Suggestions Thread for v2.4.0

[L. Coelho]

Is there any chance of adding a bearing to the measurement tool?

The dream is a grid overlay with readable coordinates on a per-system basis, plus bearing tools. It’d make so many things so much easier.

But, I gotta figure this has been a requested feature forever and it’s just complicated and annoying to implement, in which case I get it.

[shatterstar]

Hi Steve! I would like to make a quick suggestion that I felt does not warrant its own thread. I have noticed that when I equip my survey ships with any weapon but a CIWS, even the most meagre armament, they are classed as a warship.

What I was trying to do was to give them box missile launchers in order to be able to deploy buoys on important planets and jump points but also carry a few missiles for emergency self defense. However I can’t do that without the ship being classed as a warship, with even one missile launcher changing the classification.

What I would like to suggest is to have the “survey ship” classification take primacy over the “warship” classification so that having either Gravitational or Geological Survey Sensors will instantly make the ship a “survey ship” regardless of armament.

Or, at the very least, I would to classify certain missile launcher configurations as civilian; such that a survey ship can deploy buoys or non-explosive missiles (size 0 warhead) without being classed as a warship.

I understand that deploying buoys or carrying armament that could be used offensively is expressly military activity, but survey sensors already automatically classify a ship as military even if its engines are commercial. So a hostile or cautious actor would already see such a vessel as a possible threat.

Thanks for considering!

[nuclearslurpee]

Hi Steve! I would like to make a quick suggestion that I felt does not warrant its own thread. I have noticed that when I equip my survey ships with any weapon but a CIWS, even the most meagre armament, they are classed as a warship.

What I was trying to do was to give them box missile launchers in order to be able to deploy buoys on important planets and jump points but also carry a few missiles for emergency self defense. However I can’t do that without the ship being classed as a warship, with even one missile launcher changing the classification.

Are you on the most recent version? I do this all the time and I thought for sure it had been changed.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Hi Steve! I would like to make a quick suggestion that I felt does not warrant its own thread. I have noticed that when I equip my survey ships with any weapon but a CIWS, even the most meagre armament, they are classed as a warship.

What I was trying to do was to give them box missile launchers in order to be able to deploy buoys on important planets and jump points but also carry a few missiles for emergency self defense. However I can’t do that without the ship being classed as a warship, with even one missile launcher changing the classification.

What I would like to suggest is to have the “survey ship” classification take primacy over the “warship” classification so that having either Gravitational or Geological Survey Sensors will instantly make the ship a “survey ship” regardless of armament.

Or, at the very least, I would to classify certain missile launcher configurations as civilian; such that a survey ship can deploy buoys or non-explosive missiles (size 0 warhead) without being classed as a warship.

I understand that deploying buoys or carrying armament that could be used offensively is expressly military activity, but survey sensors already automatically classify a ship as military even if its engines are commercial. So a hostile or cautious actor would already see such a vessel as a possible threat.

Thanks for considering!

It's a long-standing Aurora convention that any military systems will class a vessel as military rather than commercial, with all the attendant maintenance concerns. While small sensors are commercial and there are commercial magazines (which are inefficient and dangerous), missile launchers are different. There are no small commercial lasers for example, whereas CIWS has no offensive capability. It would be a contrivance to have launchers that can only fire missiles without warheads and even that is open to abuse. Besides, being able to lay buoys everywhere is definitely a military advantage.

BTW for Aurora purposes, 'Civilian' means a shipping line ship, whereas 'Commercial' means no maintenance required. 'Military' means maintenance required, while 'Warship' is any armed vessel. 'Survey Ship' in this context would normally be used in reference to auto-assignments. People will probably understand anyway (assuming I do understand ), but it will make it clearer what you mean.

Also, I assume you are talking about classifications for maintenance and not classifications for auto-assignment, because survey sensors should override launchers for the latter.

[nakorkren]

Would it be possible to implement an option on the map that lets fleet/wreck/lifepod/salvo names only be shown when you mouse over them? This would really declutter the map while still letting you check names when necessary.

[nakorkren]

On the mining tab next to the Mass Driver Destination setting, below where it shows estimated trip time, could we please see mass diver capacity/year (just 5000 x number of mass drivers present).

Would be nice to have it here on the tab where we can see how much minerals we're generating on our minining colony vs how much we can export via mass driver, rather than having to go check number of mass drivers on the Civilian/Stockpiles tab and then mentally multiply by 5000.

[nakorkren]

What: Could the Naval Organization tree show which ship is being towed by which in some fashion? Whether it's similar to how ships that are landed show the ship they're landed on in brakcets after the name e.g. Disabled Ship ABC (Tug 001) or even the other way around e.g. Tug 001 (Disabled Ship ABC). Either way, or in some other way, what ever is easiest.

Why: It would be helpful when you have more than one ship being towed by other ships within a fleet and you want to separate some but not others. If you use a lot of tugs and stations, this would be pretty helpful.

[nakorkren]

What: Have shipyards, ground force construction centers, maintenance facilities, research facilities, etc only use population when they're actually performing work. This could/should have a lower limit, e.g. perhaps 25% of max when doing no work (i.e. the workforce required to "keep the lights on") up to 100% when the facility is operating at peak capacity.

Why: Right now you can toggle on or off construction of MSP, you can use part of the industrial capacity, etc, but terraforming facilities and shipyards and GFCCs always use maximum population. This can be a strain on colonies, and right now the only way to prioritize one occupation over another is to move the facility to an unoccupied local moon. It would also add some element of gameplay choice as to how you prioritize use of the workforce when a given colony is workforce constrained. We already have wealth consumption occurring in this fashion, so why not population usage?

[nuclearslurpee]

What: Have shipyards, ground force construction centers, maintenance facilities, research facilities, etc only use population when they're actually performing work. This could/should have a lower limit, e.g. perhaps 25% of max when doing no work (i.e. the workforce required to "keep the lights on") up to 100% when the facility is operating at peak capacity.

Why: Right now you can toggle on or off construction of MSP, you can use part of the industrial capacity, etc, but terraforming facilities and shipyards and GFCCs always use maximum population. This can be a strain on colonies, and right now the only way to prioritize one occupation over another is to move the facility to an unoccupied local moon. It would also add some element of gameplay choice as to how you prioritize use of the workforce when a given colony is workforce constrained. We already have wealth consumption occurring in this fashion, so why not population usage?

I would support this. IIRC, we had this in VB6 and it was lost or removed in the C# transition. I suspect the idea may have been to make population management more important, but what I see people do in practice is just shuffle facilities to an unimportant nearby colony (e.g., Luna) to free up population, which is just added micromanagement for the same result. In this case I think the VB6 approach was better.

[alex_brunius]

I would support this. IIRC, we had this in VB6 and it was lost or removed in the C# transition. I suspect the idea may have been to make population management more important, but what I see people do in practice is just shuffle facilities to an unimportant nearby colony (e.g., Luna) to free up population, which is just added micromanagement for the same result. In this case I think the VB6 approach was better.

I liked the VB6 approach of having the option to shut of almost any area of Industry, but then if you want to turn it on again there was IIRC a 180 day delay (so you could prioritize manufacturing workers but was a serious decision with some consequences)

[ty55101]

Proposal: Increase size of reactors and decrease size of energy weapons

Why: Currently there is little gameplay decisions regarding reactors and it is mostly a possibility of them getting destroyed in combat. With the comparative size and power of a reactor to an energy weapon there is very little reason for a player to design a ship with reactors with less power than what the energy weapons need. If reactors were comparatively larger then it would be a viable decision to put more lasers and less reactors in order to increase alpha strike and reduce DPI. I think a good size between them would be a reactor being twice as large as the energy weapon it can power.

[Black]

Could we get a checkbox for ground force formations that would make them not visible when we are selecting troops to be picked up by transports?

[paolot]

In the Naval Organization window, Movement Orders tab, would it be possible to have different colours for jump points stabilised by different races? or, at least, a different colour for JPs stabilised by someone else than me?
And have the same colour for the JP in the Orders tab and for the box around the JP in the map?

[Froggiest1982]

New planetary building: Trading Station or any other suitable name

Basically, civilians will trade only between bodies that have the Trading Station. I let your imagination run wild of the whys

 

EDIT: Of course, also having the ability to move trading goods with player controlled ships is an evergreen (but OT)

[Kaiser]

Steve, small suggestion, would it be possible to add a small legenda in the galactic map that explain what coloured circle indicates what? I know it is dumb maybe, because they are not that much, I do not know the other guys, but personally I tend to forget what a single circle indicates and I have to check and uncheck the box to figure out so, having a written legenda could give an immediate visual association between color and purposes.