Suggestions Thread for v2.4.0

[KriegsMeister]

Had a couple ideas for DSP's, I'm fairly certain these aren't entirely original and have been mentioned before, but they've been floating in my hand a lot recently

- Split DSP's into 2.5 different types:
Fixed - As they currently are mainly implemented being permanently fixed to some spot.
Orbital - Rather than the current gas giant rule where they just stick to the planet, I'd like the ability to select a body (star, planet, or moon) and then input an orbital distance/angle from that body. once created the DSP would revolve around the body.
Lagrange Orbital - Rather than inputting an orbital distance/angle, you could select one of the 5 Lagrange points between 2 bodies. This wouldn't really be necessary for L_3,4,5 as you could just get the orbital distance of the body you want to follow and set your angle appropriately, but L_1,2 would fall out of sync with traditional orbital velocities. Or if you wanted to follow a body's highly eccentric orbit.

The main reasons I want orbital DSP's is to 1) set up a more dispersed Orbital Defense Station Network such as establishing bases at Earth-Luna L_3,4,5 or 2) dispersing sensor arrays along the orbit of a planet to complement its DST's or 3) Fixing shipyards to the L_1,2 of a mineral rich Venusian world or high-gravity Super-Earth for the roleplay lore of not wanting to be too dangerously close to the planets. I'm sure others could find other fun things to do with mobile DSP's.

[paolot]

I hope we could have the command "Clear Fleet targets", as we have "Assign Fleet", "Open Fire Fleet" and "Cease Fire Fleet".
When there are tens and tens of ships, clearing targets of each one is tedious and long.

[paolot]

So Active Terminal Guidance.

Kind of... boring, honestly. And mostly useless.
...

I use it and find it useful.
The images are the missile with ATG and retargeting, and the event message that confirms retargeting (an orbital bombardment, and I switched off the active sensors of the ships).

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I hope we could have the command "Clear Fleet targets", as we have "Assign Fleet", "Open Fire Fleet" and "Cease Fire Fleet".
When there are tens and tens of ships, clearing targets of each one is tedious and long.

Added for v2.6.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Separate but connected suggestion: Certain spoiler races seem hardstuck when it comes to maximum speed and size of combat craft. Expanding the custom NPR parameters to the combat craft of spoiler races would be nice, though this might be more of a challenge.

I would like to see at least the ability to set the Precursors and Invaders tech level as a player's choice option, since they remain static and for higher-tech games they basically become speed bumps after a certain point. This could perhaps also be good for Raiders if the player wants them to be more threatening, a la Steve's Gothic campaign back before 2.0.

Added for v2.6.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13463.msg173632#msg173632

[paolot]

When we receive an event about a completed survey of a system, would it be possible to also add which ship completed the survey?
So, it would be easy to pick that ship and assign/change its orders, if needed (and control if other ships are in the same system to do the same).
Now, we have to check all the surveying ships to find the right one, or open the galactic map, find the system, and right click on it to know the ship(s) in that system.

[paolot]

When loading ordnance, would it be possible to select the missiles we need?
We already can choose the minerals to load, so I can imagine it would not be too difficut to implement this other choice.

[David_H_Roarings]

When loading ordnance, would it be possible to select the missiles we need?
We already can choose the minerals to load, so I can imagine it would not be too difficult to implement this other choice.

you can set the missile loadout by ship and that will determine what the ship will load with the load ordinance command, which can cover most use cases, but I can see where being able to load a particular type of ordinance regardless of the set ship loadout when moving large amounts of ordinance of different types from one colony to another

[paolot]

...

... I can see where being able to load a particular type of ordinance regardless of the set ship loadout when moving large amounts of ordinance of different types from one colony to another

Exactly.
Changing each time the class loadout, to load only some types of missiles, is not the most suitable way to select only the ones to transfer.

[nuclearslurpee]

...

... I can see where being able to load a particular type of ordinance regardless of the set ship loadout when moving large amounts of ordinance of different types from one colony to another

Exactly.
Changing each time the class loadout, to load only some types of missiles, is not the most suitable way to select only the ones to transfer.

It is possible to set a loadout for a single ship which overrides the class loadout. This can even be copied to other ships of that class within a fleet, I believe.

[David_H_Roarings]

I'd like to suggest a change to the consumption rate of MSP of ships maintained at maintenance facilities from 'BP/4' to
5yr maintenance cost/5/4'.

As it is right now it is possible to design a ship that will cost less in MSP doing a full deployment then what it would cost to just sit in port doing nothing.

As an example this ship I have designed in my current campaign has a maintenance life of 5.40 Years a 5 year maintenance cost of 11,602 MSP and a build cost of 10,062.8 BP, the current 5yr cost of having it in port would be 10,062.8/4 = 2515.7 per year or 12,578.5 per 5 years, under the proposed change the cost would be 11,602/10 = 1160.2 per year or 5,801 per 5 years which is still more per year then the 1yr deployed but you also still don't run up the maintenance life.

Code: [Select]

Outreach MK8 class Cruiser      35,000 tons       1,085 Crew       10,062.8 BP       TCS 700    TH 6,300    EM 12,480
9000 km/s      Armour 6-95       Shields 416-520       HTK 229      Sensors 90/90/0/0      DCR 105-30      PPV 125.56
Maint Life 5.40 Years     MSP 13,476    AFR 131%    IFR 1.8%    1YR 773    5YR 11,602    Max Repair 1,575 MSP
Magazine 614 / 0   
Commander    Control Rating 4   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

M105 EP120 Inertial Fusion Drive  EP3150.00 (2)    Power 6300    Fuel Use 14.60%    Signature 3150    Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 2,755,700 Litres    Range 97 billion km (124 days at full power)
V6 S30 Theta S208 / R520 Shields (2)     Recharge Time 520 seconds (0.8 per second)

V7 25.0cm C8 X-Ray Laser (1)    Range 384,000km     TS: 9,000 km/s     Power 16-8     RM 70,000 km    ROF 10       
V7 20cm C5 X-Ray Laser (4)    Range 384,000km     TS: 9,000 km/s     Power 10-5     RM 70,000 km    ROF 10       
V7 15.0cm C6 X-Ray Laser (2)    Range 384,000km     TS: 9,000 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 70,000 km    ROF 5       
V4 PD 25kts Quad Gauss Cannon R400-100 2 Turret (2x20)    Range 40,000km     TS: 25000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 40,000 km    ROF 5       
V6 S2.9 Beam Fire Control R384-TS9062 (20%) (1)     Max Range: 384,000 km   TS: 9,062 km/s    ECCM-3     97 95 92 90 87 84 82 79 77 74
V6 PD S0.4 Beam Fire Control R38-TS25000 (SW) (20%) (2)     Max Range: 38,400 km   TS: 25,000 km/s    ECCM-3     74 48 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
V8 S2.4 Inertial Confinement Fusion Reactor R41-PB10 (1)     Total Power Output 40.9    Exp 7%

S1 ML 5s (4)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 5
V6 S6 ML (30.0%) (9)     Missile Size: 6    Rate of Fire 490
V6 R1 S0.2 Missile Fire Control FC12-R1 (20%) (1)     Range 12.8m km    Resolution 1   ECCM-3
V6 R100 S0.2 Missile Fire Control FC59-R100 (20%) (1)     Range 59.6m km    Resolution 100   ECCM-3
S1 AMM MK8 (74)    Speed: 101,000 km/s    End: 2.2m     Range: 13.3m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 336/202/101
S6 Sword ASM MK8 (90)    Speed: 56,033 km/s    End: 17.8m     Range: 60m km    WH: 8    Size: 6    TH: 186/112/56

V6 R100 S10 Active Search Sensor AS210-R100 (20%) (1)     GPS 36000     Range 210.8m km    Resolution 100
V6 R1 S10 Active Search Sensor AS45-R1 (20%) (1)     GPS 360     Range 45.4m km    MCR 4.1m km    Resolution 1
V6 S5 Thermal Sensor TH5-90 (20%) (1)     Sensitivity 90     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  75m km
V6 S5 EM Sensor EM5-90 (20%) (1)     Sensitivity 90     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  75m km

Electronic Warfare Jammers:   Sensor 4    Fire Control 4    Missile 4   

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes

In further as it stands one can build a 'mothball hangar' that would normally have an insane maintenance cost but can considerably cut down on the maintenance cost of other ships sitting in port, using one designed for the ship above we have:

Code: [Select]

Mothball hangar class Cruiser      39,123 tons       430 Crew       3,967.7 BP       TCS 782    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      Armour 1-102       Shields 0-0       HTK 175      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 1-0      PPV 0
Maint Life 0.05 Years     MSP 563    AFR 12244%    IFR 170.1%    1YR 11,643    5YR 174,641    Max Repair 100 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 35,000 tons     
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months    Flight Crew Berths 700    Morale Check Required   

Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres    Range N/A

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Carrier for auto-assignment purposes

which under the current system has a yearly cost of 3,967.7/4 = 999.725 per year which is a little over a 3rd of what the above ship is, under the proposed system it would be 174,641/10 = 17,464.1 per year

continuing with an example of a orbital defense station design: we have currently 27,584.8/4 = 6896.2 a year or 34481 per 5 years(which is a whopping 12.75 times the 5 year deployment cost), under the new it would be: 2,703/10 = 270.3 a year or 1351.5 per 5 years. Looking at it further sitting in port for it's entire maintenance life would cost 231,988.168 MSP which is 2.2 times what it would cost in a deployed state

Code: [Select]

Orion MK3 class Orbital Defence Base      120,000 tons       5,144 Crew       27,584.8 BP       TCS 2,400    TH 0    EM 37,440
1 km/s      Armour 12-216       Shields 1248-520       HTK 1298      Sensors 90/90/0/0      DCR 761-50      PPV 446.28
Maint Life 33.64 Years     MSP 105,023    AFR 158%    IFR 2.2%    1YR 180    5YR 2,703    Max Repair 936 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 14,000 tons     Magazine 3,496 / 0   
Grand Commander    Control Rating 6   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   FLG   PFC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 280    Morale Check Required   

Fuel Capacity 3,007,200 Litres    Range N/A
V6 S30 Theta S208 / R520 Shields (6)     Recharge Time 520 seconds (2.4 per second)

V7 ASM 45.0cm C8 X-Ray Laser (1)    Range 384,000km     TS: 6,250 km/s     Power 53-8     RM 70,000 km    ROF 35       
V7 25.0cm C8 X-Ray Laser (10)    Range 384,000km     TS: 6,250 km/s     Power 16-8     RM 70,000 km    ROF 10       
V7 PD 25kts Quad 15.0cm C6 X-Ray Laser Turret (3x4)    Range 384,000km     TS: 25000 km/s     Power 24-24     RM 70,000 km    ROF 5       
V4 PD 25kts Quad Gauss Cannon R400-100 2 Turret (6x20)    Range 40,000km     TS: 25000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 40,000 km    ROF 5       
V6 PD S8 Beam Fire Control R384-TS25000 (20%) (1)     Max Range: 384,000 km   TS: 25,000 km/s    ECCM-3     97 95 92 90 87 84 82 79 77 74
V6 PD S0.8 Beam Fire Control R38-TS25000 (20%) (1)     Max Range: 38,400 km   TS: 25,000 km/s    ECCM-3     74 48 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
V6 ST S2 Beam Fire Control R384-TS6250 (20%) (2)     Max Range: 384,000 km   TS: 6,250 km/s    ECCM-3     97 95 92 90 87 84 82 79 77 74
V8 S2.4 Inertial Confinement Fusion Reactor R41-PB10 (4)     Total Power Output 163.6    Exp 7%

S1 ML 5s (10)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 5
V6 S6 ML (30.0%) (40)     Missile Size: 6    Rate of Fire 490
V6 R1 S0.2 Missile Fire Control FC12-R1 (20%) (1)     Range 12.8m km    Resolution 1   ECCM-3
V6 R100 S0.2 Missile Fire Control FC59-R100 (20%) (1)     Range 59.6m km    Resolution 100   ECCM-3
S6 Sword ASM MK7 (360)    Speed: 44,000 km/s    End: 17.7m     Range: 46.7m km    WH: 6    Size: 6    TH: 146/88/44
S4 Scythe ASM MK7 (124)    Speed: 46,500 km/s    End: 4.5m     Range: 12.5m km    WH: 4    Size: 4    TH: 155/93/46
S1 AMM MK7 (82)    Speed: 75,800 km/s    End: 2.4m     Range: 10.7m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 252/151/75

V6 R100 S10 Active Search Sensor AS210-R100 (20%) (1)     GPS 36000     Range 210.8m km    Resolution 100
V6 R1 S10 Active Search Sensor AS45-R1 (20%) (1)     GPS 360     Range 45.4m km    MCR 4.1m km    Resolution 1
V6 S5 Thermal Sensor TH5-90 (20%) (1)     Sensitivity 90     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  75m km
V6 S5 EM Sensor EM5-90 (20%) (1)     Sensitivity 90     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  75m km
ELINT Module (1)     Sensitivity 11     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  26.2m km

Electronic Warfare Jammers:   Sensor 4    Fire Control 4    Missile 4   

Strike Group
14x Little Bird MK8 Fighter   Speed: 10125 km/s    Size: 10
14x Kestrel MK8 Bomber   Speed: 10126 km/s    Size: 10

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes
Taking time to look at fighters and orbital hangars we have:

Code: [Select]

Kestrel MK8 class Bomber      500 tons       4 Crew       118.3 BP       TCS 10    TH 101    EM 0
10126 km/s      Armour 2-5       Shields 0-0       HTK 2      Sensors 1/1/0/0      DCR 0-0      PPV 3.6
Maint Life 19.24 Years     MSP 166    AFR 8%    IFR 0.1%    1YR 1    5YR 13    Max Repair 50.6 MSP
Magazine 24 / 0   
Ensign    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 27 days    Morale Check Required   

F3 EP135 Inertial Fusion Drive  EP101.25 (1)    Power 101.2    Fuel Use 115.98%    Signature 101.25    Explosion 13%
Fuel Capacity 57,000 Litres    Range 17.7 billion km (20 days at full power)

S4 BL EC15 (6)     Missile Size: 4    Hangar Reload 100 minutes    MF Reload 16 hours
V6 R5 S0.1 Missile Fire Control FC15-R5 (20%) (1)     Range 15.5m km    Resolution 5   ECCM-3
S4 Scythe ASM MK8 (6)    Speed: 66,000 km/s    End: 3.9m     Range: 15.6m km    WH: 4    Size: 4    TH: 220/132/66

V6 R5 S0.5 Active Search Sensor AS17-R5 (1)     GPS 90     Range 17.4m km    Resolution 5
C6 S0.1 EM Sensor EM0.1-1.8 (1)     Sensitivity 1.8     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  10.6m km
C6 S0.1 Thermal Sensor TH0.1-1.8 (1)     Sensitivity 1.8     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  10.6m km

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
This design is classed as a Fighter for auto-assignment purposes
and

Code: [Select]

Kestrel Orbital Hanger-M class Orbital Defence Base      35,000 tons       1,419 Crew       5,702.6 BP       TCS 700    TH 0    EM 4,740
1 km/s      Armour 5-95       Shields 158-474       HTK 382      Sensors 18/18/0/0      DCR 264-50      PPV 34.68
Maint Life 43.04 Years     MSP 23,899    AFR 42%    IFR 0.6%    1YR 25    5YR 378    Max Repair 278.4 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 7,000 tons     Magazine 1,393 / 0   
Commander    Control Rating 4   BRG   AUX   ENG   PFC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 140    Morale Check Required   

Fuel Capacity 3,200,400 Litres    Range N/A
V6 S25 Theta S158 / R474 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 474 seconds (0.3 per second)

V4 PD 25kts Quad Gauss Cannon R400-100 2 Turret (1x20)    Range 38,400km     TS: 25000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 40,000 km    ROF 5       
V6 PD S0.4 Beam Fire Control R38-TS25000 (SW) (20%) (1)     Max Range: 38,400 km   TS: 25,000 km/s    ECCM-3     74 48 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S1 ML 5s (3)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 5
V6 R1 S0.2 Missile Fire Control FC12-R1 (20%) (1)     Range 12.8m km    Resolution 1   ECCM-3
S1 AMM MK8 (49)    Speed: 101,000 km/s    End: 2.2m     Range: 13.3m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 336/202/101
S4 Scythe ASM MK8 (336)    Speed: 66,000 km/s    End: 3.9m     Range: 15.6m km    WH: 4    Size: 4    TH: 220/132/66

C6 R1 S1 Active Search Sensor AS14-R1 (1)     GPS 36     Range 14.4m km    MCR 1.3m km    Resolution 1
C6 R100 S1 Active Search Sensor AS66-R100 (1)     GPS 3600     Range 66.7m km    Resolution 100
C6 S1 EM Sensor EM1.0-18.0 (1)     Sensitivity 18     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  33.5m km
C6 S1 Thermal Sensor TH1.0-18.0 (1)     Sensitivity 18     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  33.5m km

Strike Group
14x Kestrel MK8 Bomber   Speed: 10126 km/s    Size: 10

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Carrier for auto-assignment purposes

For the Kestrel bomber 118.3/4 = 29.575 MSP per year in the current and 13/10 = 1.3 per year in the new, current: deployed 166 MSP over 19.24 years, in port 569 MSP in 19.24 years, proposed: in port 25 MSP in 19.24 years

For the Hangar we have 5,702.6/4 = 1,425.65 MSP per year currently and 378/10 = 37.8 MSP per year, current: deployed: 23,899 MSP over 43.04 years, in port 61,360 MSP in 43.04 years, proposed: in port 1,627 in 43.04 years

as it stands the more well engineered a ship/station/fighter is the more you are penalized for having it in port, this is counter intuitive and can leave players wondering why their new easy to maintain ship/station is stripping their planet of it's MSP as it is also not mentioned at all in the designing of ships/stations. only to find that the solution is to build a giant hangar with nearly nothing on it engineering or otherwise to house it in

PS: dividing by 10 was halfway arbitrary and should be considered more closely for balance and can also have tech line to increase efficiency, eg start at 2 then work on up to 10 or something like that

[nuclearslurpee]

As it is right now it is possible to design a ship that will cost less in MSP doing a full deployment then what it would cost to just sit in port doing nothing.

This is a common misconception, but incorrect. Deploying a ship away from port will always* cost the same or more in MSP than sitting it in port for the same period of time, and the cost can only be equal if no maintenance failures occur.

The maintenance rules are balanced so that the cost of an overhaul for a ship with X months on its maintenance clock is the same as X months of portside maintenance (being X/48 MSP, of course). One could, in principle, get around this rule by deploying a ship away from port and not doing an overhaul, but this will eventually become economically unmaintainable since the failure rate increases as the maintenance clock increases, so an overhaul is eventually necessary to keep a ship functional. Therefore, the MSP expended while a ship is away on deployment always represents an additional cost besides the MSP which would be expended in either case, whether through portside maintenance or overhauls.

*It is possible to build ships with very long maintenance lifetimes and with the intention of flying them around until they explode in or out of combat, avoiding overhauls entirely - the required mass of engineering spaces and MSP bays tends to render such ships rather impractical, however. For example:

Code: [Select]

Orion MK3 class Orbital Defence Base      120,000 tons       5,144 Crew       27,584.8 BP       TCS 2,400    TH 0    EM 37,440
1 km/s      Armour 12-216       Shields 1248-520       HTK 1298      Sensors 90/90/0/0      DCR 761-50      PPV 446.28


This ship has nearly 1/3 of its total hull size dedicated to engineering spaces. While it may be a maintenance-efficient design, I would not readily presume that its weapons and defenses are as efficacious as its displacement tonnage might suggest. Given that 1 MSP costs 0.25 BP (0.1 duranium, 0.05 uridium, 0.1 gallicite), it's also questionable whether the MSP savings represent a real cost savings, since the amount of engineering spaces plus crew quarters and armor mounted to achieve that long maintenance life also add up. The costs add up even less favorably for "real" ships, which need additional engines and fuel to move all those extra engineering spaces around.

Finally: frankly, even if the above monstrosity of a defense station is practical or even optimal, I don't think it's a problem that Aurora allows such designs to be feasible in narrow, specialized circumstances.