C# Suggestions

[villaincomer]

It would be helpful when constructing installations to have an option for local colony or to be placed in a stockpile (radio button).   
1) Its easy to forget to ship something meant for another colony
2) Doesn't plunge local civilian pop into a deficit.   

Also for allocation of population jobs on a colony.   It would be nice to be able to prioritise between construction while sacrificing refining (without shutting down?).   

Finally, civilian mining outposts to be able to generate a small amount of pop that can emigrate.

Thank you :)

[Coleslaw]

I'm almost sure this has been suggested before, but I can't seem to find it elsewhere. In VB6 Aurora we could right-click a planetary body and click an option to create a colony on the body. Would be super convenient for some of the oddly named asteroids in Sol that don't sort in the list too well or have non-unique names (i.e. 2001 XH255.)

[Droll]

My intuition tells me that PD STOs can be more economical/less economical than orbital PD bases depending largely on planetary terrain. If your planet is a jungle mountain, even if your making massive turret STOs their survivability will be so damn high because of fortification bonuses that enemy fleets will have massive trouble initiating a land invasion or destroying the PD defense shooting down the enemy missiles. On the other hand, orbital bases can't take advantage of the planets terrain, although if the terrain is something like desert there is a good chance orbital bases would be cheaper and overall more cost-effective.

The problem I have with PD STOs is that they are unreasonably expensive, since every single gun has a full-price fire control system which is tuned to anti-missile fire. So you can easily have each gun cost 2000k uridium or something because of the fire control. Big turrets help mitigate this since your quad gauss packs 4x the firepower per FC.

I think there needs to be a new static component called "planetary active sensor" which lets you choose which designed active sensor to use from your racial tech. Likewise when designing standard STOs a checkbox to toggle the inclusion of inbuilt FCs should also be added. I'll crosspost this to the suggestion thread.

[smoelf]

Ability to turn off automatic construction of infrastructure on colonies with a colony cost.

On some planetary bodies with low gravity I might want to colonize them using orbital habitats exclusively, but once a population has been established they will automatically start building Low Gravity Infrastructure, which will results in civilians shipping colonists to the surface. This changes the balance between agriculture, service, and manufacturing, which can be a serious detriment on colonies with high Colony Cost.

A temporary solution is to set a cargo ship to perpetually transport the LG Infrastructure away from the planet, and you could probably avoid new colonists by military restricting the planet, but turning off automatic construction of infrastructure is a cleaner solution.

[skoormit]

Could we get a Copy Fleet Name button on the Naval Organization window?
The button would merely copy (to the clipboard) the name of the currently selected fleet.

Maybe put it right next to Rename? Or even all the way at the end of the buttons, after Delete.

Reasoning:
I do a lot of fleet renaming, particularly freighters, to keep track of which fleets are doing what, what's left to take where, etc.
My fleet names include several bits of info, and rather than re-type it all when giving a fleet orders that match (exactly or nearly) another fleet's, it is faster for me to select that other fleet, click the Rename button, copy to clipboard, close the Rename popup, re-select the target fleet, click the Rename button, paste from the clipboard, and make whatever changes are needed (often none).
A Copy Fleet Name button would save me an enormous number of fiddly clicks.

[Density]

Ability to turn off automatic construction of infrastructure on colonies with a colony cost.

On some planetary bodies with low gravity I might want to colonize them using orbital habitats exclusively, but once a population has been established they will automatically start building Low Gravity Infrastructure, which will results in civilians shipping colonists to the surface.  This changes the balance between agriculture, service, and manufacturing, which can be a serious detriment on colonies with high Colony Cost.

A temporary solution is to set a cargo ship to perpetually transport the LG Infrastructure away from the planet, and you could probably avoid new colonists by military restricting the planet, but turning off automatic construction of infrastructure is a cleaner solution.

I'm also in favor of this, but for a different reason: venusian atmo planets.
Just mentioning it because it would be disappointing to see this get implemented for LG's only.

[Warer]

Land on Specified Mothership as Sub-Fleet (+Assign) for carrier micro reduction.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Ability to turn off automatic construction of infrastructure on colonies with a colony cost.

On some planetary bodies with low gravity I might want to colonize them using orbital habitats exclusively, but once a population has been established they will automatically start building Low Gravity Infrastructure, which will results in civilians shipping colonists to the surface.  This changes the balance between agriculture, service, and manufacturing, which can be a serious detriment on colonies with high Colony Cost.

A temporary solution is to set a cargo ship to perpetually transport the LG Infrastructure away from the planet, and you could probably avoid new colonists by military restricting the planet, but turning off automatic construction of infrastructure is a cleaner solution.

I'm also in favor of this, but for a different reason: venusian atmo planets.
Just mentioning it because it would be disappointing to see this get implemented for LG's only.

While I don't think this is a bad option (either of them) it is quite simple to avoid this currently. You just assign a small colony ship with a return trip to another colony and match this with the amount of people that is added to the colony over a years time. You can easily then adjust this once every ten years with just speeding up or slowing down that colony ship. But if you time it right you will only have to do this like once every hundred years or so.

The size of the colony ship you need is of course depending on the size of your habitat, but habitats usually are not that big so a single colony ship are usually enough.¨

Now you can also enjoy their production of infrastructure and move it to someplace else more useful.

[smoelf]

While I don't think this is a bad option (either of them) it is quite simple to avoid this currently. You just assign a small colony ship with a return trip to another colony and match this with the amount of people that is added to the colony over a years time. You can easily then adjust this once every ten years with just speeding up or slowing down that colony ship. But if you time it right you will only have to do this like once every hundred years or so.

The size of the colony ship you need is of course depending on the size of your habitat, but habitats usually are not that big so a single colony ship are usually enough.¨

Now you can also enjoy their production of infrastructure and move it to someplace else more useful.

Yeah, there are some ways to work around it. I've chosen to simply transport the infrastructure away to my home planet and RP that they the people dying on the surface due to no infrastructure simply never existed in the first place.

But I think that the frequency has to be a bit higher than you suggest, or perhaps I am misunderstanding you. If you only remove people/infrastructure every ten or hundred years, then you will get 10/100 years of slowly relocating workforce from industry to agriculture and thus losing efficiency. You should really remove people/infrastructure whenever there is something to remove to maintain the efficiency of orbital habitats. Also, while a single of my habitats only has room for 1.000.000 colonists, I have a lot of them at each colony as I intend to sustain a medium-large colony with only orbital habitas.

But you are absolutely right that the problem can be circumvented as the game is now.

[Borealis4x]

Maybe add the option for specified types of bodies to have unlimited amounts of minerals. You'd have sperate options for planets, gas giants, dwarfs, moons and asteroids.

I'd always make gas giants have unlimited sorium cuz I'm always paranoid about running out. Its never happened to be fair, but it does give me anxiety. Having unlimited minerals on full planets might also be a good idea for the same reason.

Keep in mind accessibility would still be a thing, so some planets would still be more valuable than others just cuz you can mine at a faster rate. It'd make gameplay more like Stellaris and other more traditional 4X games.

[Droll]

Maybe add the option for specified types of bodies to have unlimited amounts of minerals. You'd have sperate options for planets, gas giants, dwarfs, moons and asteroids.

I'd always make gas giants have unlimited sorium cuz I'm always paranoid about running out. Its never happened to be fair, but it does give me anxiety. Having unlimited minerals on full planets might also be a good idea for the same reason.

Keep in mind accessibility would still be a thing, so some planets would still be more valuable than others just cuz you can mine at a faster rate. It'd make gameplay more like Stellaris and other more traditional 4X games.

What I do is SM mode "specify minerals" and set every mineral type to 999999999999. But it definitely would be nice to be able to do that with one click-per planet.
I also have a house-rule that I'm trying out where I can only build 250 mines per 1000 km of diameter.

[villaincomer]

I like how we have our own "house rules".
Mine is if I SM minerals is to set availability to 0. 1 as a penalty

[Garfunkel]

It has been suggested before and shot down as well, because you can always use SM mode to add more minerals if you really need them so it's pretty much pointless for Steve to code something like that in, especially as he has said in the past that he views the need to find more minerals to fuel your production an important part of Aurora.

[Demetrious]

I like how we have our own "house rules".
Mine is if I SM minerals is to set availability to 0. 1 as a penalty

Given how large planets so often have tens or even hundreds of millions of tons of minerals (most if not all of the types, even) with 0.1 accessibility, this is effectively implemented already. Which is also good from a lore perspective; it explains how long-lived TN empires could exist. Strip mining small bodies provides the materiel to build up big fleets fast, and the slow production from the effectively bottomless taps is what sustains those empires, fleets and massive facility tonnage.

It is not hard to imagine that the slow collection of TN minerals to gravity wells may happen fast enough to be significant on a civilizational timescale; hundreds of years rather than thousands, as well.

[ChubbyPitbull]

Ability to directly begin upgrading a Ground Unit to a new Template

Right now as ground units become outdated, there's no way to directly re-equip units with the latest tech short of having them take losses that need to be replenished. Would be great if there was a way to upgrade/convert one template to a new one, similar to how ships can be upgraded. Something along the lines of an "Upgrade" order at Ground Force Training Facilities, where the mineral cost is spent to manufacture the replacement equipment, and the time cost to both build it, and train the unit on the new gear. This way unit formations with storied histories can easily be kept on the cutting edge of empire technology and not be lost to obsolescence.