Author Topic: C# Suggestions  (Read 121091 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ArcWolf

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • A
  • Posts: 101
  • Thanked: 52 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2145 on: October 10, 2021, 10:28:24 PM »

It's a reasonable assumption (and it's reasonable to hide experience spam in the log). But I didn't say on-the-job training isn't a thing, I specifically called out Engineering and Tactical because I expected it to work in those two cases and I haven't seen it do so.

Fair enough, i have not seen it happen with them either.
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2252
  • Thanked: 684 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2146 on: October 13, 2021, 06:37:24 PM »
Any chance of adding this big chonker in the game? More comets!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C/2014_UN271_(Bernardinelli-Bernstein)
 
The following users thanked this post: Fistandantillus7

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1593
  • Thanked: 1079 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2147 on: October 13, 2021, 07:16:37 PM »
Any chance of adding this big chonker in the game? More comets!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C/2014_UN271_(Bernardinelli-Bernstein)

Seconded as a replacement for that obnoxious comet 200 billion km away that taunts my impotent survey fleets every game until I SM survey it for 100% completion.
 
The following users thanked this post: El Pip, Fistandantillus7, Sebmono

Offline Stormtrooper

  • Commander
  • *********
  • S
  • Posts: 363
  • Thanked: 189 times
  • The universe is a Dark Forest
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2148 on: October 16, 2021, 07:53:30 AM »
I would like to see a bunch of early game research projects. It always bothered me how much stuff you get for free after only TN tech research or now, with the addition of some more conventional components, for free. You get cryogenic berths, entertainment centers, passenger transports, cargo shuttles, all without corresponding research. On one hand, this game has this nice feature that allows you to start with Earth and humanity as it is today. On the other hand, you get a bunch of stuff that feel like they'd require some research first. So I'd like it to be a thing for the sake of greater immersion.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1080
  • Thanked: 282 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2149 on: October 19, 2021, 03:06:58 PM »
When your empire grows a lot, setting up routes becomes a bit tedious. Especially when the galaxy becomes more like a cross-grid where you can go from one point to another by several routes, not remembering which one is the quickest. I thought to circumvent this by saving a route order template with just the jump points - but that of course doesn't help because you have to save it in the destination system - to which you have no access in the source system.

Is there a way to make this possible?
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1593
  • Thanked: 1079 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2150 on: October 19, 2021, 03:15:52 PM »
When your empire grows a lot, setting up routes becomes a bit tedious. Especially when the galaxy becomes more like a cross-grid where you can go from one point to another by several routes, not remembering which one is the quickest. I thought to circumvent this by saving a route order template with just the jump points - but that of course doesn't help because you have to save it in the destination system - to which you have no access in the source system.

Is there a way to make this possible?

The feature coming in v2.0 to mark certain jump links to be avoided can be used to eliminate the need to remember the efficient route. You should only need to determine the more efficient branch once and then mark the other to be avoided and after that you can forget all about it. It is a manual approach but it should work fine.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2562
  • Thanked: 531 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2151 on: October 20, 2021, 06:10:23 AM »
Something I have wanted for some time which I currently resolve with SM is the ability to convert Regular Industry to Ordnance or Fighter Factories. I usually make the conversion at around 20% of the original cost. So basically I produce 10 Ordnance/Fighter factories and then remove 50 Construction factories and add 40 Ordnance or Fighter factories instead.

I feel it is realistic that we can switch industry back and forth like that based on our needs.

I do feel that refineries and regular industry is different enough that you should not be able to refit them like that, or maintenance facilities for example. But Ordnance and Fighter factories are just factories more or less just more specialized.

So conversions should be

Construction Factory <--> Ordnance Factory
Construction Factory <--> Fighter Factory

You should not be able to convert Ordnance into Fighter factories just from regular industry or back again with a 20% conversion cost.

I know there is an issue with them not using the same resources so you can skirt the rules by incurring some penalties in production cost and an overall 20% increase in cost if you run tight on some resources. But I think that is a minor issue not worth caring much about and probably not a real problem at all to be honest but a trade off.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2021, 06:20:36 AM by Jorgen_CAB »
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1080
  • Thanked: 282 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2152 on: October 20, 2021, 06:17:09 AM »
When your empire grows a lot, setting up routes becomes a bit tedious. Especially when the galaxy becomes more like a cross-grid where you can go from one point to another by several routes, not remembering which one is the quickest. I thought to circumvent this by saving a route order template with just the jump points - but that of course doesn't help because you have to save it in the destination system - to which you have no access in the source system.

Is there a way to make this possible?

The feature coming in v2.0 to mark certain jump links to be avoided can be used to eliminate the need to remember the efficient route. You should only need to determine the more efficient branch once and then mark the other to be avoided and after that you can forget all about it. It is a manual approach but it should work fine.
In general, it would help - though not for jump sequences above 4 systems apart; as well as the blocking can only be used as a general tool. It might be that on a local level of one or two systems apart the jump point needs to be open, but  the longer route might be way shorter via another system, and I don't think that "blocking" can differentiate that.
 

Offline hostergaard

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • h
  • Posts: 59
  • Thanked: 13 times
Re: C# Suggestions (Third time is the charm!)
« Reply #2153 on: October 21, 2021, 12:29:36 PM »
I really liked being able to subsidize civilian corporations as I enjoyed having a significant civilian sector. I hope it will return, my suggestion is related to that. Generally speaking I would enjoy seeing a more active and civilian sector able to handle various tasks automatically.


Suggestion: ability to subsidize the creation of civilian mining colonies.

One way would be to pay a given cost to have on created on a body immediately, but that might be too powerfull, instead I suggest that the player should be able to select a body in the system view screen and put a chosen amount of wealth on that body (without creating a colony or anything). This then affects the chance of a mining colony being established on the body, giving it a bonus depending on the wealth placed there. The player can add and remove the wealth as they please, but when a civilian colony is created that money disappears as it is paid out to the mining corporation established.  Similarly, one could consider being able to subsidize the expansion of mining colonies in a similar manner.


Suggestion: Civilian whatever

Generally speaking, there is a high level of entry to this game, and there is also people who enjoy them. To ease that and enable people to focus on parts they prefer, and also making larger empire management easier, make automated civilian solutions a thing so people can select what aspects they want to personally solve and work on and what they want the game to take care of.  It should not be too difficult as there is already a basis for it in the game, with how civilian mining colonies are created with armies, and you can generate ship design and armies at game start. To expand:


- Civilian security/Private armies

Simply like the armies generated for the mining colonies, a player can elect, for a wealth cost, to have civilian armies generated on the planet to take care of defending the planet and policing it. Of course, they are not so finely tuned as a player designed army could be, but at least you don't have to learn the system in its entirety to make viable armies. In the simplest form it could be a checkbox at the beginning in the game that decide for the entire empire that you can uncheck at any time, a checkbox for each colony under the ground units that decide if has a private army.


The exact details of balancing it of course needs to be tested. Fx, the armies don't just appear or disappear immediately but take some time to do so and while costing wealth to simulate time to hire/train/transport individuals. Perhaps there would be some mineral requirements. They player could let the game completely generate armies on their own, or you could give them an option to decide certain aspect on their own like, size, police strength, what they should be able to defend against, etc.

Or perhaps more simple, private security companies could generate various armies of different sizes according to colony size. Possibly then you could ship private armies from populated colonies to unpopulated colonies if necessary.

- Civilian Fleets

Similarly civilian fleets could be generated tough likely with both wealth and mineral costs. The level of control the player have needs to be balanced, either by selection on game start, trough science or the same. Furthermore, how much the player can control the design and at what granularity would have to be figured out, but basically its so new players can have the option of just generating fleets that work more like NPR fleets that works for the player. However, it can enable roleplaying and give the ability for the player to design empires with more interesting government types. An interesting consequence would be that privateer fleets could be generated, basically independent fleets, with no or little colonies, that can be given letters of marquee to raid enemies of civilisations. Or just good old pirate ships :D Tough, of course, a checkbox to generate such things or should be there at game creation like the spawning of civilian fuel harvesters.

--Civilian defence bases (or rather, civilian PPV)

More or less extension of the previous suggestion, but limited to creating fleets for defensive purposes of a planet/system to fulfil PPV. So probably just bases of various kinds.

- Civilian designed ships

Again to make things easier for new players who wants to make their own fleet, but not yet delve into designing ships, this is more of a functionally thing, they can have ship design be automatically generate classes of ships with current technology. And again, at various level of granularity ranging from, generate cruiser, to ant-ship destroyer to more exact specification like ship size, engangement range and so on.

- Civilian racial tech

I remembered I made a similar suggestion once, so I found the link here:

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=9630.msg103714#msg103714

- Investing in Civilian companies

This more for roleplaying sake than anything, let be able to buy stocks in the companies. Owning a company completely would give you all of its profits, and costs. This way, players with communist civilisation could use the system, but not have it conflict with their roleplaying. Then its more civilian iniatives rather than companies.

- Civilian government of planets

The idea for me at first was roleplay, its a common trope for galactic civilisations to have planets sold or governed by private companies. So you could offload various responsibilities to a civilian government, ranging from specific responsibilities like constructions to everything like armies, PPV fleets and so on. You could set various targets for them to meet at various level of granularity, say, pop size, construction ability and so on and they will try to meet them with the recourses available. One could expand this to also be defined on a system and sector basis

- Subject Empires

At this point if you have entire, planets systems and sectors be civilian controlled with civilian armies and fleets, you are reaching a point where they are basically non-player vasal empires. So why not give the player ability to make them independed actual vasals empires if they so choose. The level of independence could of course be defined of various level of granularity, from near independed paying a tite of wealth and minerals possibly, to near integrated where they player can direct colonies, armies and fleets more or less as they please. This would also allow you to concur enemy races as have them become vasals instead of being completely destroyed.
 

Offline Stormtrooper

  • Commander
  • *********
  • S
  • Posts: 363
  • Thanked: 189 times
  • The universe is a Dark Forest
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2154 on: October 21, 2021, 01:48:15 PM »
I know this probably was suggested already, but I just want to make sure it doesn't get lost... Could Invaders also be made to improve their tech and ships over time like pirates do? I love them so much and I want to play with them, but it gets old and pointless really fast when past some point they turn from a threat and interesting addition to mild irritation after they can't harm you anymore. If they were improving, they'd have the chance to become the ultimate AI enemy that can keep up with the player through, if not whole, at least most of the game.
 
The following users thanked this post: Droll, serger

Offline xenoscepter

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 980
  • Thanked: 217 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2155 on: October 21, 2021, 02:20:27 PM »
 --- Internal Armor: In the Class Design Window, I'd like to see a second box for "Internal Armor". This would function just like Turret Armor, adding HtK per layer for each component added to the ship. So a ship with say, 5 Crew Quarters, an Engine and some smattering of other parts would have more HtK with 1 layer of Internal Armor over the exact same ship with 0, and so on and so forth. They would be heavier and more expensive than a ship without of course. :)

 --- "Bunker / Transport / Transport - Small" Ground Modules: For Static units only, Bunker modules would be a component that could apply the Static Unit's extra armor to all units either in the same formation as itself or those directly supporting it. It would have a specified tonnage much like an HQ module and would give diminishing returns much like an HQ module if more units than it can handle are added. Transport Modules would work the same way, but would only be for vehicles. Bunker modules would also confer their Hit Mod, that being of a Static unit as well as all other limitations of a Static unit to it's formation and any assigned to directly support it. Transport Modules would confer the Vehicle's armor and Hit Mods as well along with the Armor bonus for breakthroughs to any unit within it's formation. Transport modules would also differ from Bunker modules in that they would need to be directly support a formation to confer their bonus to it if not actually within the formation itself, while Bunkers would need to have formations assigned to directly support them instead. Transport - Small Modules would be smaller than regular Transport Modules, but would only count infantry. All three modules would confer their Terrain / Environment bonuses to units alongside their Hit Mod, Armor and other imitations, but only at half the rate. A new Ground Commander Trait, "Mechanized Operations" or something like that, could increase this... maybe up to like... 75% or something, idk.

 --- Missile Batteries: An STO unit that draws from the planet's own stockpiles. Missile Batteries use existing Missile Launchers, much like regular STOs, but any launcher used in them has double the fire rate. Missile Batteries consume ordinance from the planet's stockpiles, using missiles that are specified for them via some new UI element.
 
The following users thanked this post: Droll, serger, Sebmono

Offline Droll

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • D
  • Posts: 1417
  • Thanked: 438 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2156 on: October 21, 2021, 02:47:58 PM »
--- Internal Armor: In the Class Design Window, I'd like to see a second box for "Internal Armor". This would function just like Turret Armor, adding HtK per layer for each component added to the ship. So a ship with say, 5 Crew Quarters, an Engine and some smattering of other parts would have more HtK with 1 layer of Internal Armor over the exact same ship with 0, and so on and so forth. They would be heavier and more expensive than a ship without of course. :)

 --- "Bunker / Transport / Transport - Small" Ground Modules: For Static units only, Bunker modules would be a component that could apply the Static Unit's extra armor to all units either in the same formation as itself or those directly supporting it. It would have a specified tonnage much like an HQ module and would give diminishing returns much like an HQ module if more units than it can handle are added. Transport Modules would work the same way, but would only be for vehicles. Bunker modules would also confer their Hit Mod, that being of a Static unit as well as all other limitations of a Static unit to it's formation and any assigned to directly support it. Transport Modules would confer the Vehicle's armor and Hit Mods as well along with the Armor bonus for breakthroughs to any unit within it's formation. Transport modules would also differ from Bunker modules in that they would need to be directly support a formation to confer their bonus to it if not actually within the formation itself, while Bunkers would need to have formations assigned to directly support them instead. Transport - Small Modules would be smaller than regular Transport Modules, but would only count infantry. All three modules would confer their Terrain / Environment bonuses to units alongside their Hit Mod, Armor and other imitations, but only at half the rate. A new Ground Commander Trait, "Mechanized Operations" or something like that, could increase this... maybe up to like... 75% or something, idk.

 --- Missile Batteries: An STO unit that draws from the planet's own stockpiles. Missile Batteries use existing Missile Launchers, much like regular STOs, but any launcher used in them has double the fire rate. Missile Batteries consume ordinance from the planet's stockpiles, using missiles that are specified for them via some new UI element.

I like all of these, internal armor would have to be incredibly expensive (tonnage and resource-wise) for it to be balanced IMO and also unavailable for stations that use structural shells.
Your bunker/transport idea is interesting because it allows infantry to better play a much larger role in offensives and also allows the player to explicitly define APCs/IFVs that transport troops.
 

Offline xenoscepter

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 980
  • Thanked: 217 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2157 on: October 21, 2021, 03:09:51 PM »
~snip snip~

I like all of these, internal armor would have to be incredibly expensive (tonnage and resource-wise) for it to be balanced IMO and also unavailable for stations that use structural shells.
Your bunker/transport idea is interesting because it allows infantry to better play a much larger role in offensives and also allows the player to explicitly define APCs/IFVs that transport troops.

 --- The Internal Armor wouldn't really need to be any more or less expensive in terms of resources or tonnage than Turret Armor already is. For one, since it adds HtK to everything mounted, this scales up tonnage wise quite quickly indeed. Secondly, since more armor already costs more anyway, you might as well just make it cost whatever that many layers would. Finally, HtK requires more repairs to fix and such is rather balanced in the sense that an Internally Armored ship may survive, but will be out of action while it undertakes repairs.
 
The following users thanked this post: Droll

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1080
  • Thanked: 282 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2158 on: October 23, 2021, 06:20:16 AM »
Wouldn't it be nice to build a space station hidden somewhere in your system, tow a shipyard there and begin building your dark ops section 31 ships there?  ;D
 
The following users thanked this post: QuakeIV

Offline Platys51

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2159 on: October 24, 2021, 06:43:52 AM »
"colonise all mineral rich bodies" and "purge all empty colonies" buttons for using mining ships without developing carpal tunnel.
If possible, "gather minerals from colonies in system" would be nice too, or add it as part of the mining ship routine to gather them before moving on.