C# Aurora Changes Discussion

[Steve Walmsley]

I've moved on to coding missile combat. In this example, the French missile cruiser Clemenceau is launching against a US destroyer. The launch summary includes the range and the estimated chance to hit (although that can change while the missiles are in-flight).





The destroyer does not have any active sensors that can detect the missiles. However, there are four deep space tracking stations on the planet. With the new passive sensor model, they can detect the French missiles from launch.



First salvo arrives, scoring eight hits, two of which penetrate the armour. I've added the number of penetrating hits to the defender summary. BTW not sure if I mentioned this anywhere but in C# Aurora, you can have multiple windows open of each type. So in this case I have two event windows open - one for France and one for the United States - and both will update together. You could have two Class Design windows open to compare designs, etc..







Four more salvos arrive.









The sixth salvo is sufficient to destroy the ship.





I'll show some point defence examples when I finish the code in that area.

[Zincat]

BTW not sure if I mentioned this anywhere but in C# Aurora, you can have multiple windows open of each type. So in this case I have two event windows open - one for France and one for the United States - and both will update together. You could have two Class Design windows open to compare designs, etc.

That is an amazing improvement in my opinion. Very glad to hear that. I can imagine a lot of possible uses for this 

[Hazard]

Even if it is clear, having that carrier eat the missile and intercepting those 20 missiles aimed at the Arleigh Burke might be the better option if that carrier can take the blow but not the half a dozen salvos following in trail and numbering a dozen missiles each.

As Steve noted, this can get very complex, very fast.

EDIT: Steve, please consider writing salvos with the number of missiles in them. It would seem to me to best fit behind the signature.

[Barkhorn]

Could we also have an ETA when firing missiles?

[Steve Walmsley]

EDIT: Steve, please consider writing salvos with the number of missiles in them. It would seem to me to best fit behind the signature.

Yes, that's a bug - need to see how many missiles

[TMaekler]

BTW not sure if I mentioned this anywhere but in C# Aurora, you can have multiple windows open of each type. So in this case I have two event windows open - one for France and one for the United States - and both will update together. You could have two Class Design windows open to compare designs, etc..

That is going to be very helpful. We need to push for 16k-Monitors Can someone write an email to Elon?

[chrislocke2000]

in the attacker missile combat log as well as showing the number of missiles in the salvo it would be good to also see number of hits before you get to armour damage and penetration. I know you can see this through number of appropriate strength explosions on the tactical map but you can't see which ships they relate to.

[boggo2300]

That is going to be very helpful. We need to push for 16k-Monitors Can someone write an email to Elon?

Why so he can over promise and under deliver again?

Bezos would be a much better choice if you actually want a 16k monitor

[Steve Walmsley]

in the attacker missile combat log as well as showing the number of missiles in the salvo it would be good to also see number of hits before you get to armour damage and penetration. I know you can see this through number of appropriate strength explosions on the tactical map but you can't see which ships they relate to.

If there are shield hits, they will be listed separately.

[Froggiest1982]

Spring is on Wednesday

Still a decent way to go. Getting into combat now but there are a lot of smaller areas not done. About a dozen movement orders still to do, finish off the ground-space interactions (I just wrote the code for ground units shooting down incoming missiles), quite a lot of minor windows missing, etc. but the major missing part is the AI. I also have a long 'to do' list for finishing off parts of the code with about 50 items on it.

Once most of that is done, I will run one or more test campaigns, which will probably take a few months.

Hi @Steve Walmsley, sorry I do live in New Zealand so I have a different season calendar! My spring starts end of September...

[Steve Walmsley]

Hi @Steve Walmsley, sorry I do live in New Zealand so I have a different season calendar! My spring starts end of September...

Ah! Very good point. I would be disappointed if I wasn't well into a test campaign by your spring

[the obelisk]

They would be low values to hit because of the tracking speed. It is a possibility though. I'll sort this out when I create the UI for directing ground unit beam fire.

You can't use turrets for ground unit beams?

On the subject of ground unit beams, could a ground unit with that kind of weapon shoot at targets on another colony, (assuming they're in range) or just stuff in space?

[Steve Walmsley]

You can't use turrets for ground unit beams?

On the subject of ground unit beams, could a ground unit with that kind of weapon shoot at targets on another colony, (assuming they're in range) or just stuff in space?

Two ground units on different system bodies will be able to shoot at one another (when I write that code).

For now, ground weapons will be non-turreted. I might look at that in the future.

[Hazard]

It should probably be possible to place single mounted cannons into ground based turrets. Not least of which because while ships can haul the whole ship around if necessary to track a target and land a blow, a ground cannon can't shift around the planet to do the same.

[Bughunter]

a ground cannon can't shift around the planet to do the same.

I find your lack of faith disturbing..