Posted by: Marv
« on: May 15, 2022, 03:12:31 AM »Date of promotion. . . . ah. . . thank you Sir!
Posted by: Garfunkel
« on: May 14, 2022, 09:27:40 PM »Seniority is simply the date of promotion to current rank. Political reliability affects promotion score, which affects if/when a leader is promoted.
Posted by: Marv
« on: May 14, 2022, 01:35:58 PM »Thank you for this guide! A question on who will be automatically appointed fleet commander (no flag bridge in the fleet): you mention the "seniority" will decide. Now how is seniority measured? Political reliability? Age? Years in service? Promotion score? I have tested some but it never seems to follow any pattern.
Posted by: Alsadius
« on: May 10, 2020, 11:41:08 AM »This is very informative and the written format allows much more content in the end than doing a video. Also, quicker to find the info you search!
That's not to say I don't like the videos done, it's just that this text is very well laid out and explained and easy to recheck in time of need.
Thank you. And yeah, for things like this I'm a big fan of text. For things where you need a lot of visuals, video is often better, but when the information is basically just text, that's how it should be presented. Or at least, that's my view. (I know some people prefer video, and I don't mean to say that their preferences are objectively wrong or anything, but this feels much more natural to me.)
Posted by: CharonJr
« on: May 10, 2020, 05:37:15 AM »Nice information andas vorpal mentioned exactly the reason why I prefer text-guides to videos 
Posted by: vorpal+5
« on: May 10, 2020, 05:13:18 AM »This is very informative and the written format allows much more content in the end than doing a video. Also, quicker to find the info you search!
That's not to say I don't like the videos done, it's just that this text is very well laid out and explained and easy to recheck in time of need.
That's not to say I don't like the videos done, it's just that this text is very well laid out and explained and easy to recheck in time of need.
Posted by: Father Tim
« on: May 04, 2020, 07:37:25 AM »In VB Aurora Communications was also the public relations skill, and it increased the apparent PPV of a ship / fleet. I haven't seen any mention of it from Steve so I suspect that aspect is not in C# Aurora yet.
Posted by: Exultant
« on: May 03, 2020, 11:32:27 PM »Quote from: Alsadius link=topic=11223. msg130300#msg130300 date=1588511485
Fleet training is the VB6 taskforce training. It's what you're increasing when you put your ships under a Training naval command, and uses crew training as a max increase per-year. Percentages transferred to ships appear to be a percentage of that commander's skill.
- Fleet Training isn't listed as a separate skill, so I assume it just uses the Crew Training skill. I'm unsure what role ship officers/commanders play, if any, and I'd assume there isn't one. Fleet commanders might play a role, but I really don't know.
Also, a ship with an XO has a noticeable impact on training times, so I assume it functions just like everything else (with XO giving full bonus and ship commander giving 50%)[/list]
Posted by: Polestar
« on: May 03, 2020, 06:59:07 PM »We're clearly reading the same formula in the same way. So, no disagreement there. My post - and I could perhaps have made this clear - is about language. The way the guide is written seems to suggest a formula of additive, not multiplicative, bonuses.The general equation governing the effect of commanders and admin HQs is not exactly as given above. It is, simplified:
Total multiplier to the stat = (1 + commander bonus) * (1 + first admin bonus) * (1 + second admin bonus), repeating for all admin bonuses.
The commander's bonus may be applied in full, or be halved. I give some examples of both below.
The admin bonus is the admin officer's bonus, multiplied by the admin HQ type's multiplier, as described by Steve and in this guide.
I said "simplified", because I have not tested the effect of supporting officers.
That was the formula I used, if I'm reading you right. Where do you disagree with my example?
A minor thought along the lines of how to make effective use of this game mechanic:
Perhaps include a beginner's tip saying something like "If you have one or two ships making use of a particular bonus, then it is important to assign them your best commanders. However, if you have more ships than this, assigning your best leaders to a chain of administrative HQs commanding your fleets will enable them to force-multiply the efforts of all your ships."
1. The top-level command can be of any type. The type of HQ has its normal effect. My top-ranking officer happened to have a bonus to terraforming, so I made my top-level command an Industrial HQ, and got the expected bonus to terraforming.
Wait, to terraforming? My terraformers are in an industrial command, and don't get any bonus I can see. [/quote]I performed the following experiment:
Have a terraforming ship in orbit. Have it assigned to any admin hierarchy below the top-level HQ. Assign a (valid) officer with a bonus to Terraforming to the top-level HQ. Set the top-level HQ to be of any type other than Industrial. For the world around which the ship is orbiting, inspect the Environment tab. Now, change the top-level command to Industrial. Inspect the Environment tab for that world again.
Hope this reply helps.
Posted by: Alsadius
« on: May 03, 2020, 03:51:02 PM »The general equation governing the effect of commanders and admin HQs is not exactly as given above. It is, simplified:
Total multiplier to the stat = (1 + commander bonus) * (1 + first admin bonus) * (1 + second admin bonus), repeating for all admin bonuses.
The commander's bonus may be applied in full, or be halved. I give some examples of both below.
The admin bonus is the admin officer's bonus, multiplied by the admin HQ type's multiplier, as described by Steve and in this guide.
I said "simplified", because I have not tested the effect of supporting officers.
That was the formula I used, if I'm reading you right. Where do you disagree with my example?
1. The top-level command can be of any type. The type of HQ has its normal effect. My top-ranking officer happened to have a bonus to terraforming, so I made my top-level command an Industrial HQ, and got the expected bonus to terraforming.
Wait, to terraforming? My terraformers are in an industrial command, and don't get any bonus I can see.
Mining (ship-board):
The rules operate normally. The commander on a ship contributes 100% of their bonus.
Terraforming (ship-board):
The rules operate normally. The commander on a ship contributes 100% of their bonus.
Thanks for confirming.
Surveying:
Testing using several gravitational survey ships, each mounting one ordinary grav sensor (base rate: 1/hour), and one geosurvey ship, mounting one ordinary geo sensor.
Survey (and general) commands appear to affect geo-surveys normally. The commander on a ship contributes 50% of their bonus. The effect of the science officer has not been tested by me. The effects of commanders and admin support take effect immediately. Survey commands do indeed get a 2x range bonus.
Grav surveys are weird. I could not get the rate at which they operate to change by any mix of commanders or admin HQs. The rate stuck at 1.45/hour, and attempts to reset things by cancelling commands, waiting for the next gravsurvey site, or even removing the admin command entirely all failed to change this in the slightest.
Weird. Might be worth bug-reporting, if you're finding this on the newest build.
Posted by: skoormit
« on: May 03, 2020, 03:44:07 PM »Of note: An admin command without a commander provides no bonuses, and does not confer bonuses from its parents.
In other words, a vacant admin command breaks the chain of nesting bonuses.
It is very important to keep your admins from being vacant.
In other words, a vacant admin command breaks the chain of nesting bonuses.
It is very important to keep your admins from being vacant.
Posted by: Polestar
« on: May 03, 2020, 01:58:27 PM »This guide's headed in the right direction! This post provides some additional notes and corrections to a few points below.
The general equation governing the effect of commanders and admin HQs is not exactly as given above. It is, simplified:
Total multiplier to the stat = (1 + commander bonus) * (1 + first admin bonus) * (1 + second admin bonus), repeating for all admin bonuses.
The commander's bonus may be applied in full, or be halved. I give some examples of both below.
The admin bonus is the admin officer's bonus, multiplied by the admin HQ type's multiplier, as described by Steve and in this guide.
I said "simplified", because I have not tested the effect of supporting officers.
Some notes based on testing in v1.93.
1. The top-level command can be of any type. The type of HQ has its normal effect. My top-ranking officer happened to have a bonus to terraforming, so I made my top-level command an Industrial HQ, and got the expected bonus to terraforming.
Mining (ship-board):
The rules operate normally. The commander on a ship contributes 100% of their bonus.
Terraforming (ship-board):
The rules operate normally. The commander on a ship contributes 100% of their bonus.
Surveying:
Testing using several gravitational survey ships, each mounting one ordinary grav sensor (base rate: 1/hour), and one geosurvey ship, mounting one ordinary geo sensor.
Survey (and general) commands appear to affect geo-surveys normally. The commander on a ship contributes 50% of their bonus. The effect of the science officer has not been tested by me. The effects of commanders and admin support take effect immediately. Survey commands do indeed get a 2x range bonus.
Grav surveys are weird. I could not get the rate at which they operate to change by any mix of commanders or admin HQs. The rate stuck at 1.45/hour, and attempts to reset things by cancelling commands, waiting for the next gravsurvey site, or even removing the admin command entirely all failed to change this in the slightest.
The general equation governing the effect of commanders and admin HQs is not exactly as given above. It is, simplified:
Total multiplier to the stat = (1 + commander bonus) * (1 + first admin bonus) * (1 + second admin bonus), repeating for all admin bonuses.
The commander's bonus may be applied in full, or be halved. I give some examples of both below.
The admin bonus is the admin officer's bonus, multiplied by the admin HQ type's multiplier, as described by Steve and in this guide.
I said "simplified", because I have not tested the effect of supporting officers.
Some notes based on testing in v1.93.
1. The top-level command can be of any type. The type of HQ has its normal effect. My top-ranking officer happened to have a bonus to terraforming, so I made my top-level command an Industrial HQ, and got the expected bonus to terraforming.
Mining (ship-board):
The rules operate normally. The commander on a ship contributes 100% of their bonus.
Terraforming (ship-board):
The rules operate normally. The commander on a ship contributes 100% of their bonus.
Surveying:
Testing using several gravitational survey ships, each mounting one ordinary grav sensor (base rate: 1/hour), and one geosurvey ship, mounting one ordinary geo sensor.
Survey (and general) commands appear to affect geo-surveys normally. The commander on a ship contributes 50% of their bonus. The effect of the science officer has not been tested by me. The effects of commanders and admin support take effect immediately. Survey commands do indeed get a 2x range bonus.
Grav surveys are weird. I could not get the rate at which they operate to change by any mix of commanders or admin HQs. The rate stuck at 1.45/hour, and attempts to reset things by cancelling commands, waiting for the next gravsurvey site, or even removing the admin command entirely all failed to change this in the slightest.
Posted by: Alsadius
« on: May 03, 2020, 11:30:20 AM »Tactical helps the To-Hit chance.
Fighter Combat helps with To-Hit rolls when commanding a fighter.
Fighter Operations helps with rearming and (possibly, not 100% sure) refueling fighters inside a hangar.
Production is named thus because it was speeding up jump gate construction. It should still speed up Jump Point stabilization as only the name changed, nothing else but I don't know if anyone has tested it enough to confirm.
Makes sense. I assume a CAG helps with Fighter Ops, but probably not with Fighter Combat.
Also, I did a bit of testing - terraforming doesn't seem to benefit from admin commands.
Posted by: Garfunkel
« on: May 03, 2020, 11:19:32 AM »Tactical helps the To-Hit chance.
Fighter Combat helps with To-Hit rolls when commanding a fighter.
Fighter Operations helps with rearming and (possibly, not 100% sure) refueling fighters inside a hangar.
Production is named thus because it was speeding up jump gate construction. It should still speed up Jump Point stabilization as only the name changed, nothing else but I don't know if anyone has tested it enough to confirm.
Fighter Combat helps with To-Hit rolls when commanding a fighter.
Fighter Operations helps with rearming and (possibly, not 100% sure) refueling fighters inside a hangar.
Production is named thus because it was speeding up jump gate construction. It should still speed up Jump Point stabilization as only the name changed, nothing else but I don't know if anyone has tested it enough to confirm.
Posted by: Mr.Nap
« on: May 03, 2020, 10:57:58 AM »Noted.
Thank you so much.
Thank you so much.
