Author Topic: Change Log for 6.00 discussion  (Read 49852 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline chuckles73

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • c
  • Posts: 37
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #75 on: May 11, 2012, 08:17:43 AM »
I just remember a game where one of my satellites (without engines) tried to shift orbit, happened to get caught during the once-every-five-days tick, and ended up too far away from the planet to get back... >.<
 

Offline jseah

  • Captain
  • **********
  • j
  • Posts: 490
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #76 on: May 14, 2012, 02:49:27 PM »
Um, could I request that new civilian administrator and new scientist become interrupts again?

While new naval and ground not interrupting is nice, I actually want to do things with the other two. 
 

Offline Erik L

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5659
  • Thanked: 377 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #77 on: May 14, 2012, 02:54:02 PM »
Um, could I request that new civilian administrator and new scientist become interrupts again?

While new naval and ground not interrupting is nice, I actually want to do things with the other two. 

Or at least make it configurable. Make a check list of what things are interrupts and what are not.

PS. I'd like scientists and civ admins to interrupt also ;)

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11729
  • Thanked: 20681 times
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #78 on: May 14, 2012, 04:15:13 PM »
Um, could I request that new civilian administrator and new scientist become interrupts again?

While new naval and ground not interrupting is nice, I actually want to do things with the other two. 

OK, I've changed it so that civs and scientists have different events and they do interrupt.

Steve
 

Offline dgibso29

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • d
  • Posts: 179
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #79 on: May 14, 2012, 04:32:11 PM »
Daw, you were supposed to say, "and it's configurable."
 

Offline UnLimiTeD

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • U
  • Posts: 1108
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #80 on: May 14, 2012, 05:26:11 PM »
Lol.
Would it be possible to set the population growth in the game somewhere?
Also possible just for the race.
I'm about to do a small RP campaign and it's gnawing at my suspension of disbelief that they apparently all breed like rabbits.
 

Offline jseah

  • Captain
  • **********
  • j
  • Posts: 490
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #81 on: May 15, 2012, 02:49:57 AM »
While we are on the subject of non-interrupting events, can we make new/lost friendly/allied sensor/transponder contact not interrupt? 
 

Offline xeryon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 581
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #82 on: May 15, 2012, 06:49:07 AM »
Instead of singling out interrupts, just leave it the way it is by default and make it so all of the log file entries have two switches:  one to disable the log entry and one to disable the interrupt.
 

Offline ollobrains

  • Commander
  • *********
  • o
  • Posts: 380
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #83 on: May 16, 2012, 03:25:12 AM »
population growth limits under youre normal growth rate could be useful
 

Offline ussugu

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • u
  • Posts: 23
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #84 on: May 23, 2012, 09:02:05 AM »
Quote from: Steve Walmsley
Any action that uses crew grade as a modifier will also be affected by low morale. This includes weapon accuracy, maintenance failures and transit delays.

Just my two cents here, but I think that the morale "penalty" might need to be adjusted for combat situations.  If you are saying morale is based on fatigue from being "away" for so long plus general grumpiness from lack of downtime, I would argue that combat would eliminate the grumpy aspect of morale. 

I understand that in high stress situations, fatigue is what it is, but if I am getting shot at and afraid for my life, my pissed off attitude at my superiors would probably dissipate and that aspect of my morale would not play a factor.  Maybe cut the morale penalty in half for combat situations and leave as is for typical daily grind things.
 

Offline TheDeadlyShoe

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1264
  • Thanked: 58 times
  • Dance Commander
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #85 on: May 23, 2012, 11:21:17 AM »
well combat is supposed to be the main penalty for morale.  In the interest of KISS its better to have a unified mechanic, i.e. just one morale penalty.  So if the combat morale penalty is too high you might as well adjust all of it.

 

Offline Girlinhat

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • G
  • Posts: 199
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #86 on: May 23, 2012, 03:40:16 PM »
More importantly, if morale doesn't affect combat as much then it's no big penalty.  To encourage players to keep their fleets AND their crews maintained, it must have a direct and important impact.
 

Offline wedgebert

  • Ace Wiki Contributor
  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • ****
  • w
  • Posts: 89
  • Thanked: 34 times
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #87 on: May 23, 2012, 10:37:46 PM »
It does make sense though, you're unlikely to piss about in combat because you're unhappy. To me, low morale would result in things like the maintenance clock increasing faster due to poor job performance alogn with the increased failure rates. Maybe instead of a penalty to the crew grate, it results in slower increases to crew grade and possibly even a decrease if it gets low enough.

You'll give it your best in combat, you just won't know what you're doing. A few weeks in a brothel isn't going to teach you all the things you should have been learning regarding how to do your job during those boring drills.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11729
  • Thanked: 20681 times
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #88 on: May 24, 2012, 12:04:07 PM »
I tend to view the combat penalty due to morale (as with crew grade) to be related to how well the systems are maintained and how often the crew carries out drills. When a warship fires a beam weapon (for example) the grade/morale bonus/penalty is not really based on the crew manually aiming the weapon but on how well the weapon and the fire control function, which is in turn based on how well they have been checked and maintained in the months leading up to the battle. High crew grade means a crew that constantly drills and improves their systems over time to get the absolute best out of them, correcting things that another crew would accept as being within normal parameters. A low crew grade will usually indicate a lack of experience in how to get the most of their systems. A low morale indicates a lack of willingness to do so. In the case of a sudden battle it is unlikely a crew would be able to overcome months of letting things slide in terms of drills and maintenance.

Steve
 

Offline ussugu

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • u
  • Posts: 23
Re: Change Log for 5.70 discussion
« Reply #89 on: May 24, 2012, 01:12:38 PM »
Quote from: Steve Walmsley
A low morale indicates a lack of willingness to do so. In the case of a sudden battle it is unlikely a crew would be able to overcome months of letting things slide in terms of drills and maintenance.

Steve

Good point. I defer to your logic.