v2.2.0 Changes Discussion Thread

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

When a game loads, a maximum of 10,000 past events will be loaded ...

How much it could be difficult to set this value each time?
If I reload a match after some days not playing, I confess I don't remember the details of what happened. 

Even if you don't, I doubt you will be reading through the last 10,000 events. If it becomes an issue in real games, I will add something, but I suspect if I hadn't said anything, no one would even notice.

[Droll]

When a game loads, a maximum of 10,000 past events will be loaded ...

How much it could be difficult to set this value each time?
If I reload a match after some days not playing, I confess I don't remember the details of what happened. 

Even if you don't, I doubt you will be reading through the last 10,000 events. If it becomes an issue in real games, I will add something, but I suspect if I hadn't said anything, no one would even notice.

The only way I see this limit being reached is if there are multiple large ground battles playing out. Those generate a lot of events.

[Hazard]

The only way I see this limit being reached is if there are multiple large ground battles playing out. Those generate a lot of events.

In that case I suspect the culprit was the shared homeworld for two NPRs that ended up fighting over it.

And I think killing everybody in the process.

[Froggiest1982]

When a game loads, a maximum of 10,000 past events will be loaded ...

How much it could be difficult to set this value each time?
If I reload a match after some days not playing, I confess I don't remember the details of what happened. 

Even if you don't, I doubt you will be reading through the last 10,000 events. If it becomes an issue in real games, I will add something, but I suspect if I hadn't said anything, no one would even notice.

Since purging the event timeline is one of the methods to increase performances along helping with database size and loading/saving times, I think a few of us would have noticed, so thanks for addition.

While on the topic, as to export the event timeline before purging is one of my tasks, which also comes with a special function on my excel sheet to show the proper date, is it possible to have an export timeline button? Only if easy, otherwise I'll carry on manually.

Thanks again. 

[QuakeIV]

I'm also feeling a little put out at the loss of information, though I do grasp that normally I wouldn't really use it for anything.

Minding, I might even write a tool to go and get it out of the database, so if you left it alone on the DB side and just fetched the last 10k, presumably it would at least be possible to still go and get the full log.

I guess really it depends on how the load time is effected by that.  My understanding is most of the performance comes from loading the database fully into memory so maybe the cost is still a bit undesirable.

[Garfunkel]

Great and useful addition for sure! I doubt how often anyone would need to go past the last 10,000 events. But I'm sure someone will make a tool that automatically writes events to a separate database as they happen so that those who really do need their entire game timeline preserved for posterity, can do so.

[vorpal+5]

Fight your FOMO brothers 

[nuclearslurpee]

Steve, I'm curious, what was the motivation for adding the 0.1-ton fuel tank? Not that I'm complaining, but with the 1-ton tank and the 0.5-ton MSP bay we have the necessary tools to make our tonnages end in zeroes already, so I'm curious what else could motivate this.

[lumporr]

There have been times where the tonnage is round, but the speed is not... plus, seeing things like 1599.9897 under "exact size" might finally be a thing of the past.

[nuclearslurpee]

plus, seeing things like 1599.9897 under "exact size" might finally be a thing of the past.

That will still happen because of armor calculations.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Steve, I'm curious, what was the motivation for adding the 0.1-ton fuel tank? Not that I'm complaining, but with the 1-ton tank and the 0.5-ton MSP bay we have the necessary tools to make our tonnages end in zeroes already, so I'm curious what else could motivate this.

I had a 250 ton gas-core fighter with only 2000 litres of fuel, because it is intended to operate with the mothership and that allowed me to design it with a two-shot railgun at 250 tons. When I developed Ion, I created an upgraded version. I had better reactor tech, allowing a smaller reactor, but the same fire control speed, which meant a larger fire control. The only way I could manage it was removing one of the 1000 litre fuel tanks and that made the range unacceptable. The new component allowed me to keep 800 litres of that 1000 and with improved fuel consumption tech I was able to maintain the range.

SF-1B Starfury class Fighter      250 tons       1 Crew       50.5 BP       TCS 5    TH 40    EM 0
8010 km/s      Armour 1-3       Shields 0-0       HTK 1      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0-0      PPV 1.65
Maint Life 4.03 Years     MSP 35    AFR 50%    IFR 0.7%    1YR 3    5YR 52    Max Repair 20 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.3 days    Morale Check Required   

Beigie-Bryant-40B Particle Thrust Engine (1)    Power 40    Fuel Use 885.44%    Signature 40    Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 2,000 Litres    Range 0.16 billion km (5 hours at full power)

Copeland JC-2A Pulse Discharge Cannon  (1x2)    Range 48,000km     TS: 8,010 km/s     Power 1.5-1.5     RM 50,000 km    ROF 5       
Douglas-Xavier DX-48-SA Tracking System (1)     Max Range: 48,000 km   TS: 8,000 km/s    ECCM-1     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
Starfury MK I Reactor (1)     Total Power Output 1.5    Exp 15%
Starfury MK II Active Sensor  (1)     GPS 2     Range 2m km    MCR 181.7k km    Resolution 1

SF-2A Starfury class Fighter      250 tons       1 Crew       59.5 BP       TCS 5    TH 50    EM 0
10001 km/s      Armour 1-3       Shields 0-0       HTK 1      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0-0      PPV 1.65
Maint Life 3.50 Years     MSP 30    AFR 50%    IFR 0.7%    1YR 4    5YR 56    Max Repair 25 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.3 days    Morale Check Required   

Beigie-Bryant-50B Particle Thrust Engine (1)    Power 50    Fuel Use 758.95%    Signature 50    Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 1,800 Litres    Range 0.17 billion km (4 hours at full power)

Copeland JC-2A Pulse Discharge Cannon  (1x2)    Range 48,000km     TS: 10,001 km/s     Power 1.5-1.5     RM 50,000 km    ROF 5       
Douglas-Xavier DX-48-SB Tracking System (1)     Max Range: 48,000 km   TS: 10,000 km/s    ECCM-2     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
Starfury MK II Reactor (1)     Total Power Output 1.5    Exp 15%
Starfury MK III Active Sensor (1)     GPS 2     Range 2m km    MCR 181.7k km    Resolution 1

[db48x]

Steve, have you ever considered just letting us type in a fuel volume? It would be a lot less fiddly. It would be nice to do the same with crew volume as well.

[nuclearslurpee]

Steve, have you ever considered just letting us type in a fuel volume? It would be a lot less fiddly. It would be nice to do the same with crew volume as well.

I would prefer the current system. It's easier to fiddle with tonnages by adding and/or subtracting a couple of X-size tanks or MSP bays than typing in numbers and trying to get them to match the exact right HS needed. Also, it's sometimes better to have control of the actual allocation of fuel tanks on a ship, for example I will prefer to have several smaller tanks than fewer larger ones sometimes as a form of resilience against battle damage.

Not sure why we need crew volume as that is handled automatically. MSP would make more sense though I dislike the idea for the same reasons.

[Snoman314]

Also, it's sometimes better to have control of the actual allocation of fuel tanks on a ship, for example I will prefer to have several smaller tanks than fewer larger ones sometimes as a form of resilience against battle damage.

But @Nuclearslurpee, my warship with one large fuel tank instead of 5 standard fuel tanks saves a whole 5BP! (Just don't tell the enemy I have no redundancy, shh!).

[AJS1956]

Hi,

If it let you type in a tonnage value to create a fuel tank it would make rounding your ship tonnage easy. You could also  add a second value to specify the number of tanks created to fill this tonnage to allow for redundancy (at a cost of extra BP). The drawbacks would include not being able to have tanks of different sizes and requiring new tanks when refitting.

Andy