Author Topic: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition  (Read 98947 times)

Steve Walmsley, TheTalkingMeowth and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2187
  • Thanked: 653 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2160 on: September 09, 2021, 04:12:12 AM »
Ships cannot have equal or higher rank than admin commands because the ranks required for admin go up if the ship captains rank goes up.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1028
  • Thanked: 258 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2161 on: September 09, 2021, 05:07:09 AM »
Ships cannot have equal or higher rank than admin commands because the ranks required for admin go up if the ship captains rank goes up.
That is only true for fleets below one admin command. Ships in other admin commands can have lower ranks and therefore that admin command can have an equal or lower rank than the ship in the first admin command.
 

Online nuclearslurpee

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1300
  • Thanked: 841 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2162 on: September 09, 2021, 08:48:45 AM »
Naval admin commands are, AFAIK, always assigned manually and an officer in such a position is never re-assigned by the commander auto-assign. At least, I have never seen an admin post filled automatically nor would I want this to be the case as these assignments require more care and precision than the auto-assignment system is capable of.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1028
  • Thanked: 258 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2163 on: September 09, 2021, 12:30:47 PM »
Naval admin commands are, AFAIK, always assigned manually and an officer in such a position is never re-assigned by the commander auto-assign. At least, I have never seen an admin post filled automatically nor would I want this to be the case as these assignments require more care and precision than the auto-assignment system is capable of.
Yeah, you are right... don't know why I mixed that one totally up. Sorry... confused... thought that would actually happen...
 

Offline kilo

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • k
  • Posts: 139
  • Thanked: 15 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2164 on: September 12, 2021, 05:28:21 AM »
Simple question about ground formations:

You can combine two formations by dragging elements over from one formation to the other and deleting the old one. How does one split such a formation into two? For this you would need to create a dummy formation on a planet, which is not possible, right?
 

Online nuclearslurpee

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1300
  • Thanked: 841 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2165 on: September 12, 2021, 09:06:36 AM »
Simple question about ground formations:

You can combine two formations by dragging elements over from one formation to the other and deleting the old one. How does one split such a formation into two? For this you would need to create a dummy formation on a planet, which is not possible, right?

Basically this, you would have to build a skeleton of a new formation (with, say, a HQ unit and nothing else in it) and then move units between the formations. Probably in this case it is easier to use the replacements system to build the new formation out of the old one by changing the formation templates of both.

Candidly, I wouldn't really recommend splitting formations like this though, unless it is part of a much larger reorganization and for some reason it is necessary to have additional formations. Usually with ground forces the big limitation is number of leaders, and smaller formations exacerbate this problem. Larger formations are also more resistant to breakthroughs and will perform better in combat although this effect is relatively small above 5,000 tons or so.
 

Offline KriegsMeister

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • K
  • Posts: 4
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2166 on: September 12, 2021, 11:21:42 PM »
I'm trying to start my first campaign with multiple player races and I've run into small little hiccup (possible game design flaw?) with the zero RP conventional start.  That being when trying to design weaponry and fire controls for combat ships, you run into this problem where you can design and build Beam Fire Controls, but not Beam weapons, as well as the inverse for missiles.  I can design and build missiles and launchers, but require Trans-Newtonian and Active Grav Sensor techs to make Missile Fire controls.

As disappointing as it is to forgo pre-TN railguns and lasers that are already in development now, I'm fine with just having missiles as the only available armament.  But my actual question is can I actually use missiles without MFC? I know I can add Active/EM/IR sensors to missiles which supposedly are for re-tracking onto lost or new targets, but i haven't really played with them much in the past.  If I build these sensors into my missiles is there a way I can launch them in the general direction of a target with out an actual MFC lock and hope that they hit?
 

Offline kilo

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • k
  • Posts: 139
  • Thanked: 15 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2167 on: September 13, 2021, 07:20:08 AM »
Simple question about ground formations:

You can combine two formations by dragging elements over from one formation to the other and deleting the old one. How does one split such a formation into two? For this you would need to create a dummy formation on a planet, which is not possible, right?

Basically this, you would have to build a skeleton of a new formation (with, say, a HQ unit and nothing else in it) and then move units between the formations. Probably in this case it is easier to use the replacements system to build the new formation out of the old one by changing the formation templates of both.

Candidly, I wouldn't really recommend splitting formations like this though, unless it is part of a much larger reorganization and for some reason it is necessary to have additional formations. Usually with ground forces the big limitation is number of leaders, and smaller formations exacerbate this problem. Larger formations are also more resistant to breakthroughs and will perform better in combat although this effect is relatively small above 5,000 tons or so.

Yeah you are right when it comes to combat units. My problem is slightly different though. I combined my geo survey formations and now they do not fit into the transports anymore. This is a typical programming problem i guess, as I had 4 formations of 5kt and now there is one of 20kt. The 20kt one does not fit onto the landing fleet anymore...
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2187
  • Thanked: 653 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2168 on: September 13, 2021, 07:34:30 AM »
I'm trying to start my first campaign with multiple player races and I've run into small little hiccup (possible game design flaw?) with the zero RP conventional start.  That being when trying to design weaponry and fire controls for combat ships, you run into this problem where you can design and build Beam Fire Controls, but not Beam weapons, as well as the inverse for missiles.  I can design and build missiles and launchers, but require Trans-Newtonian and Active Grav Sensor techs to make Missile Fire controls.

As disappointing as it is to forgo pre-TN railguns and lasers that are already in development now, I'm fine with just having missiles as the only available armament.  But my actual question is can I actually use missiles without MFC? I know I can add Active/EM/IR sensors to missiles which supposedly are for re-tracking onto lost or new targets, but i haven't really played with them much in the past.  If I build these sensors into my missiles is there a way I can launch them in the general direction of a target with out an actual MFC lock and hope that they hit?
You cannot have truly Conventional campaign, for several reasons but the most important is that without researching TN-Theory, you cannot have Active Sensors which are absolutely required for space combat. For ground combat, you'll need to use SM mode to create communications between all powers on Earth and set their relations to what you want because you cannot create diplomatic ships either. And ground units cannot fight what they cannot see which brings you back to the sensor problem. Plus, while you can use fighters to move colonists around, there are no cargo holds small enough for fighters.

There have been several different suggestions to Steve that would enable a truly Conventional campaign with a multi-faction start to work but currently it isn't possible. What you can do is have everyone start at Conventional with no shipyards and just few labs, then use SM mode to instant components. That means that researching all the TN stuff will take quite a while but the factions can get the necessary components (weapons, sensors, engines) into usage fairly quickly. For example, faction A might go for Duranium armour immediately to make fighters/ships lighter but faction B might go for a cheaper, advanced conventional armour that will give their ground troops an edge and thus plan for a imminent ground war instead.
 

Online nuclearslurpee

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1300
  • Thanked: 841 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2169 on: September 13, 2021, 09:39:18 AM »
I'm trying to start my first campaign with multiple player races and I've run into small little hiccup (possible game design flaw?) with the zero RP conventional start.  That being when trying to design weaponry and fire controls for combat ships, you run into this problem where you can design and build Beam Fire Controls, but not Beam weapons, as well as the inverse for missiles.  I can design and build missiles and launchers, but require Trans-Newtonian and Active Grav Sensor techs to make Missile Fire controls.

As disappointing as it is to forgo pre-TN railguns and lasers that are already in development now, I'm fine with just having missiles as the only available armament.  But my actual question is can I actually use missiles without MFC? I know I can add Active/EM/IR sensors to missiles which supposedly are for re-tracking onto lost or new targets, but i haven't really played with them much in the past.  If I build these sensors into my missiles is there a way I can launch them in the general direction of a target with out an actual MFC lock and hope that they hit?
You cannot have truly Conventional campaign, for several reasons but the most important is that without researching TN-Theory, you cannot have Active Sensors which are absolutely required for space combat.

I have used some light DB modding on a separate 1.13 DB to add in necessary technologies to allow for a somewhat playable conventional setup without initially researching TN Tech before doing anything. I haven't enabled beam weapons (frankly I think they would be a bit OP since conventional missiles are very limited) but with conventional tiers of the sensor techs you can build the needed sensors and MFCs plus I enable a conventional CIWS for missile defense along with the basic transport modules as researchable tech.

The main limits remaining are lack of targetable beam weapons (even basic Gauss, 10cm Railgun, or Laser would likely overpower un-boosted missiles, so this isn't a big loss) and geosurvey which means you cannot find mineral sources on other planets to mine. To solve the latter would probably require adding a new, inefficient survey component (something like: 500 tons and 0.25 survey points/hour) along with the tech to enable it and I will probably do this at some point.

All this to say... the needed changes are not difficult and can be done DB-only so it would not be much work for Steve, but if he will not do it then it is not a problem for a player with a DB editor to make the changes. Of course doing this means you cannot submit a bug report (or must reproduce with an unmodded DB first which is what I do).

Quote
For ground combat, you'll need to use SM mode to create communications between all powers on Earth and set their relations to what you want because you cannot create diplomatic ships either. And ground units cannot fight what they cannot see which brings you back to the sensor problem. Plus, while you can use fighters to move colonists around, there are no cargo holds small enough for fighters.

Actually the diplomatic modules are available without TN tech. You also have access to cargo holds + shuttle bays, luxury transport (but not cryogenics), and the recreational module for all the good that does anyone, so with the starting shipyards it is not difficult to at least colonize Sol but it is pointless to do so without knowing where the minerals are.

Essentially "all" that is needed for conventional starts to be playable are conventional active and geosurvey sensors, with conventional troop transport modules being desirable as well. Once you have this you can at least survey, colonize, mine other bodies, and have missile combat + ground combat, which is the bare minimum needed tor a playable 4X game.
 

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 10665
  • Thanked: 14185 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2170 on: September 13, 2021, 11:04:26 AM »
I've added some conventional systems, as suggested by nuclearslurpee.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12523.msg155095#msg155095
 
The following users thanked this post: AlStar, Garfunkel, Black, BAGrimm, nuclearslurpee, Blogaugis

Offline Jarhead0331

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • J
  • Posts: 107
  • Thanked: 38 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2171 on: September 16, 2021, 08:54:46 AM »
I've been away for awhile so I apologize in advance if this is a dumb question...what is the deal with the version number being worked on? I thought the next release was to be 1.14. However, now i see references to a 2.0 and I even saw Steve reference 2.20?!

The latest build I have is 1.13...is that current? What the heck is coming next?

Sorry for the confusion.
 

Offline SpaceMarine

  • Bug Moderators
  • Commodore
  • ***
  • Posts: 671
  • Thanked: 676 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2172 on: September 16, 2021, 08:57:35 AM »
due to the jump in changes being made and the complexity of those changes, steve decided to essentially call 1.14, 2.0, he hasnt changed the name on the forum page to try to limit confusion but 1.14 is 2.0.
 
The following users thanked this post: Jarhead0331

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 10665
  • Thanked: 14185 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2173 on: September 16, 2021, 09:58:48 AM »
2.20 was a typo :)
 
The following users thanked this post: Jarhead0331

Offline El Pip

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • E
  • Posts: 117
  • Thanked: 50 times
Re: Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition
« Reply #2174 on: September 18, 2021, 08:40:41 AM »
Did the "No JP Survey" button make it into Aurora C#. If so, where is it hiding?

I know that "Full Grav Survey" would get the same result, but I'd rather my ships have to go off and redo the survey than just SM it into place. I've found the "No Geo Survey" button so I am hopeful there is a Grav/JP equivalent.