Official Suggestion Thread for 5.20 or later

[waresky]

Sometimes return...

A more better ARMY management and an "tactical map" for more feeling in..

Steve?

* are Age am post ...2009? ehehhe.--"The Fading Sun" like stylez are too,obviously..but a little exagonal map?..

[ollobrains]

a tactical map enhancement would make this game a bit easier to manage

[Charlie Beeler]

Looks like there is some minor TechSystem table cleanup needed.

TechType 6 - Squadron Jump Radius has some minor progression/development cost/hs requirements issues. 

Name Max Squadron Jump Radius - 50k (Size x 1.0) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 100k (Size x 1.05) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 250 (Size x 1.1) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 500k (Size x 1.15) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 750k (Size x 1.2) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 1000k (Size x 1.25) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 1500k (Size x 1.3) Jump Point Distance - 2000 (Size x 2.2) Jump Point Distance - 3000 (Size x 2.6) Jump Point Distance - 4000 (Size x 3.0) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 2000k (Size x 1.4) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 2500k (Size x 1.5)

DEV 1000 2000 4000 8000 15000 30000 60000 250000 500000 1000000 125000 250000

Granted this is a range of tech I haven't seen anyone post that they've gotten too.

For continuity TechType 166 should have Minimum Jump Engine Size - 15 not be a TransNewtonian Starting Tech.

Also for continuity TechType 196 (ground troops) Should probably have Replacement/Garrison/Mobile Infantry Battalions and Engineer Brigades changed to TransNewtonian Starting Tech since their only prerequisite tech is TransNewtian Tech.

One last thing that I've noted, there is an orphaned(prerequisite is no long a table entry) tech PDC Hanger (TechType 98)in the table. 

[DatAlien]

I want to repeat my suggestion of setting the names of your commanders depending on their home planet

[chrislocke2000]

Colonists with memories

Having recently lost a colony of 50 odd million people to a hostile NPR I was pretty happy to be able to liberate them a couple of months later.

Now I know they may be pretty upset with me for letting them get captured in the first place but for them to be treated as a brand new captured race seems a little harsh.

I would propose that the penalties to production are reveresed on capture to reflect the fact that your own population is generally happier to see you back but may be disaffected by recent events. Ie if they are conquered status (20% production) when recaptured they class at 80% production for you. If you have been slow to get them back and the status of the colony for the other side has moved to Subjugated (40% production) then when you get them back they class at 60% etc.

This still gives a penalty for allowing them to be captured in the first place and also gives an incentive to get them back as soon as possible.

[Feujak]

Hello,

I have a suggestions for the new Group by Function for colonie.
Why not adding a small menu to choose yourself which colonies will be in which group.
(This would prevent Archeological Digs to change statut when they find something)

Sorry for my poor english

[Erik L]

When you select a scientist in the available area, it changes the Allocated Research Labs value to their max, or however many is left, whichever is greater.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Looks like there is some minor TechSystem table cleanup needed.

TechType 6 - Squadron Jump Radius has some minor progression/development cost/hs requirements issues. 

Name Max Squadron Jump Radius - 50k (Size x 1.0) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 100k (Size x 1.05) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 250 (Size x 1.1) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 500k (Size x 1.15) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 750k (Size x 1.2) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 1000k (Size x 1.25) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 1500k (Size x 1.3) Jump Point Distance - 2000 (Size x 2.2) Jump Point Distance - 3000 (Size x 2.6) Jump Point Distance - 4000 (Size x 3.0) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 2000k (Size x 1.4) Max Squadron Jump Radius - 2500k (Size x 1.5)

DEV 1000 2000 4000 8000 15000 30000 60000 250000 500000 1000000 125000 250000

Granted this is a range of tech I haven't seen anyone post that they've gotten too.

Yes, that was a a bit of a mess . Fixed for the next DB release.

For continuity TechType 166 should have Minimum Jump Engine Size - 15 not be a TransNewtonian Starting Tech.

Also for continuity TechType 196 (ground troops) Should probably have Replacement/Garrison/Mobile Infantry Battalions and Engineer Brigades changed to TransNewtonian Starting Tech since their only prerequisite tech is TransNewtian Tech.

I am going to leave the Min Jump Engine Size as a starting tech. I think have the same setting for other size-based tech progressions. With regard to ground forces, there are a lot of techs that have TN tech as their only prerequisite so I can't really use that as a justification for having them immediately available. On the other hand, I think some starting ground forces are reasonable anyway so I will include all the above except engineers as starting tech.

One last thing that I've noted, there is an orphaned(prerequisite is no long a table entry) tech PDC Hanger (TechType 98)in the table. 

I have removed it. The standard hangar can be used on ships so I don't think there is any point in having the PDC hangar as a special PDC system.

Thanks for identifying all the above issues.

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

a tactical map enhancement would make this game a bit easier to manage

Did you have any particular tactical map enhancement in mind?

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Might have been said before but perhaps have the ship design window throw up a design error if you have missile launchers on a design but no missile fire control.  Same for beam weapons and no beam fire control.

Fortunately I spotted that my new battlecruisers had a plethora of launchers and nothing to direct them with before I retooled a yard.

Added for the next version.

Steve

[Beersatron]

Civilian Shipping, can you have something that will roll for scrapping ships?

Something along the lines of:

The ship to be scrapped has to be old (say 10+ years?).
There has to be other ships in the line's fleet to 'take up the slack'.
The line gets 25% of the original wealth back.
They do not automatically build a new ship - there are way too many civies in pretty much every game I have played.
The ship has to be at a planet with a spaceport.

Anybody else got suggestions on factors that would weigh against/for scrapping?

[Thiosk]

I see no reason why Civvie ships shouldn't track a maintenance clock, with the ability to reroll for a new ship.  I think "just" 10 years (an arbitrary, illustrative value I know) isn't quite right-- you might have a design that you use for well over 10 years, like my 25-cargo hold superfreighter that flies at about 4k km/s.  No need to replace an old freighter with the same design.  But all those single-hold craft running around; not much need for them to do much of anything anymore.  I've just decided to ignore it, and once I have 10 or 15 freighters running on a line, I upgrade them with newer vessels.  But I don't do conventional starts, which would likely result in dozens of nauseatingly slow freighers flitting about.

[Thiosk]

Suggestion 1:  Decrease penalty to PDC mounted beam weapons in the case of atmospheres.

I put my beam PDCs inside mountains, where the atmosphere is thinner.  This would open up some beam coverage for planets.  Might be too many special cases

Suggestion 2:  maintenance is sometimes annoying at far flung worlds-- consumption of some minerals is far higher than others, and is not uniform.  I suggest including another option: maintenance facilities should consume minerals first, but then resort to maintenance supplies to keep ships tip top.  This way, you can just run supply ships rather than freighters, and logistically would only have to provide one item rather than (potentially) 11 minerals in various concentrations.  The planned change to open up minerals to civilian trade would somewhat mitigate the logistical annoyance.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Civilian Shipping, can you have something that will roll for scrapping ships?

Something along the lines of:

The ship to be scrapped has to be old (say 10+ years?).
There has to be other ships in the line's fleet to 'take up the slack'.
The line gets 25% of the original wealth back.
They do not automatically build a new ship - there are way too many civies in pretty much every game I have played.
The ship has to be at a planet with a spaceport.

Anybody else got suggestions on factors that would weigh against/for scrapping?

I think something along these lines is a really good idea. There are too many civvies and it does become a problem later in the game. I'll give it some thought.

Steve

[Brian Neumann]

Civilian Shipping, can you have something that will roll for scrapping ships?
Anybody else got suggestions on factors that would weigh against/for scrapping?

The availability of new/faster ships.  The older a design is the more likely it will be considered obsolete.  Also a factor based on size.  A large ship may still be economical if it slow while a small ship with a limited payload that is slow as well is far less usefull.  Finally any freighter that can not transport an installation (5 cargo holds) should have a dramatically higher chance of scrapping once larger freighters are comonly available.

Brian