Author Topic: C# Suggestions  (Read 273101 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2989
  • Thanked: 2247 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2415 on: February 02, 2022, 03:25:46 PM »
but is and should be more expensive so that it is not greatly preferable to adding new slipways to existing yards.

That they should be more expensive is not something I ever disagreed with. What I disagree with is if they need to be 10 times or more expensive to be balanced?

It is a question of gameplay vs verisimilitude, personally I prefer to err on the former side and not pay too much attention to the numbers under the hood so long as I understand the mechanics involved, but others approach the game quite differently. As I said, in practice I have found shipyard expansion to be suitably costed compared to other major expense categories. Increasing the cost of shipyard expansion would slow things down considerably as players will lack the economic means to expand very quickly, while decreasing the cost of building new yards makes it a lot quicker and cheaper to put yards into orbit. Neither of these are strictly bad things, but they do shift the game economy balance so making a significant change can have perhaps undesired knock-on effects.

The good news is that both of these quantities should be easily moddable if you want to test some changes, although the changes might not be easy to reflect in the GUI. For shipyards it is easy, just change the build costs in DIM_PlanetaryInstallations to whatever value you think is reasonable (I'd probably start by halving the costs - don't forget repair yards!). For shipyard expansions it is a bit of a hack, but in FCT_TechSystem you can modify the Shipyard Operations techs to effectively increase the costs by some factor. The vanilla values are 1.0, 0.95, 0.9, ... so you could change these to 2.0, 1.9, 1.8, ... and double the time and build costs associated with shipyard operations.
 

Offline papent

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 163
  • Thanked: 45 times
  • Off We Go Into The Wild Blue Yonder
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2416 on: February 02, 2022, 03:33:56 PM »

Would love this. The more officer slots we can add the better. I already put a Science module in terraforming platforms for RP purposes.

I agree that we should put as many officers as possible on ships, I suggested something similar
A minor suggestion and an expansion of the Misc component Idea

Miscellaneous Ship Officer Stations
You design the components on the Create Research Projects window by:
  • Choosing a size (from 1 HS to 10)
  • giving the component a name
  • Choosing an Officer Type ( Naval, Ground, Admin, Scientist)
  • Choosing an Officer Skill That will be the Primary selection Criteria
  • For Naval/Ground/Admin only: Rank Required (Racial Min +0/1/2/3/4)

Cost is equal to size in HS and the mineral requirements are split between 20% Duranium and 80% Corbomite. The HTK is equal to the square root of the size. additional the officer improves the skill required by the ship station up to 1% or 1 per year per HTK of the component. [ballparking some figures]

two example Officer Stations

Code: [Select]
Internal Security Control
Cost 100   Size 100 tons   Crew 15   HTK 1
Officer: Ground Force Officer
Rank: Major
Skill: Ground Combat Defence
Base Chance to hit 100%
Materials Required: Duranium  20    Corbomite  80   

Code: [Select]
Civil Logistic Liaison
Cost 200   Size 200 tons   Crew 30   HTK 2
Officer: Civilian Administrator
Rank: Admin Rating 1
Skill: Logistics
Base Chance to hit 100%
Materials Required: Duranium  40    Corbomite  160   

thoughts?

Edited: Change Rank Idea with RougeNPS input.
In my humble opinion anything that could be considered a balance issue is a moot point unless the AI utilize it against you because otherwise it's an exploit you willing choose to use to game the system. 
Rule 0 Is effect : "The SM is always right/ What SM Says Goes."
 

Offline ArcWolf

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • A
  • Posts: 160
  • Thanked: 80 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2417 on: February 04, 2022, 09:46:55 PM »
Can we have a hybrid "Know Star Systems" setting? This way we can have earth, proximal centari, etc, but also get pulsars, nebula etc after a set distance in either LY or after a set number of jumps.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2989
  • Thanked: 2247 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2418 on: February 04, 2022, 11:42:04 PM »
Can we have a hybrid "Know Star Systems" setting? This way we can have earth, proximal centari, etc, but also get pulsars, nebula etc after a set distance in either LY or after a set number of jumps.

Sorry to disappoint you, but thus far we don't even have pulsars, nebulae, black holes, etc. in C#, so this would need to come before such a change could be considered.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11673
  • Thanked: 20457 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2419 on: February 05, 2022, 05:11:44 AM »
Can we have a hybrid "Know Star Systems" setting? This way we can have earth, proximal centari, etc, but also get pulsars, nebula etc after a set distance in either LY or after a set number of jumps.

Sorry to disappoint you, but thus far we don't even have pulsars, nebulae, black holes, etc. in C#, so this would need to come before such a change could be considered.

I do have some ideas around new 'star' types, but I plan to release v2.0 before making any more significant changes.
 

Offline ArcWolf

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • A
  • Posts: 160
  • Thanked: 80 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2420 on: February 05, 2022, 05:30:22 AM »
Can we have a hybrid "Know Star Systems" setting? This way we can have earth, proximal centari, etc, but also get pulsars, nebula etc after a set distance in either LY or after a set number of jumps.

Sorry to disappoint you, but thus far we don't even have pulsars, nebulae, black holes, etc. in C#, so this would need to come before such a change could be considered.

never play on anything other then know star systems, so i did not realize they were not yet implemented in C#.
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2421 on: February 05, 2022, 07:18:59 AM »
I do have some ideas around new 'star' types, but I plan to release v2.0 before making any more significant changes.

Would be great with even more variation for sure! ( Beyond what we will get from Eccentric Orbits )
I loved the pulsars, nebulae and black holes in vb6 Aurora and miss how they added some unique systems  :)
 

Offline xenoscepter

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1157
  • Thanked: 318 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2422 on: February 05, 2022, 05:10:20 PM »
 --- I've probably said it before, but I'll say it again. I'd really like to see the ability to assign Direct Support freely, regardless of formation size or HQ size. I'd like the option to have Sub-Ordinate formations assigned to provide Direct Support to the formation it is Sub-Ordinate to. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
 
The following users thanked this post: papent

Offline Migi

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 465
  • Thanked: 172 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2423 on: February 07, 2022, 08:41:30 PM »
1) Could we have a 0.5T Fuel Storage component? We already have a 0.5T maintenance storage bay, but sometimes adding a tiny amount of fuel would be preferable to adding a tiny amount of MSP.

2) I would like a checkbox in the commanders window, so that the 'search box' in the bottom right only shows unassigned commanders.

3) At the moment the auto class assignment doesn't seem to look at deployment time or range for military ships. A ship with weapons over 1000T is always "classed as a c for auto-assignment purposes" (I assume c is a generic warship).
If the deployment time is less than ~3 months and/or range less than ~10b km could it be classed as a system defence vessel? The AI can count it when determining defensive strength and ignore it when counting offensive strength.
 

Offline xenoscepter

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1157
  • Thanked: 318 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2424 on: February 08, 2022, 06:15:58 PM »
 --- Weird idea just hit me out of the blue: Deployment Ships. Ships with modules that let them extend the deployment of fleets. Unlike Rec Modules these ships wouldn't provide effectively infinite Deployment and the components to create them would be Military rather than Commercial.
 

Offline Kiero

  • Bronze Supporter
  • Lieutenant
  • *****
  • Posts: 175
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • In space no one can hear you scream.
  • Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter : Support the forums with a Bronze subscription
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2425 on: February 10, 2022, 08:19:36 AM »
Ground Units:

Ability to produce units as replenishment ones (no formation number tracking).
Ability to filter units in "Formation Templates" window (by type / components and so on).
 
The following users thanked this post: papent

Offline Geeptoon

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • G
  • Posts: 12
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2426 on: February 10, 2022, 03:27:53 PM »
A Quality of life improvement.   Templates for setting Mineral reserve amounts for colonies.   Or at least a set reserve for all minerals button.   Unless I'm missing this already.
 

Offline papent

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 163
  • Thanked: 45 times
  • Off We Go Into The Wild Blue Yonder
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2427 on: February 10, 2022, 04:16:17 PM »
A Quality of life improvement.   Templates for setting Mineral reserve amounts for colonies.   Or at least a set reserve for all minerals button.   Unless I'm missing this already.

Something that makes the reserve equal to consumption?
In my humble opinion anything that could be considered a balance issue is a moot point unless the AI utilize it against you because otherwise it's an exploit you willing choose to use to game the system. 
Rule 0 Is effect : "The SM is always right/ What SM Says Goes."
 

Online Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2796
  • Thanked: 1054 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2428 on: February 11, 2022, 01:11:30 AM »
Conventional Small Tug Clamps

and

Conventional Large Tug Clamps

CSTC would be a 100-ton component that allows ship to 'clamp' into another ship. As it is using physical connection for tugging instead of TN-based tractor beam, it can only maintain connection if the masses in question are 1000-tons or less and speed is 100 km/sec or less.

CLTC is similar but takes up little bit more space (maybe 500 tons) to simulate it is more comprehensive and larger clamping system, that allows same speed but larger sizes.

Especially the first one would allow a more comprehensive conventional-era play. We can now have a fighter/FAC-level game going on with cargo, colonists, and fuel being able to move transferred but if something bad happen, there's no tugs to help things out. So, this would allow one fighter or FAC to tug another fighter or FAC, while the larger variant would make space stations movable before TN-tech.
 

Offline ArcWolf

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • A
  • Posts: 160
  • Thanked: 80 times
Re: C# Suggestions
« Reply #2429 on: February 11, 2022, 02:24:52 AM »

CSTC would be a 100-ton component that allows ship to 'clamp' into another ship. As it is using physical connection for tugging instead of TN-based tractor beam, it can only maintain connection if the masses in question are 1000-tons or less and speed is 100 km/sec or less.


combined mass or max mas per vessel?