Author Topic: C# Suggestions  (Read 265988 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TheTalkingMeowth

  • Captain
  • **********
  • T
  • Posts: 494
  • Thanked: 203 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1710 on: April 30, 2021, 03:22:52 PM »
Multi-shot missile launchers...because they`re cool. That and I guess maybe they`d help full-size launchers overcome enemy PD?

This is kind of possible with 2-stage MIRVs. Empty 1st stage and just set the separation range to the attack range and the missile will split into multiple missiles 5s after launch.
True but I mean a true MSML, ie a launcher that fires off multiple shots per 5 seconds. Some super tech used possibly by invaders of precursors, or discoverable from ruins. Is it possible to make a random chance per completely empty system to generate an lets call it "Ancient Wreck" that has the tech and other advanced ones?

Do you just...want something that is "stronger" than existing tech? Because I don't really see how what you've described is in any way different than 1. empty 1st stage approach on a large launcher or 2. just having multiple 5s fire rate launchers attached to a single fire control. Both let you put multiple missiles in space in the same increment pointed at the same target.
 

Offline Bremen

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • B
  • Posts: 743
  • Thanked: 150 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1711 on: April 30, 2021, 05:16:03 PM »
Multi-shot missile launchers...because they`re cool. That and I guess maybe they`d help full-size launchers overcome enemy PD?

This is kind of possible with 2-stage MIRVs. Empty 1st stage and just set the separation range to the attack range and the missile will split into multiple missiles 5s after launch.
True but I mean a true MSML, ie a launcher that fires off multiple shots per 5 seconds. Some super tech used possibly by invaders of precursors, or discoverable from ruins. Is it possible to make a random chance per completely empty system to generate an lets call it "Ancient Wreck" that has the tech and other advanced ones?

I think multi-missile launchers are modeled fine just by using multiple missile launchers and visualizing it as a single weapon. If you want something that shoots a bunch and then takes a long time to reload, just used the reduced reload speed option.
 

Offline Coleslaw

  • I got the Versacis on, stop playin'!
  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 58
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1712 on: May 03, 2021, 05:17:13 PM »
This is an extremely small thing.

How feasible would an "Unload All" order for cargo spaces be? For example, my salvagers pick up a whole bunch of random minerals and ship modules. Rather than having to separately unload minerals and separately unload ship components, an option that just dumps the entire cargo space onto the body would be nice. If this could be used before the ship had anything in it, that'd be cool too. I find I can't actually tell my salvagers to unload anything until they actually have something in their cargo space, which means I have to tell it to salvage, then refuel at a colony, and then remember later to empty themselves before I send them out again.

Also, I see the All Active Sensors On/Off thing has been added. Could we also get one for shields?

...And another thing! I was puttering along and suddenly two hostile contacts appear in my home system, but for some reason the autoturns don't stop. Fortunately, they didn't seem keen to doing me any harm, but if they were, they would've had literally two months to do so simply because the autoturns kept going. They weren't new contacts in the sense that I hadn't seen them before, but I did lose them before they popped into my system so theoretically I should've gotten interrupted once they reappeared, no?
 
The following users thanked this post: LiquidGold2, clew, nuclearslurpee

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2960
  • Thanked: 2221 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1713 on: May 03, 2021, 06:22:59 PM »
...And another thing! I was puttering along and suddenly two hostile contacts appear in my home system, but for some reason the autoturns don't stop. Fortunately, they didn't seem keen to doing me any harm, but if they were, they would've had literally two months to do so simply because the autoturns kept going. They weren't new contacts in the sense that I hadn't seen them before, but I did lose them before they popped into my system so theoretically I should've gotten interrupted once they reappeared, no?

This occurs because of how the contacts system interacts with the events. The events are only fired when a contact changes, so if you lost a hostile contact at (say) full speed with all sensors on, and it later reappears in the same state, a notification may not be fired and the auto-turn won't stop. Be nice if this was improved though!
 
The following users thanked this post: BAGrimm, clew

Offline idefelipe

  • Gold Supporter
  • Lieutenant
  • *****
  • Posts: 153
  • Thanked: 75 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1714 on: May 04, 2021, 12:38:54 AM »
Hey there Steve!!

I would have another small suggestion for the commanders tab. I like to manually assign commanders to the ships, so none of them keep without a command while is in the lower rank. Even if the commander has not a proper skill for the work he will do, I don't think that the Fleet Command would keep commanders looking through the window when there are ships without CO.

I also use automatic assigment, of course, but as said I like to assign from year to year those that are not assigned. Is it possible to add a checkbox in the commander tab to show the "unassigned" commanders? So the list will show only those that need a new ship :)

Thanks.
 
The following users thanked this post: Garfunkel, papent, serger, clew, nuclearslurpee

Offline chrislocke2000

  • Captain
  • **********
  • c
  • Posts: 544
  • Thanked: 39 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1715 on: May 04, 2021, 08:27:33 AM »
Two thoughts on ground forces and combat.

Rather than having to build units with specific terrain capabilities such as jungle etc and deal with the inherent costs this could be treated as a training option in much the same way that ships are trained at the moment. This would then approximate a little more on true to life with work up training rather than ground up troops. Depending on how detailed this is made you could accelerate training by placing troops on planets with the same overall environment and provide officers with terrain specific bonuses to both help on trainings and combat in those environments. You could then also retrain troops as needed for some better flexibility.

My other general comment is that collateral damage still seems very high to me for ground troops. For me I’m using troops more for RP reasons rather than balance as there is little to no incremental benefit in dropped troops v just pummelling from above at the moment.
 

Offline skoormit

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 764
  • Thanked: 310 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1716 on: May 04, 2021, 08:53:31 AM »
...there is little to no incremental benefit in dropped troops v just pummelling from above at the moment.

I'm not a ground combat expert, so correct me if I'm wrong: against fortified defenders, isn't it cheaper/faster to drop troops than to bombard from orbit, when you take into account the very low hit chance and the MSP cost of weapon failures?
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2960
  • Thanked: 2221 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1717 on: May 04, 2021, 11:14:06 AM »
Hey there Steve!!

I would have another small suggestion for the commanders tab. I like to manually assign commanders to the ships, so none of them keep without a command while is in the lower rank. Even if the commander has not a proper skill for the work he will do, I don't think that the Fleet Command would keep commanders looking through the window when there are ships without CO.

I also use automatic assigment, of course, but as said I like to assign from year to year those that are not assigned. Is it possible to add a checkbox in the commander tab to show the "unassigned" commanders? So the list will show only those that need a new ship :)

Thanks.

Seconded.

...there is little to no incremental benefit in dropped troops v just pummelling from above at the moment.

I'm not a ground combat expert, so correct me if I'm wrong: against fortified defenders, isn't it cheaper/faster to drop troops than to bombard from orbit, when you take into account the very low hit chance and the MSP cost of weapon failures?

I believe there is also a significant difference in collateral damage as shipboard weapons have both lower chance to hit (requiring more shots) and often are quite overkill - to say nothing about using missiles which just devastate the entire environment of a body. That said collateral damage in general is rather excessive at the moment so it may get looked at sometime.
 

Offline Droll

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • D
  • Posts: 1703
  • Thanked: 599 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1718 on: May 04, 2021, 11:22:48 AM »
That said collateral damage in general is rather excessive at the moment so it may get looked at sometime.

Ground artillery also is quite insane for collateral damage. Its why I prefer long range bombardment over heavy bombardment.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2960
  • Thanked: 2221 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1719 on: May 04, 2021, 12:11:29 PM »
That said collateral damage in general is rather excessive at the moment so it may get looked at sometime.

Ground artillery also is quite insane for collateral damage. Its why I prefer long range bombardment over heavy bombardment.

I've noticed a lot of players will rush to the heavy+ weapons and vehicle types thinking that more powerful == better. Aurora's ground unit system in general is really designed with a "less is more" ideal, as bringing an overkill weapon to a battle is more wasteful than useful, but new players do not always realize this. That might contribute to the collateral damage excess as well.
 
The following users thanked this post: BAGrimm

Offline Stryker

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • S
  • Posts: 65
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1720 on: May 04, 2021, 06:17:19 PM »
It would be nice to have an auto damage control checkbox in the design screen.  This way you can set auto damage control for the entire class, instead of having to do it ship by ship.

Edit:  I meant damage control, not maintenance. 
« Last Edit: May 05, 2021, 12:35:44 PM by Stryker »
 

Offline QuakeIV

  • Registered
  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 759
  • Thanked: 168 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1721 on: May 05, 2021, 12:07:53 AM »
That said collateral damage in general is rather excessive at the moment so it may get looked at sometime.

Ground artillery also is quite insane for collateral damage. Its why I prefer long range bombardment over heavy bombardment.

I've noticed a lot of players will rush to the heavy+ weapons and vehicle types thinking that more powerful == better. Aurora's ground unit system in general is really designed with a "less is more" ideal, as bringing an overkill weapon to a battle is more wasteful than useful, but new players do not always realize this. That might contribute to the collateral damage excess as well.

In this regard I'd actually personally kindof like if more bigger = more better' to some extent, the tech isn't as rewarding as you would initially assume currently.
 

Offline Tavik Toth

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • T
  • Posts: 33
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1722 on: May 06, 2021, 08:33:29 AM »
Hm, not sure if this has been suggested before, but if it's practical I'd like to see some sort of Non-Trans Newtonian ship weapons and sensors.  Maybe have them be 50% less effective/efficient that Trans Newtonian weapons and sensors?
 
The following users thanked this post: nuclearslurpee

Offline DFNewb

  • Captain
  • **********
  • D
  • Posts: 508
  • Thanked: 103 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1723 on: May 06, 2021, 08:57:03 AM »
Can search and destroy fighters and flak suppression be buffed? Currently they are kinda useless, I always wanted to crush a planet's ground forces with fighters but as it currently is, that is impossible to do.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2960
  • Thanked: 2221 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #1724 on: May 06, 2021, 10:39:12 AM »
Hm, not sure if this has been suggested before, but if it's practical I'd like to see some sort of Non-Trans Newtonian ship weapons and sensors.  Maybe have them be 50% less effective/efficient that Trans Newtonian weapons and sensors?

It's been discussed before. To my recollection, in order for pre-TN warfare to be viable or have any point we need:
  • Active sensors and missile FCs
  • (Optional) Some kind of beam weapon, maybe a basic railgun
  • Troop transport capacity
  • Ideally some way to conduct geo surveys so that colonies make sense. Honestly if ground GEO units could do regular surveys in addition to special surveys that would be cool and really only useful in pre-TN warfare.
 
The following users thanked this post: kingflute