Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes Discussion  (Read 271702 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ektor

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • E
  • Posts: 126
  • Thanked: 83 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2580 on: February 07, 2020, 06:20:58 PM »
So, I'm curious about the whole diplomacy thing.  You need to have a detected ship in an alien system, but you lose diplomatic points and get asked to leave if they detect your ship? How is one supposed to do diplomacy, then? There should be a way to ask for permission to stay.
 

Offline Father Tim

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2114
  • Thanked: 502 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2581 on: February 07, 2020, 08:55:12 PM »
So, I'm curious about the whole diplomacy thing.  You need to have a detected ship in an alien system, but you lose diplomatic points and get asked to leave if they detect your ship? How is one supposed to do diplomacy, then? There should be a way to ask for permission to stay.

They don't always ask you to leave, and if you show them the jump point there's a good chance they'll follow you through and you can talk in the system next door.
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1786
  • Thanked: 441 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2582 on: February 08, 2020, 06:55:11 AM »
If your ship doesn't have active sensors and it's small, the malus it causes is minimal.
 

Offline vorpal+5

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 305
  • Thanked: 41 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2583 on: February 08, 2020, 11:10:49 PM »
About the new post on Star System Design, it made me think of 2 facts I recently read in a scientific magazine, perhaps Steve will want to use them to nudge probabilities so to stick more to the most recent views of the scientific community on star systems:

- Orange dwarf stars are much more chance to harbor planets with some life compared to red stars, because the latter produce much greater (or is it during a much longer time) deadly radiations whereas orange stars are much 'quieter' on that
- systems with multiple stars have lower chance to have planets (because accretion process is harder with multiple stars)

I won't cite my source, sorry I don't have the magazine before me, but if you don't want to trust me on these facts (which I understand) googling them should not be too difficult.

cheers
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 9941
  • Thanked: 10018 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2584 on: February 09, 2020, 07:05:06 AM »
About the new post on Star System Design, it made me think of 2 facts I recently read in a scientific magazine, perhaps Steve will want to use them to nudge probabilities so to stick more to the most recent views of the scientific community on star systems:

- Orange dwarf stars are much more chance to harbor planets with some life compared to red stars, because the latter produce much greater (or is it during a much longer time) deadly radiations whereas orange stars are much 'quieter' on that
- systems with multiple stars have lower chance to have planets (because accretion process is harder with multiple stars)

I won't cite my source, sorry I don't have the magazine before me, but if you don't want to trust me on these facts (which I understand) googling them should not be too difficult.

cheers

Yes, I'm aware of the radiation risks with some red stars. I considered having some systems with high radiation on planets closer to the star, but in a real stars game a high proportion of stars are red dwarves so it would have a big impact and it doesn't really add any significant game play decisions. Maybe if I add some technology to protect planets from solar radiation it might be an option.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 683
  • Thanked: 126 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2585 on: February 09, 2020, 07:28:36 AM »
In the new diplomacy system it looks to me that an NPR never will declare a system it shares as its capitol with another race as worthy of fully conquering. For RP reasons that option might be interesting, so having an option that overrules the NPR calculations in SM mode might be worth considering.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 9941
  • Thanked: 10018 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2586 on: February 09, 2020, 08:29:37 AM »
In the new diplomacy system it looks to me that an NPR never will declare a system it shares as its capitol with another race as worthy of fully conquering. For RP reasons that option might be interesting, so having an option that overrules the NPR calculations in SM mode might be worth considering.

It will try to conquer that system if relations fall far enough. Once an alien race is declared hostile, any prior territorial agreements are ignored.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alsadius

Online froggiest1982

  • Commander
  • *********
  • f
  • Posts: 369
  • Thanked: 78 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2587 on: February 09, 2020, 02:28:05 PM »
In the cancel star option what happen if we cancel a star with a planet gravitating having a population?

Example, I jump in a System which has a second star orbiting 30LY away and the system has generated an NPR on one of the planets there.

Did you test the above yet?

thanks
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1786
  • Thanked: 441 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2588 on: February 09, 2020, 03:38:28 PM »
Deleting a star deletes all planets orbiting it. Deleting a planet deletes all moons orbiting it and every colony on it. So I would say that deleting a star leads to everything else orbiting that star vanishing as well.

These new possibilities can be quite useful but are definitely a big risk of accidentally messing up your game  :o
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 9941
  • Thanked: 10018 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2589 on: February 09, 2020, 04:11:40 PM »
In the cancel star option what happen if we cancel a star with a planet gravitating having a population?

Example, I jump in a System which has a second star orbiting 30LY away and the system has generated an NPR on one of the planets there.

Did you test the above yet?

thanks

The intention of the star system design functionality is to build starting star systems for RP purposes, rather than for deleting parts of systems mid-campaign. I would not recommend the latter unless you are sure about what it is in the system. The "are you sure" popups before any deletion happens warn that affected populations will be deleted. However, the specific example above wouldn't be a problem because an NPR would not be generated in a location that cannot easily reach the primary star.

Even if an NPR or other population was on the system body, there are a lot of safeguards in place in C#. When a population is deleted, the following are also deleted; Research projects, queued research, sectors, admin commands, contacts for the pop/SY/ground forces, all fleet orders for fleets that had the pop as a destination, shipyards, shipyard tasks, commander assignments and ground forces. The NPR would still function in this scenario, even if you just deleted its capital, but it wouldn't be much of a threat.

BTW I assume you mean Delete. Cancel means you are NOT deleting or modifying the star.
 

Offline JacenHan

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 411
  • Thanked: 83 times
  • Discord Username: Jacenhan
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2590 on: February 09, 2020, 04:13:35 PM »
I'm pretty sure we could already delete (non-primary) stars in VB6 (I've used it to get rid of annoying super-distant binary systems), so we've had the opportunity to mess up our games for a while.
 
The following users thanked this post: froggiest1982

Online froggiest1982

  • Commander
  • *********
  • f
  • Posts: 369
  • Thanked: 78 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2591 on: February 09, 2020, 06:21:52 PM »
I'm pretty sure we could already delete (non-primary) stars in VB6 (I've used it to get rid of annoying super-distant binary systems), so we've had the opportunity to mess up our games for a while.

I see; I've I haven't tried that ever I think.
 

Offline chrislocke2000

  • Captain
  • **********
  • c
  • Posts: 524
  • Thanked: 32 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2592 on: February 10, 2020, 03:28:27 AM »
The new system updates options look great, no more constant generating of systems when you are trying to find a home for a non Sol player race.

Assume the TN materials generator can still be re-run on any planets at set up stage?
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 9941
  • Thanked: 10018 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2593 on: February 10, 2020, 04:19:40 AM »
The new system updates options look great, no more constant generating of systems when you are trying to find a home for a non Sol player race.

Assume the TN materials generator can still be re-run on any planets at set up stage?

Yes, or you can specify the minerals individually.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alsadius

Offline TMaekler

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 683
  • Thanked: 126 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2594 on: February 10, 2020, 05:16:15 AM »
In VB6 research was bound to a planet. If you started research on one planet, stopped it and continued it later on another planet, it didn’t use the already done research on the former planet. You had to start from scratch or finish it on the former planet. Will that change in C#?
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72