Author Topic: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread  (Read 46831 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline serger

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 638
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #270 on: February 14, 2021, 03:49:27 AM »
Given the severe limitations on range for thermonuclear warheads detonating in vacuum, the standard armor/damage model does make some sense. A symmetric release of high-power x-rays is still very damaging, but with no atmosphere to be converted into a big blastwave you have to get the warhead to within tens of meters of the target to do real damage.

Within megaton-range warheads and without gamma mirrors on the hull - atmosphere is not necessary to make blastwave, because target's hull in this distance without atmosphere's protective pillow will be instantly, within microseconds, vaporized by direct, unimpaired gamma wave. This lash of hull's vapour will be much more hazardous blastwave than any air blastwave possible. Think about it it as like half of your hull's surface will be converted in extra-brisant explosive, that will be detonated with extreme synchronism. In fact, that's what nuclear explosion makes with atmosphere, but without losses to inner atmosphere ball's heating and lifting (that's smth like 1/3 to 1/2 of atmosphere nuke energy) and without sprawling of air blastwave, that will weaken it's hazardous effect - without atmosphere nuke will make the same blastwave out of hull matter instead of air matter.
 

Offline SpaceMarine

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • Thanked: 877 times
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #271 on: February 15, 2021, 08:03:00 AM »
Steve in regards to the last change you didnt list rahkas as an option is this because NPRs never could generate them or is it because rahkas are having more stuff looked at because they are bugged atm.

or just a simple thing of forgetting to list it there, clarification would be great.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11713
  • Thanked: 20616 times
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #272 on: February 15, 2021, 08:24:22 AM »
Steve in regards to the last change you didnt list rahkas as an option is this because NPRs never could generate them or is it because rahkas are having more stuff looked at because they are bugged atm.

or just a simple thing of forgetting to list it there, clarification would be great.

I left it out for now, as I think I fixed Rakhas but didn't want NPRs generating them until I was sure :)
 

Offline SpaceMarine

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • Thanked: 877 times
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #273 on: February 15, 2021, 08:29:16 AM »
gotcha so the rahkas disappearing after save is sorted then (hopefully), i cant wait to fight them properly i managed to land forces before saving and they got decimated so this is gonna be really interesting to play with once its fixed.
 

Offline AlStar

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 205
  • Thanked: 158 times
  • Flag Maker Flag Maker : For creating Flags for Aurora
    Race Maker Race Maker : Creating race images
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #274 on: February 15, 2021, 08:34:38 AM »
Quote
If a missile releases its second stage and has no assigned parent fire control, the second stage missiles will select a target randomly using the following guidelines
...
•The target must be hostile and not have friendly boarders.
...
Very considerate of the missiles to avoid our boarders.

I realize that this is a convenience of life thing, but it's just funny to me that an automated missile would go "whelp, better avoid that enemy ship - pretty sure it's got friendlies on board!"
 

Offline SpaceMarine

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • Thanked: 877 times
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #275 on: February 15, 2021, 08:36:22 AM »
Quote
If a missile releases its second stage and has no assigned parent fire control, the second stage missiles will select a target randomly using the following guidelines
...
•The target must be hostile and not have friendly boarders.
...
Very considerate of the missiles to avoid our boarders.

I realize that this is a convenience of life thing, but it's just funny to me that an automated missile would go "whelp, better avoid that enemy ship - pretty sure it's got friendlies on board!"

Actually it wouldnt avoid a ship being boarded until the marines have captured the vessel as it would still be seen as an enemy, also this is the future am sure these missiles have some kind of intelligence onboard that lets them make these kinds of decisions mid flight, especially considering they are flying at tens of thousands of km/s

trying to hit ships that are also doing that.
 

Offline serger

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 638
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #276 on: February 15, 2021, 08:46:54 AM »
I think it's just marines have a habit to bring IFF (Identification, friend or foe) responders with current codes in their satchels and fix them at the hull during boarding action.
 
The following users thanked this post: QuakeIV

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11713
  • Thanked: 20616 times
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #277 on: February 15, 2021, 09:18:45 AM »
I think it's just marines have a habit to bring IFF (Identification, friend or foe) responders with current codes in their satchels and fix them at the hull during boarding action.

Yes, that was also in my head when thinking of a reason to include that parameter :)
 
The following users thanked this post: QuakeIV

Offline Desdinova

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • D
  • Posts: 280
  • Thanked: 282 times
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #278 on: February 15, 2021, 10:34:14 AM »
Hi Steve, could we also get an option at some point to export the commander name theme setup and/or rank setup?

I usually add several dozen commander name themes for an 'international' game and also usually edit the rank names to add a junior officer rank and it's a pain to set up every time.
 
The following users thanked this post: Fistandantillus7

Offline Kristover

  • Gold Supporter
  • Lt. Commander
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 260
  • Thanked: 135 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #279 on: February 15, 2021, 10:55:56 AM »
My excitement level for 1.13 grows.  I ended my long running 1.12 game a couple of weeks ago and haven’t started another because I can’t imagine without playing with the 1.13 updates.  The player made cosmetic components and the the STO/ground support fighter changes are big for me.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2021, 11:04:56 AM by Kristover »
 

Online Droll

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • D
  • Posts: 1709
  • Thanked: 602 times
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #280 on: February 15, 2021, 11:20:41 AM »
My excitement level for 1.13 grows.  I ended my long running 1.12 game a couple of weeks ago and haven’t started another because I can’t imagine without playing with the 1.13 updates.  The player made cosmetic components and the the STO/ground support fighter changes are big for me.

What changes have been made to ground support fighters? Cannot find anything on the change list regarding them.

It sounds like they are still going to be micro nightmare/unusable in 1.13 during combat. (carrier auto build helps but was never a massive problem thanks to sub-fleets)
 

Offline serger

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 638
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #281 on: February 15, 2021, 11:25:13 AM »
Code: [Select]
Fixed bug that allowed STO units to fire at fighters on ground support missions.
Fixed bug that prevented fighters on search and destroy missions from attacking planets without friendly populations.
 
The following users thanked this post: Kristover

Offline Kristover

  • Gold Supporter
  • Lt. Commander
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 260
  • Thanked: 135 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #282 on: February 15, 2021, 11:29:31 AM »
If there was any STO on planet, it pretty much rendered Ground Support Fighters useless because they would get obliterated prior to having any effect whatsoever. 
 

Online Droll

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • D
  • Posts: 1709
  • Thanked: 602 times
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #283 on: February 15, 2021, 11:30:19 AM »
Code: [Select]
Fixed bug that allowed STO units to fire at fighters on ground support missions.
Fixed bug that prevented fighters on search and destroy missions from attacking planets without friendly populations.

Oh right, I was thinking of how bad the UI micro is for actually assigning fighters to support ground formations and didn't see anything relating to that.
Sorry I am very one-minded when it comes to my problems with ground support fighters which is why I kind of "ignored" the fix list there.

Still important fixes though.
 
The following users thanked this post: Kristover

Offline serger

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 638
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: v1.13.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #284 on: February 15, 2021, 11:34:05 AM »
I'm waiting greedy for 1.13 too, but the most desired for me are fixes of auto-assignment and Fire At Will + Random Second Stage Targeting features.