) will never be properly evaluated. Or the 'end game', with the last techs.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Will the replacement code try to replace 1 lost unit with another unit, or does it try to match tonnage?

Number of units. If you need fewer units, set the replacement formation template to have fewer units.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I know that's not something trivial to do (having done that for my work, you need migration procedures to convert old data into new data structures, etc.) but maintaining save game compatibility as much as possible across versions would be nice to have from now on. That's not only a convenience for us players, but if you think about it, having games that last would allow testing things that are rarely tested too. If a game must be restarted each  time a  major version is put out, then chances are that a few things (like multiple large NPR empires) will never be properly evaluated. Or the 'end game', with the last techs.

If I was working on Aurora full time or charging for the game, I would probably add this. However, with limited free time I tend to focus on fixing bugs or adding things I would use myself. It would use up a lot of that free time to try to create save game conversion programs, especially as each one would be different. Also, not much fun either

[vorpal+5]

Fair points! Thanks for the rationale.