Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
C# Bug Reports / Re: v2.2.1 Bugs Thread
« Last post by Desdinova on Today at 12:36:24 PM »
I just had about a 5 minute cycle of object reference not set to an instance of an object popup messages.

The functions were:
1954
1943
478

I was able to eventually click through it and save the DB.
2
C# Suggestions / Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Last post by nuclearslurpee on Today at 12:26:51 PM »
While Steve is apparently working on the refit costs section I thought Id bring up adding a time to refit section to that screen. Personally I usually don't particularly care about the cost to refit something, I mostly care about the time it'd take. Building a brand new ship can take a long time, especially if you dont have components built for it. Refitting something to get a ship with similar capabilities can be quicker than building a new ship. Unless it's not which I'd like to know. If some thing costs a lot to refit but takes less time than building the class from scratch I'd strongly consider doing the refit to save time. So it's a useful metric and having it shown on the screen would be awesome. Thanks!

Refit/build time is directly proportional to build cost, so if the refit cost is 15% of the build cost it will take 15% of the class build time to do the refit. In other words, if the refit cost is less than 100% then the refit will be faster than a new build.
3
C# Mechanics / Re: v2.2.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by nuclearslurpee on Today at 12:24:59 PM »
I'm aware, but I'm expecting the difference in warhead count between 'maximize chances of killing a shipkiller' and 'maximize expected number of decoys stripped' will be significant.

The flip side is that opponents can simply use missiles without decoys in which case your 'stripper' missiles will be nothing more than less-effective AMMs. Should make for some interesting tactical brinksmanship in missile designs.  ;D

Quote
Though it would get smaller as warhead tech improves.

The MSP per additional warhead is a fixed 0.1, so the improvement is very small especially with fractional warheads.
4
C# Suggestions / Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Last post by jatzi on Today at 12:15:23 PM »
While Steve is apparently working on the refit costs section I thought Id bring up adding a time to refit section to that screen. Personally I usually don't particularly care about the cost to refit something, I mostly care about the time it'd take. Building a brand new ship can take a long time, especially if you dont have components built for it. Refitting something to get a ship with similar capabilities can be quicker than building a new ship. Unless it's not which I'd like to know. If some thing costs a lot to refit but takes less time than building the class from scratch I'd strongly consider doing the refit to save time. So it's a useful metric and having it shown on the screen would be awesome. Thanks!
5
The Academy / Re: Base unit type for HQ
« Last post by Jorgen_CAB on Today at 11:30:39 AM »
I didn't notice anyone else mention this: For defensive units, infantry can fortify more deeply than vehicles can, so that may be a consideration in some situations.

For garrison units I almost exclusively use Static units for my HQ.
6
C# Bug Reports / Re: Typo Thread bugs
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Today at 11:14:24 AM »
Description of multiple warheads tech:

Missiles can split their warhead strength into multiple attacks for an extra 0.25 MSP per additional warhead

This disagrees with the pricing given in http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13090.msg164435#msg164435 so it may be a outdated string.

Fixed, but won't appear until the next DB update.
7
C# Bug Reports / Re: Typo Thread bugs
« Last post by Ulzgoroth on Today at 11:04:31 AM »
Description of multiple warheads tech:

Missiles can split their warhead strength into multiple attacks for an extra 0.25 MSP per additional warhead

This disagrees with the pricing given in http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13090.msg164435#msg164435 so it may be a outdated string.
8
The Academy / Re: Base unit type for HQ
« Last post by Snoman314 on Today at 11:00:30 AM »
I didn't notice anyone else mention this: For defensive units, infantry can fortify more deeply than vehicles can, so that may be a consideration in some situations.
9
C# Mechanics / Re: v2.2.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by Ulzgoroth on Today at 10:59:44 AM »
Looking at decoy and AMM logic now, it seems like there's a (potentially micro-heavy) niche for 'duster' AMMs that throw the maximum possible number of warheads regardless of how weak they are. Fired as a first AMM wave against incoming missiles, these wouldn't have much chance of killing incoming ASMs, but would be very efficient at removing all their decoys since decoy removal doesn't depend on a damage check. Thus stripped the shipkillers should be comparatively easy for more-typical AMMs or point defense beam weapons to stop.

Each extra warhead costs 0.1 MSP of non-warhead space, which limits the practical number of warheads.
Good thing there's a minimum overhead of MSP size cost for each additional warhead then, I guess.
I'm aware, but I'm expecting the difference in warhead count between 'maximize chances of killing a shipkiller' and 'maximize expected number of decoys stripped' will be significant.

Though it would get smaller as warhead tech improves.
10
The Academy / Re: Base unit type for HQ
« Last post by Ulzgoroth on Today at 10:58:03 AM »
I just used infantry chassis for those because (A) they're very sedentary units and (B) if they're getting shot at, HQ survivability isn't likely to help much.

...And then in contradiction of the latter I rounded out the tonnage that couldn't fit another survey vehicle with security troop (light armor PWL) meatshields.


(And then I noticed that no bodies in the starter solar system were eligible for ground survey. That seems new?)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk