Author Topic: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions  (Read 184843 times)

Shuul and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline xenoscepter

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 333
  • Thanked: 15 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2085 on: March 18, 2020, 10:38:20 PM »
Could we have it so the Technology Screen shows us what is in use and what isn't? So we can make those parts obsolete easier.
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1529
  • Thanked: 209 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2086 on: March 19, 2020, 02:13:48 PM »
This would be useful if there was a manpower mechanic attached to ground combat, but there isn't. Ground units are very much depicted by their equipment, and the manpower attached to it is utterly inconsequential. A PW(L) infantryman may be rated at 3 tons in weight/shipping, but does that mean that a 60 ton Heavy Anti Vehicle Static Unit is made up of 20 men?
Agreed with Hazard.

It's very difficult to justify a Medical Unit when there is nothing that ties down units to manpower or even biology. So it would need to be generic Field Repair Unit(s) that have a chance of saving a unit that got hit and destroyed. Two new tech lines: one to improve the chance of saving and another to improve the tonnage size of the unit - for example, you would start with a FRU that can save 5 tons at combat round at 5% chance and eventually go up to 500 tons at 25% chance. That way you can't save Ultra-Heavy Vehicles or Super-Heavy Vehicles or maybe you can if the tech lines are allowed to go even higher.

The engineering equipment should be both defensive and offensive - on unarmoured light vehicles you would only help fortify your defensive units whereas on strongly armoured heavy vehicles it'll help reduce enemy defences with your other attackers.
 

Offline Zhatelier

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Z
  • Posts: 9
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2087 on: March 20, 2020, 03:07:15 AM »
I was wondering, would it be possible to have an ability to add in entries into the event log in SM mode.  I'm not asking for the entries to have any function into the game itself, mostly for flavour.  As I see it, it would require the ability to select which empire will see the entry, location (if applicable) and a text field.  After making the entry, it would appear in the selected empire's event log in addition to the SM view.
An example of a custom entry could be something like this:

Great Britain      The Caribbean      HMS Cornwall has plundered San Antonio [SPA] for 200 wealth.
(And from the other side with a second custom entry)
Spain                The Caribbean      Our ship San Antonio was plundered by HMS Cornwall [GB] for 200 wealth.
 

Offline Rook

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2088 on: March 24, 2020, 06:28:19 AM »
Two Suggestions, though I haven't torn through this thread in a while, so I'm not sure if these have been covered.  .  . 

First, Parasite Naming theme based on assigned group:
 The idea here is that a naming theme can be a assigned to a sub-group, and, possibly, only to parasites within that subgroup.   When a parasite is transferred to that subgroup, it is automatically renamed according to the naming theme.   Making it easier to apply callsigns to Parasites.   The purpose is purely for flavor, where your fleet has callsigns for different fighter groups.   

Second, Covert/Submarine Patrol Order:
 An Advanced order for reconnaissance craft with low signatures/stealth capability.   This order will automatically assign headings and speeds, based on fuel status, its signature, its own sensor range, and known enemy sensor ranges, to scout a system for contacts.   The idea here is that a ship will automatically scout a system, but avoid detection.   As well, for "long duration missions" it will keep its speed low during patrol to conserve fuel, but increase speed as necessary to avoid detection or evade hostile ships.  An additional thought, an area within the system could be designated for the patrol order, or boundaries set, to limit the search area.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 06:32:49 AM by Rook »
 

Offline Father Tim

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 221 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2089 on: March 24, 2020, 01:44:39 PM »
. . . As well, for "long duration missions" it will keep its speed low during patrol to conserve fuel, but increase speed as necessary to avoid detection or evade hostile ships. . .

Speed has zero effect on fuel efficiency.  Fuel per unit distance is constant regardless of whether it's at 2 km/s or 20,000 km/s.
 

Offline SevenOfCarina

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 105
  • Thanked: 38 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2090 on: March 25, 2020, 12:32:05 AM »
I was wondering, could certain system bodies that are in close orbit of gas giants or near a hyperactive star have a minimum radiation level? Like, for most system bodies radiation will eventually settle down to zero, but for these, it will instead start at a base number within range of around 10-200 or so, determined by proximity to a star (below a certain orbit radius) and type of star (focusing on flare stars, neutron stars, pulsars and the like) and proximity to a gas giant (below a certain orbit radius) and the magnetic field strength of the gas giant. Radiation level will not decline below this fixed number. I'm mostly asking so we need to actually need to think twice between colonising radioactive hellholes like Io and its much calmer neighbour Callisto, which in Aurora are functionally identical. Of course really mineral rich bodies might still be worth colonising despite the efficiency hit.
 
The following users thanked this post: AlStar, Garfunkel, QuakeIV, JacenHan, Bughunter

Offline Tyrannus Rex

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • T
  • Posts: 1
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2091 on: March 25, 2020, 04:57:59 AM »
Quote from: SevenOfCarina link=topic=9841. msg119979#msg119979 date=1585114325
I was wondering, could certain system bodies that are in close orbit of gas giants or near a hyperactive star have a minimum radiation level? Like, for most system bodies radiation will eventually settle down to zero, but for these, it will instead start at a base number within range of around 10-200 or so, determined by proximity to a star (below a certain orbit radius) and type of star (focusing on flare stars, neutron stars, pulsars and the like) and proximity to a gas giant (below a certain orbit radius) and the magnetic field strength of the gas giant.  Radiation level will not decline below this fixed number.  I'm mostly asking so we need to actually need to think twice between colonising radioactive hellholes like Io and its much calmer neighbour Callisto, which in Aurora are functionally identical.  Of course really mineral rich bodies might still be worth colonising despite the efficiency hit.

This would be an excellent thing to have implemented.  As such even if you had a wonderful mineral rich planet that you wanted to collect, paying the costs of a constant Radiation penalty would be interesting.  Maybe to tie in with this is that you had to have shields, or thicker armor to approach said objects.  Making it just a little bit of a challenge for some, or just a flavor for RP purposes.
 

Offline obsidian_green

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • o
  • Posts: 163
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2092 on: March 25, 2020, 11:31:25 PM »

Second, Covert/Submarine Patrol Order:
 An Advanced order for reconnaissance craft with low signatures/stealth capability.   This order will automatically assign headings and speeds, based on fuel status, its signature, its own sensor range, and known enemy sensor ranges, to scout a system for contacts.   The idea here is that a ship will automatically scout a system, but avoid detection.   As well, for "long duration missions" it will keep its speed low during patrol to conserve fuel, but increase speed as necessary to avoid detection or evade hostile ships.  An additional thought, an area within the system could be designated for the patrol order, or boundaries set, to limit the search area.

I love this idea, more because the logic could be employed by NPRs. If the mechanics haven't changed from 7.1, lower speed would reduce IR signature. Every working tool in the AI toolbox can increase the chances of pleasant surprises from NPRs.
 
The following users thanked this post: Rook

Offline SevenOfCarina

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 105
  • Thanked: 38 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2093 on: March 26, 2020, 09:39:13 AM »
With the C# release date literally around the corner, it's probably a bit late to ask for this, but could there be a global modifier to survey speed like with terraforming speed at game start? Sometimes it's worthwhile to play a game where exploration is deliberately slow, so much so that significant colonies and industry could already be in place before a system has been fully surveyed. You could have a giant hostile empire a literal four or five jumps away, right on your doorstep, and you wouldn't find out till you've already expanded right next to them.

I'm asking because I really love the thought of massive defensive wars and grinding campaigns through hostile territory, but most of my VB6 campaigns don't really go there because hostile empires are either too distant or they're encountered so early that the intervening space is mostly unoccupied, so wars devolve down to rushing the entire fleet to their capital before they can do the same to you, or turtling in for a long military build-up because there are no colonies that you need to worry about defending.
 
The following users thanked this post: clement, QuakeIV, Mastik, Bughunter

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 8419
  • Thanked: 6066 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2094 on: March 26, 2020, 11:01:21 AM »
With the C# release date literally around the corner, it's probably a bit late to ask for this, but could there be a global modifier to survey speed like with terraforming speed at game start? Sometimes it's worthwhile to play a game where exploration is deliberately slow, so much so that significant colonies and industry could already be in place before a system has been fully surveyed. You could have a giant hostile empire a literal four or five jumps away, right on your doorstep, and you wouldn't find out till you've already expanded right next to them.

I'm asking because I really love the thought of massive defensive wars and grinding campaigns through hostile territory, but most of my VB6 campaigns don't really go there because hostile empires are either too distant or they're encountered so early that the intervening space is mostly unoccupied, so wars devolve down to rushing the entire fleet to their capital before they can do the same to you, or turtling in for a long military build-up because there are no colonies that you need to worry about defending.

That's a good idea. I've added it.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg119998#msg119998

EDIT: Good thing you suggested this as it highlighted a problem with saving game settings :)
« Last Edit: March 26, 2020, 11:23:38 AM by Steve Walmsley »
 
The following users thanked this post: AlStar, Garfunkel, hubgbf, Kristover, clement, Jorgen_CAB, Zincat, DIT_grue, Nori, SevenOfCarina

Offline JacenHan

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 329
  • Thanked: 45 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2095 on: March 28, 2020, 12:22:36 PM »
What with all of the global modifier suggestions and features going around, would it be possible to have a maintenance modifier that affects how much tonnage maintenance facilities support (and how many MSPs they produce)?
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 8419
  • Thanked: 6066 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2096 on: March 28, 2020, 12:24:46 PM »
What with all of the global modifier suggestions and features going around, would it be possible to have a maintenance modifier that affects how much tonnage maintenance facilities support (and how many MSPs they produce)?

There is a tech line for both so you can SM the extra if required.
 

Online Shuul

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 78
  • Thanked: 15 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2097 on: March 28, 2020, 12:49:15 PM »
Can I suggest to limit possible weapons. For ships with diplomacy module just to ciws? I feel like this can be exploited if we can fit them with weapons for first strike.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mastik

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 8419
  • Thanked: 6066 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2098 on: March 28, 2020, 02:00:57 PM »
Can I suggest to limit possible weapons. For ships with diplomacy module just to ciws? I feel like this can be exploited if we can fit them with weapons for first strike.

I've updated the Diplomacy Part 2 post with the following text.

NPRs deduct 10,000 tons from the tonnage of one Diplomatic Ship per system for threat purposes if that class type has never fired weapons and the Diplomatic Ship is in a non-Core system. If the NPR only has one system, it is not treated as core for this purpose

It will be possible to send in an armed Diplomatic Ship for some form of sneak attack. However, the Diplomacy Module is 1500 tons, so once engines and maybe a jump drive are added, there isn't much room for weapons. You could send a Diplomatic Ship larger than 10,000 tons, although that would cause a diplomatic penalty for the excess whenever you use the ship and most of the time you won't be conducting sneak attacks. Finally, missiles are detected on launch now so you can't get inside PD range. So sneak attack is possible (try to take out shipyards in a mass box launcher attack maybe) but I don't think that is overpowered.
 

Offline Scandinavian

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • S
  • Posts: 107
  • Thanked: 28 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #2099 on: March 28, 2020, 03:34:34 PM »
Is that deduction before or after commercial engine modifier?
 

 

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