Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Froggiest1982
« on: July 11, 2020, 11:48:26 PM »

What about and exodus plan with space stations full of colonist/infrastructure to be tugged out of Orbit and just moved later on?

I dont see the civs being able to handle all traffic as your colonies grow wider in the galaxy and also you may want them to be focused in moving important factories.

You could just set all colonies to stable forcing them to build more freighters thanks to the logistic contracts.
Posted by: Panopticon
« on: July 04, 2020, 04:23:02 AM »

I put it in the suggestions thread but thought I'd ask here too, have you considered an option to reduce or remove population growth on system bodies effected by a disaster? It seems annoying to have to play catch up to population growth when evacuating a doomed world.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: July 04, 2020, 04:17:04 AM »

Nice AAR, really!

Two remarks though:
1 - Terraforming happens to fast
2 - It seems the Colonial Alliance is betraying its mandate. I'm shocked that Earth evacuation is not given absolute priority on the pretext 'humanity is saved'. Do you want 2 billions people roast in hell really?  ;D

Terraforming is a lot slower in general than in VB6, but it can be done relatively quickly if you find a small world with high enough gravity. In this case, the moon was 2800 km, which makes terraforming 20x faster than an Earth-sized world (about 5x faster than VB6). Also, I had 46 terraforming installations on the surface and 96 terraforming modules in orbit. Finally, no matter how much effort you throw at a world, it can't be done in less than 5 years if you need to add 20% water.

The change in focus is necessary if I want to maintain a functioning economy. Once that problem is fixed, I can switch back to the faster evacuation. Also, I need the space because I can't fit everyone on Mars, Io and Mercury.
Posted by: vorpal+5
« on: July 04, 2020, 12:31:35 AM »

Nice AAR, really!

Two remarks though:
1 - Terraforming happens to fast
2 - It seems the Colonial Alliance is betraying its mandate. I'm shocked that Earth evacuation is not given absolute priority on the pretext 'humanity is saved'. Do you want 2 billions people roast in hell really?  ;D
Posted by: Gyrfalcon
« on: July 03, 2020, 02:30:49 PM »

Hey Steve, why are the crew sizes for the Cobras around 21-23 per fighter? With a deployment time of around a week, I would expect it to drop to 2-3 crew
Posted by: Zincat
« on: June 30, 2020, 03:26:37 PM »

...very unfavorable NPR settings...

Would you mind specifying the settings you use? I might try your setup for my next empire.

I will start by saying that unfortunately it's been a few busy and unfun months, so I have not had time to play nearly as much as I would have liked. Because of that (and the research rates/survey rates I use) I have still not been in any major war yet. I preface this to make clear I don't know if these settings would result in a fun game long-term XD

I like to simulate a very "full and old" galaxy, and a dangerous one. Keep in mind, a lot of it it's RP, I'll explain what I mean by this later on.


So, let's start with the race.
Mine is a semi-conventional start. By this I mean that I start conventional, then SM-research trans newtonian tech AND SM change the conventional factories to TN factories/minets/etc. This way I do not have to slog through the conversion, while still starting with literally zero tech besides TN. And only 8 research labs and 2 shipyards.

Now, for the galaxy, to start with I activate all spoilers. Then I set research rate to 15% and exploration to 10%. This ensures that exploration and research are slow, and that spoilers remain relevant for a longer period of time. (Well, the invaders always are. You might want to deactivate them, if you don't like that. I don't mind losing a game so I leave them on)

Now come the part of the NPR. I want a "full" galaxy. I also generally want a galaxy where the race I play is last to the stars. The young upstarts, so to speak, or the few survivors of a disaster. Unfortunately in Aurora you cannot easily say: "the NPRs will have the first two tech levels in everything researched" or "the NPR will start with 3 systems controlled" or similar.
So the only solution I have is increase the difficulty. I roleplay it as the other races being advanced but "decadent". But once they do find potential enemies, they start to properly use their pregressed knoledge etc.

The settings I chose this last game were just one starting NPR (as I'm still a bit wary of performance) but 130% difficulty and NPR generation chance by player and by other NPR set to 66%. NPRs will also activate ancient races.
Basically, two thirds of suitable planets will be inhabited by NPRs, and it does not matter whether I'm the one discovering them or an NPR is. This should ensure that the galaxy will be "full" and dangerous, and that there will be very few unoccupied high value planets.

Incidentally, if you remember my posts in that thread about the fuel usage/retrofit of commercial vessels/importance of gas giants etc. These settings are the reason why I treat fuel as valuable. Unless I luck out in the very first few systems I explore... I am afraid of exploring TOO much.
While knowledge is important, activating a strong enemy early on can be instant death. So I explore within a certain "range" from my systems. The galaxy is a dangerous place. No reason to immediately risk activating a strong enemy while exploring systems that with my current engine tech are too far away to meaningfully exploit. This is also the reason why I make dual-task survey ships, I don't need infinite survey capabilities. It's much better to be flexible imo.

Once I can decently defend myself, I will start increasing my rate of exploration and go further away.

I understand it's a very... particular way that I play. It is likely not for everyone. But I have fun with this, and I think it explains why I may put value in choices that would seem un-optimal in a standard settings game.
Posted by: skoormit
« on: June 30, 2020, 01:42:21 PM »

...very unfavorable NPR settings...

Would you mind specifying the settings you use? I might try your setup for my next empire.
Posted by: Zincat
« on: June 28, 2020, 07:36:56 AM »

I personally play 15% research, 10% exploration now. With all spoilers active and very unfavorable NPR settings, it really makes for a challenge.
It might be too much if you don't want "marathon speed". I'd say 25% research should be good for you then.

I definitely recommend 10% exploration, it really changed how I play my game. It's so much more entertaining, space feels vast. I might even try 5% next time...
Posted by: skoormit
« on: June 28, 2020, 07:03:58 AM »

What would be for you a decent reduction in research and survey that makes the game much slower but not like 'marathon speed' of a Civ game? 20%

My current game is 25% research and survey.
I find this research rate satisfying, but I could still stand to slow down the surveying. Next time I will probably have 10% survey.

This is partly a playstyle preference. I very much enjoy the challenge of exploring and expanding efficiently, more than I enjoy the challenge of defeating an alien empire.
If you prefer action, and don't enjoy being constrained on your options for expansion, you may prefer higher survey speed.

But research 25% or lower really does make each tech advancement meaningful very early in the game.
Posted by: vorpal+5
« on: June 26, 2020, 10:29:10 PM »

What would be for you a decent reduction in research and survey that makes the game much slower but not like 'marathon speed' of a Civ game? 20%
Posted by: Zincat
« on: June 21, 2020, 07:13:53 AM »

Yes, I think next time I might go reduced research and reduced survey. The reduced research makes decisions on what to research far more meaningful and each new tech feels like an achievement.

I plan to use a 10cm railgun for energy point defence and probably for an energy-armed fighter, then I will start with lasers. Can't afford to go for gauss or particle lances in this situation, at least not yet. I will also start with some basic missile tech as well. I've never been 23 years into a campaign without any weapons or offensive ground forces :)

I might even say, I think that reduced research speed and reduced survey speed (and maybe even reduced terraforming speed) are the way the game should mostly be played right now. It was different in vb aurora, because there games tended to slow down pretty quickly, and even have death by slowdowns.

But here, with the turn speed we have.... At 100% speed you tend to reach high tech levels and huge numbers of system explored VERY quickly. In just a few hours, comparately speaking, you'll reach the tech levels you might have reached at the end of a campaign in vb aurora. It really feels too quick. 10 years in game, and you researched 3-4 different engine techs...

Being 23 years in and not having a real military is very entertaining, as far as I'm concerned. Once again, same reasoning. At 100% speed it feels warships just magically pop into existance. Here, have these 4 new weapons tech. Not enough? Have another four.

At reduced speed it's a struggle instead  ;D
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: June 21, 2020, 06:26:53 AM »

I highly approve of the Eagle Transporter icon   8)
Perhaps the campaign start date should have been 13th Sept 1999  ;)

It seemed appropriate for the scenario :)

Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: June 21, 2020, 06:26:20 AM »

The lack of significant mineral deposits is... concerning.
I wish we had an option at startup to change the mineral generation chance and/or amount.

I was taken aback by how many systems you surveyed. Then I remembered you're not running on reduced survey speed like I do. It has become a favorite of mine to be honest  ;D

You're not usually one to start with conventional tech. As you said, in this game you don't have any weapon tech researched from the start. After you build those carriers, where do you plan to develop? More beam warships or will you move to missiles?
Considering the penalty to research you started with, I guess you'll have to specialize a bit?

Yes, I think next time I might go reduced research and reduced survey. The reduced research makes decisions on what to research far more meaningful and each new tech feels like an achievement.

I plan to use a 10cm railgun for energy point defence and probably for an energy-armed fighter, then I will start with lasers. Can't afford to go for gauss or particle lances in this situation, at least not yet. I will also start with some basic missile tech as well. I've never been 23 years into a campaign without any weapons or offensive ground forces :)
Posted by: Shinanygnz
« on: June 20, 2020, 01:37:19 PM »

I highly approve of the Eagle Transporter icon   8)
Perhaps the campaign start date should have been 13th Sept 1999  ;)
Posted by: Zincat
« on: June 20, 2020, 09:52:37 AM »

The lack of significant mineral deposits is... concerning.
I wish we had an option at startup to change the mineral generation chance and/or amount.

I was taken aback by how many systems you surveyed. Then I remembered you're not running on reduced survey speed like I do. It has become a favorite of mine to be honest  ;D

You're not usually one to start with conventional tech. As you said, in this game you don't have any weapon tech researched from the start. After you build those carriers, where do you plan to develop? More beam warships or will you move to missiles?
Considering the penalty to research you started with, I guess you'll have to specialize a bit?