Author Topic: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions  (Read 135142 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1313
  • Thanked: 149 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1455 on: October 15, 2019, 04:50:01 PM »
So it's a combination of Swarm and Invaders with minor differences here and there? While that isn't inherently a bad thing, my gut instinct is that any new spoiler should radically stand out from the existing spoilers.
 

Offline Father Tim

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1231
  • Thanked: 155 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1456 on: October 15, 2019, 05:34:00 PM »
To which I would add that we already have both Invaders and the Arachnid Omnivoracity.  We have ever-increasing, ever-improving 'outside' forces that can't be counter-invaded, only endured or stoppered.  And we have suicidally-hostile, wipe-out-all-life, massively out-produce player empire(s) yet technologically slow/stagnant enemies.

Certainly, the 'implacable foe' and/or 'endless horde' is a staple of space opera, and has a place in Aurora.  But I agree that spoiler races need to be significantly different from not only what a player can do, but from each other.

Personally, I also think they should be a surprise.  That is why we spoiler them after all.  I wouldn't want to know all the mechanics behind them (as are laid out above).  There are more things in space (and Aurora) than are dreamt of in my empire's philosophy.

I am excited to discover organically the changes and additions Steve has made to the spoiler races, and if he wants to do something like The Forbidden is suggesting, hopefully he'll keep the details quiet until well after I've had my grubby little manipulators on C# Aurora for a while.

- - -

First, though, I want Steve to build the "bug button" he promised me:  http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=9841.msg110045#msg110045
« Last Edit: October 15, 2019, 09:53:06 PM by Father Tim »
 

Offline JustAnotherDude

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • J
  • Posts: 61
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1457 on: October 15, 2019, 07:47:25 PM »
I like the escalation mechanic and a spoiler that works that way would be interesting and superships are always fun but I feel that there's too much overlap between this and invaders.  The thought you out into is is evident, though.

Also locking tech levels isn't the best idea I'm my opinion, they should scale relative to the player to an extent because it's easy to get a curb stomp either way if it's fixed.
 

Offline DIT_grue

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • D
  • Posts: 175
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1458 on: October 16, 2019, 02:59:52 AM »
It is straight up most efficient to give as many labs to as few scientists as possible and then exactly ONE lab to all the rest so they can train.

Even that is a compromise. There's nothing mechanically preventing you assigning a project, reducing the allocated labs to zero, then leaving the scientist in charge to improve their skill at the same odds as any other project leader. (I guess churning out paper studies and grant applications in a desperate scrabble to acquire the resources to actually get the job done is excellent practice and motivation?)
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1313
  • Thanked: 149 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1459 on: October 16, 2019, 12:16:31 PM »
First, though, I want Steve to build the "bug button" he promised me:  http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=9841.msg110045#msg110045
Oh, I had completely forgotten that! Yes, 100% agreed, that would be really cool feature to have.
 

Offline Stryker

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • S
  • Posts: 7
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1460 on: October 23, 2019, 06:20:40 PM »
Being God-Emperor of the universe is hard, especially when your underlings won't do what you want!  I was recently annoyed with them because after acquiring 500 points of ecm tech from a salvaged ship, I sent the salvage vessel to Mars (where my secret electronic warfare lab is) and told them to release the tech data.   However, despite being in Mars orbit, the fools sent the data to Earth.   Since I was already researching this on Mars, and had already done more than 500 points in research, the data was wasted.   A good flogging is in order. . . or maybe an order.

I recommend an order on the fleet management screen: Release tech data too (target world).   This would resolve this and the future crews of my salvage vessels (and their widows) would appreciate it.
 

Offline Shuul

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • S
  • Posts: 64
  • Thanked: 9 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1461 on: October 24, 2019, 03:39:25 AM »
I want to suggest to have an optional picture for your ship design.
So in design screen we can select png or jpg to represent ship design. Maybe it can be also shown in fleet screen or somewhere else.
It should be optional though, for me it will be much easier to imagine the ship I want.
 

Offline Father Tim

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1231
  • Thanked: 155 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1462 on: October 29, 2019, 04:46:03 AM »
Ground Unit Auto-Improvement
------------------------------------

I would love it if, when I develop new armour and/or weapon tech, Aurora would immediately make copycat designs of all my ground units that used the old 'best' armour or weapon tech and replace it with the newly researched version.

So, upon me gaining Composite Armour Tech, Aurora would immediately copy my High Density Duranium Armour-using 'Mark I Fighting Tractor' design, and create a 'Mark I Fighting Tractor A' design using Composite Armour. . . or maybe a 'Mark I Fighting Tractor (CompArm)' design.  It's fine if Aurora doesn't know or can't match my empire's naming scheme -- as long as I can clearly identify the new design, I can rename it 'appropriately' myself.

Likewise with improved weapons tech.
 

Offline Profugo Barbatus

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • P
  • Posts: 45
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1463 on: October 29, 2019, 06:54:17 AM »
That seems like a great way to flood any RP'd military with useless formations. If I'm running a fictional WW2 Britian in space, I don't want my unit lists flooding out with a bunch of different Bren gun units because I made a push for new tech to build the new fangled Hover Churchill tank designs. It could be a nice option, as long as it is exactly that, an option. Perhaps an auto-update box on the initial unit definition, or a game level setting.
 

Offline Hazard

  • Captain
  • **********
  • H
  • Posts: 513
  • Thanked: 43 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1464 on: October 29, 2019, 09:10:29 AM »
Works better if automatically generated designs get deleted if an improvement becomes available and none were build of the previous version.
 

Offline QuakeIV

  • Registered
  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 350
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1465 on: October 29, 2019, 06:44:06 PM »
I'd say it would be about as good as auto updating ship designs, that is to say likely to annoy people more than actually help.  I'll phase in a next gen wave of combat gear when I am good and ready to.
 
The following users thanked this post: Viridia, Rook

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 1081
  • Thanked: 84 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1466 on: October 31, 2019, 07:08:54 PM »
I suggest that you change ship based maintenance facilities so that the need population to run and as such would need 50k population in order to operate just like ground based maintenance facilities.

These ship based facilities might be a bit more expensive to build but the strategic benefit and the economic benefit in the long run (as they don't need population) to run will almost always outweigh the small initial cost benefit of building ground based maintenance facilities.

Since we can now have population anywhere in space I think that making this change will improve the logistical challenge of where you can maintain your ships in a positive way.
 

Offline Hazard

  • Captain
  • **********
  • H
  • Posts: 513
  • Thanked: 43 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1467 on: November 01, 2019, 11:03:52 AM »
Instead of forcing ship based facilities require population, it might be more sensible to make them require large numbers of personnel instead, or be more expensive like automated mines. Not just maintenance facilities; fuel harvesters and asteroid miners as well do jobs at the same production rates as ground side facilities, and have similar or smaller construction costs.
 

Offline Father Tim

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1231
  • Thanked: 155 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1468 on: November 01, 2019, 11:07:30 AM »
I suggest that you change ship based maintenance facilities so that the need population to run and as such would need 50k population in order to operate just like ground based maintenance facilities.

These ship based facilities might be a bit more expensive to build but the strategic benefit and the economic benefit in the long run (as they don't need population) to run will almost always outweigh the small initial cost benefit of building ground based maintenance facilities.

Since we can now have population anywhere in space I think that making this change will improve the logistical challenge of where you can maintain your ships in a positive way.

Since Terraforming Modules / Facilities have the exact same issue -- and have had it for 15+ years -- I doubt that it will (or even should) change.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 1081
  • Thanked: 84 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1469 on: November 01, 2019, 01:45:45 PM »
I suggest that you change ship based maintenance facilities so that the need population to run and as such would need 50k population in order to operate just like ground based maintenance facilities.

These ship based facilities might be a bit more expensive to build but the strategic benefit and the economic benefit in the long run (as they don't need population) to run will almost always outweigh the small initial cost benefit of building ground based maintenance facilities.

Since we can now have population anywhere in space I think that making this change will improve the logistical challenge of where you can maintain your ships in a positive way.


Since Terraforming Modules / Facilities have the exact same issue -- and have had it for 15+ years -- I doubt that it will (or even should) change.

The problem have mostly been moving population to run them... I think that all should work the same or you simply make them allot more expensive like Automated mines are twice as costly as regular mines to make it a real decision.
 

 

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