Aurora 4x
C# Aurora => C# Mechanics => Topic started by: Steve Walmsley on May 11, 2020, 03:37:07 AM
-
We had change discussion threads during development, so now that Aurora is entering a phase where I am adding features as well as fixing bugs I think it would be useful to have the same type of thread for each new version. Please continue to add suggestions to the main suggestions thread as I will work through that at some point. This is just for discussion of new changes/fixes
-
Thanks Steve, I really wished you would have added something like this.
Just a quick one: why allow import but not export for the medals? Or there is also an Export feature?
Reason being that if you want to save medals you have created "in-game" and not during a game preparation you will have to copy it back to your csv file.
I know just being fussy here, sorry for that.
-
Steve, what would you think about a suggestion box for "medal conditions", "Fleet Standing Orders", "Fleet Order Conditions", etc. I think a bunch of us have some ideas to increase automation through these systems. How much would you be interested to implement?
-
I like the new invader implementation, even if I'll probably never use it because it's too spooky. The Discord has pointed out that it looks and feels a lot like daemonic attacks in 40K. Was that the inspiration?
-
I like the new invader implementation, even if I'll probably never use it because it's too spooky. The Discord has pointed out that it looks and feels a lot like daemonic attacks in 40K. Was that the inspiration?
Yes, Eye of Terror and Black Crusades was inspiration.
-
Just a quick one: why allow import but not export for the medals? Or there is also an Export feature?
I second this question. An Export option is just as necessary to transfer stuff to new games.
I mean, I can handle CSV editing, but it's a bit of a hassle and I suspect it'll confound a number of players.
-
I have thought a lot about the invader implementation. I like the rifts and the nature of the invaders as a extragalactic force.
I like, that as the rift grows, the invaders become stronger and stronger, making the fight against them harder, as time progresses.
I feel like there should be some way of fighting the invaders without conquering a all the required ancient constructs and waiting for the rift to close. At that point the fight against the invaders is won anyway.
In unlucky circumstances, I might not be finding ancient constructs and there might be rifts blocking my way to further exploration. There should be a way to close a rift locally, even if it is very expensive and dangerous, or requires the entire military of a mid tier empire. Just the possibility is important so I have something to work towards, if I'm in one of the above situations.
For example, rifts could have a stationary stabilisation platform with a large escort located in the middle of the rift. Without the platform, the rift would close slowly. The invaders could get combat bonuses when fighting inside the rift, so that it won't be easy to take down.
-
Thanks Steve, I really wished you would have added something like this.
Just a quick one: why allow import but not export for the medals? Or there is also an Export feature?
Reason being that if you want to save medals you have created "in-game" and not during a game preparation you will have to copy it back to your csv file.
I know just being fussy here, sorry for that.
I will get around to export. Just decided to do import first so that people can create a list of medals to import to multiple campaigns.
-
So, as far as I understand, the racial bonus is 10% of the Ancient construct bonus. And you need 100% total racial bonus in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing.
As such, you need a total of 1000% bonus worth in Active Ancient Constructs in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing, and more than that if you want them to shrink and eventually close down.
Assuming that the average construct gives a 40% bonus (old anomalies used to give between 20 and 60% bonus), that's more than 25 of them active for the Invaders threat to be eventually defeated.
I have to ask Steve... how common are they? I never, never in all my games of Aurora saw more than 4-6 anomalies per game. 25+ of them seems an unreacheable number with the frequency they had in the past.
-
I like the new invader implementation, even if I'll probably never use it because it's too spooky. The Discord has pointed out that it looks and feels a lot like daemonic attacks in 40K. Was that the inspiration?
Yes, Eye of Terror and Black Crusades was inspiration.
So is there a chance that we will get Space Hulks in the future? Something for our marines to board and die horribly. :)
-
So, as far as I understand, the racial bonus is 10% of the Ancient construct bonus. And you need 100% total racial bonus in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing.
As such, you need a total of 1000% bonus worth in Active Ancient Constructs in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing, and more than that if you want them to shrink and eventually close down.
Assuming that the average construct gives a 40% bonus (old anomalies used to give between 20 and 60% bonus), that's more than 25 of them active for the Invaders threat to be eventually defeated.
I have to ask Steve... how common are they? I never, never in all my games of Aurora saw more than 4-6 anomalies per game. 25+ of them seems an unreacheable number with the frequency they had in the past.
They range from 20% to 100%. In my test crusade game, there were 15 with a total of 920% bonus by the time I abandoned it in year 25. I'm actually concerned it is too easy, although the requirements of finding and surveying the ruins and establishing a population of 1m will slow it down. Bear in mind they are constructs controlled by any race, not just player races. In that game there were two NPRs. I'll see how it goes with testing.
-
So, as far as I understand, the racial bonus is 10% of the Ancient construct bonus. And you need 100% total racial bonus in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing.
As such, you need a total of 1000% bonus worth in Active Ancient Constructs in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing, and more than that if you want them to shrink and eventually close down.
Assuming that the average construct gives a 40% bonus (old anomalies used to give between 20 and 60% bonus), that's more than 25 of them active for the Invaders threat to be eventually defeated.
I have to ask Steve... how common are they? I never, never in all my games of Aurora saw more than 4-6 anomalies per game. 25+ of them seems an unreacheable number with the frequency they had in the past.
They range from 20% to 100%. In my test crusade game, there were 15 with a total of 920% bonus by the time I abandoned it in year 25. I'm actually concerned it is too easy, although the requirements of finding and surveying the ruins and establishing a population of 1m will slow it down. Bear in mind they are constructs controlled by any race, not just player races. In that game there were two NPRs. I'll see how it goes with testing.
Should there be a scaling based on maximum galaxy size?
-
So, as far as I understand, the racial bonus is 10% of the Ancient construct bonus. And you need 100% total racial bonus in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing.
As such, you need a total of 1000% bonus worth in Active Ancient Constructs in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing, and more than that if you want them to shrink and eventually close down.
Assuming that the average construct gives a 40% bonus (old anomalies used to give between 20 and 60% bonus), that's more than 25 of them active for the Invaders threat to be eventually defeated.
I have to ask Steve... how common are they? I never, never in all my games of Aurora saw more than 4-6 anomalies per game. 25+ of them seems an unreacheable number with the frequency they had in the past.
They range from 20% to 100%. In my test crusade game, there were 15 with a total of 920% bonus by the time I abandoned it in year 25. I'm actually concerned it is too easy, although the requirements of finding and surveying the ruins and establishing a population of 1m will slow it down. Bear in mind they are constructs controlled by any race, not just player races. In that game there were two NPRs. I'll see how it goes with testing.
Should there be a scaling based on maximum galaxy size?
It sort of scales itself. With a larger galaxy there is more chance that Invaders will appear. I probably should scale it on number of starting NPRs though. The concept will need more play-testing in general though.
-
any chance that terraform get a order to terraform a world to race needs automatic? without doing every gas yourself ?
thanks arty
-
Is Gene editing gonna make it to 1.10 or are you holding off on it for some reason (changes from VB or something you want to add)?
-
I always liked the mechanics of shields consuming fuel to keep running, is it possible this can be added in the future as a selectable option at game creation or something? Also, I like the maintenance failures but personally find the rewind/overhaul mechanics really burdensome, is there any chance of decoupling these two mechanics in the game options?
-
So, as far as I understand, the racial bonus is 10% of the Ancient construct bonus. And you need 100% total racial bonus in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing.
As such, you need a total of 1000% bonus worth in Active Ancient Constructs in the galaxy for rifts to stop growing, and more than that if you want them to shrink and eventually close down.
Assuming that the average construct gives a 40% bonus (old anomalies used to give between 20 and 60% bonus), that's more than 25 of them active for the Invaders threat to be eventually defeated.
I have to ask Steve... how common are they? I never, never in all my games of Aurora saw more than 4-6 anomalies per game. 25+ of them seems an unreacheable number with the frequency they had in the past.
They range from 20% to 100%. In my test crusade game, there were 15 with a total of 920% bonus by the time I abandoned it in year 25. I'm actually concerned it is too easy, although the requirements of finding and surveying the ruins and establishing a population of 1m will slow it down. Bear in mind they are constructs controlled by any race, not just player races. In that game there were two NPRs. I'll see how it goes with testing.
Should there be a scaling based on maximum galaxy size?
It sort of scales itself. With a larger galaxy there is more chance that Invaders will appear. I probably should scale it on number of starting NPRs though. The concept will need more play-testing in general though.
You aren't generating the full galaxy at game start, so it scales according to the currently explored systems rather than the maximum. As such it should already be effectively scaling to # of NPRs. The only problem I see is if the invaders themselves can explore new systems, in which case they will grow unchecked until the whole galaxy has been explored. Another possible limit would be to have invaders return home through the rifts if there is no existing route to any inhabited systems. That way if an NPR gets wiped out before it contacts its neighbours there won't be a huge swarm waiting if and when someone else finally connects to that area.
-
Is Gene editing gonna make it to 1.10 or are you holding off on it for some reason (changes from VB or something you want to add)?
Probably not. Not actively holding off - more lacking enthusiasm to add :)
-
As I mentioned in the OP, this thread is to discuss changes announced for v1.10. If you have suggestions for future versions, please add them to the suggestions thread. If you make suggestions here they will be passed over and probably forgotten by the time I start working through the suggestions thread,
-
A few questions regarding the rift and the Invaders:
Is there a limit on how large the rift can be? If one of these is in a system that I don't care about, can it grow as large as the system?
Can the invader's raider groups spawn at any location in the rift, or just at the center?
Are there any harmful effects/penalties to the ships fighting/transiting within the rifts?
-
A few questions regarding the rift and the Invaders:
Is there a limit on how large the rift can be? If one of these is in a system that I don't care about, can it grow as large as the system?
Can the invader's raider groups spawn at any location in the rift, or just at the center?
Are there any harmful effects/penalties to the ships fighting/transiting within the rifts?
No limit on size - give enough time it can fill the system. Invader groups spawn anywhere in the rift, not just the centre. If there is more than one rift, invaders may spawn simultaneously in multiple rifts (they are distributed, not duplicated). No penalties to ships (so far). I have considered having some form of penalty to ships without shields or maybe to ships with holes in their armour, but I haven't implemented anything.
-
No limit on size - give enough time it can fill the system.
You should probably put some sort of limit to stop it overflowing into negative values.
What happens if you turn Invaders on then later turn them off, do the ships and rifts disappear or does it just prevent new ones from spawning?
-
I have thought a lot about the invader implementation. I like the rifts and the nature of the invaders as a extragalactic force.
I like, that as the rift grows, the invaders become stronger and stronger, making the fight against them harder, as time progresses.
I feel like there should be some way of fighting the invaders without conquering a all the required ancient constructs and waiting for the rift to close. At that point the fight against the invaders is won anyway.
In unlucky circumstances, I might not be finding ancient constructs and there might be rifts blocking my way to further exploration. There should be a way to close a rift locally, even if it is very expensive and dangerous, or requires the entire military of a mid tier empire. Just the possibility is important so I have something to work towards, if I'm in one of the above situations.
For example, rifts could have a stationary stabilisation platform with a large escort located in the middle of the rift. Without the platform, the rift would close slowly. The invaders could get combat bonuses when fighting inside the rift, so that it won't be easy to take down.
I'm reluctant to suggest ideas given that we haven't played with the new rift mechanic yet, but here goes.
I would say that ruins auto-suppressing rifts might make the player feel a bit uninvolved. So here are some things / ideas to consider.
Make rifts spawn and growth be more severe in unoccupied space.
- System with active ruins: Rift grows at normal speed. Ruin global suppression can reverse rift growth. Full bonus of local ruins are applied on top of global suppression as bonus.
- System with 5B+ population, and no ruins: Rift grows at normal speed. Ruin global suppression can at most slow growth by 90%. New rifts cannot spawn in system if global suppression is above 100%.
- System with no (or little) population, and no ruins: Rifts grow twice as fast, and ruin global suppression can at most slow growth by 50% (down to normal growth speed). Global suppression only count for 20% of what it actually is. New rifts cannot spawn in system if global suppression is above 500% (100% at the 20% rate).
The idea here is that systems with ruins are somewhat like 'bastions'. Populated systems are at risk, but decently okay to defend. Empty systems are eldritch beachheads that will devolve into system-wide hell-scapes in short order.
Allow player to fight rifts in an active manner:
The main means of closing rifts (and only means for systems with no ruins), is by gravitation surveying of new survey locations spawned by rift.
There are always at least 1 of these rift gravitational survey locations per rift. As soon as one is surveyed, another spawns (unless the rift is closed entirely.) Larger rifts have more simultaneous survey locations.
These rift survey locations require a large amount of survey points to survey.
Surveying one of these survey locations reduces the size of the rift in a linear fashion (Not a percentage. So less effective per survey location for larger rifts.)
Surveying one of these survey locations has a small chance to spawn an attack from the rift. Chance goes up if rift is larger.
If a rift is closed via gravitational surveying / manipulation, a new rift will not spawn in that system for a year and a day. (Or whatever timespan makes sense.)
The idea:
- Build on existing game mechanics. (New table of foreign key links between rifts and gravitational survey locations can hopefully keep this relatively cleanly split from existing DB structure and code.)
- Encourage new ship designs for this situation.
- Closing a rift is possible, but dangerous, and can to some degree be brute forced.
- If you let a rift grow, you will suffer for it.
- You get some breathing room if you pull it off.
Involve ground combat in fighting rifts:
If a rift completely overwhelms (no population left) a large enough system body (at least 0.1G?) a ground force from the rift is spawned on the system body, along with a rift anomaly.
A rift anomaly slightly speeds up the growth rate of the rift it is connected to.
Once such a rift anomaly is spawned on a system body, it remains even if the system body leaves the rift. (Orbits and whatnot.)
Surveying a rift anomaly via Xenoarchaeology shrinks the rift in the same manner as a gravitational survey would.
These count as rift survey locations, so new orbital gravitation rift survey locations will not spawn if enough planet-side rift anomalies exist in system.
These anomalies do not grant any other benefits. They are not ruins or research bonuses. (If we want to reward players, I'd rather spawn a beneficial anomaly on a system body if a rift is closed entirely.)
The idea:
- Build on existing game mechanics. (New table of foreign key links between rifts and gravitational survey locations can hopefully keep this relatively cleanly split from existing DB structure and code.)
- Encourage early response to new rifts. If you let them dig in...
- Same general mechanics as void-side gravitational surveying to close the rift.
Pity us greenhorns:
Make strength of rift invaders configurable in game menu / options.
-
Rifts are a cool concept, but I feel like they should be affected by more than just anomaly count. I kind of want there to be a tech involved, which could let players have a bit more active control over rift closing speed.
Given that gene modding isn't in the game yet, the Biology/Genetics tree is still very sparse. (Heck, even with it in, it's not the deepest tree). I'm trying to think of whether this tech could be added there. It'd require a particular sort of flavor for this to make sense, but if you're "studying the alien physiology" or something, it could work. Reminds me a bit of analyzing psychic aliens in games like X-Com or Alpha Centauri.
-
Ancient constructs are interesting considering how they could (possibly) lead to both conflict and cooperation.
As described now you need 1M pop to use them. That is not a huge investment and if you conquer them they would keep operate under the new ownership with the existing pop. I would like to see some more "cost" to conquering them. Say you have to construct a building to get the rift-reducing effect. One that is easily destroyed by any form of combat. Suddenly conquering them is a much tougher choice and if you do it would definitely have to be by ground invasion or it would take you forever to rebuild the rift-reducing structure in the radiated remains.
But most of all, any warfare around an ancient construct would mean rift-reduction downtime and more invaders for everyone. I would like to see that tie into a future diplomatic AI at some point. Weigh fear of invaders vs letting neighbour empires get too powerful. Support alien empires to protect their construct sites, peacekeeping actions, lots of possibilities.
-
Ancient constructs are interesting considering how they could (possibly) lead to both conflict and cooperation.
As described now you need 1M pop to use them. That is not a huge investment and if you conquer them they would keep operate under the new ownership with the existing pop. I would like to see some more "cost" to conquering them. Say you have to construct a building to get the rift-reducing effect. One that is easily destroyed by any form of combat. Suddenly conquering them is a much tougher choice and if you do it would definitely have to be by ground invasion or it would take you forever to rebuild the rift-reducing structure in the radiated remains.
But most of all, any warfare around an ancient construct would mean rift-reduction downtime and more invaders for everyone. I would like to see that tie into a future diplomatic AI at some point. Weigh fear of invaders vs letting neighbour empires get too powerful. Support alien empires to protect their construct sites, peacekeeping actions, lots of possibilities.
If I understand the mechanism correctly, if you conquered that alien population, you still have to survey the ancient construct to activate it for your empire? So that can be the down time in between you mentioned there.
1) Ancient Constructs will be 'dormant' until surveyed by a Xenoarchaeological formation. This will be the same process as for ruins. Ruins and Ancient Constructs on the same system body will be surveyed simultaneously but independently. When an Ancient Construct is surveyed, its research field and bonus will be revealed. It will not add any bonus while dormant.
-
Is Gene editing gonna make it to 1.10 or are you holding off on it for some reason (changes from VB or something you want to add)?
Probably not. Not actively holding off - more lacking enthusiasm to add :)
Having the population to adapt the environment (within certain fix ranges of course) would be really cool and it will make gene modification obsolete considering you are researching it for ground units now as well.
-
All I can say is that I am super excited for 1.10 and I always played with invaders on in VB I will probably do the same now, they seem really interesting really looking forward to it. Just hoping they are not super OP or it takes a solid amount of time for them to start really showing up.
-
Hey, about the "automatic research" feature, are the connected techs getting grouped up into a single tech in the research screen, so that it doesn't display the different troop transport techs as separately available research anymore?
And about the medal importer, isn't having "," be the separator between the items going to be problematic for when a medal has a comma in its description or in its file name? Maybe the different items could be put on separate lines, with the condition numbers still sharing a single line. Would maybe be better for readability, too?
-
And about the medal importer, isn't having "," be the separator between the items going to be problematic for when a medal has a comma in its description or in its file name? Maybe the different items could be put on separate lines, with the condition numbers still sharing a single line. Would maybe be better for readability, too?
regarding the commas, there is a way to escape them in CSV, so that they don't break the formatting.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4617935/is-there-a-way-to-include-commas-in-csv-columns-without-breaking-the-formatting (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4617935/is-there-a-way-to-include-commas-in-csv-columns-without-breaking-the-formatting)
-
And about the medal importer, isn't having "," be the separator between the items going to be problematic for when a medal has a comma in its description or in its file name? Maybe the different items could be put on separate lines, with the condition numbers still sharing a single line. Would maybe be better for readability, too?
regarding the commas, there is a way to escape them in CSV, so that they don't break the formatting.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4617935/is-there-a-way-to-include-commas-in-csv-columns-without-breaking-the-formatting (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4617935/is-there-a-way-to-include-commas-in-csv-columns-without-breaking-the-formatting)
Yup, just put those names in "".
-
Oh, thanks, I was hoping for that.
-
Is Gene editing gonna make it to 1.10 or are you holding off on it for some reason (changes from VB or something you want to add)?
Probably not. Not actively holding off - more lacking enthusiasm to add :)
It's not added? I conquered an NPR planet, and it had one Gene Editing building, as well as an indicator of yearly % genome change (something like that, I don't remember the precise wording)
-
Is Gene editing gonna make it to 1.10 or are you holding off on it for some reason (changes from VB or something you want to add)?
Probably not. Not actively holding off - more lacking enthusiasm to add :)
It's not added? I conquered an NPR planet, and it had one Gene Editing building, as well as an indicator of yearly % genome change (something like that, I don't remember the precise wording)
The buildings exist. They just don't do anything yet.
-
Can we put in a stop upon Communication and Intelligence Updates when using auto-turns? Specifically, when full diplomatic communication is first established and when new diplomatic contacts are made.
Or, even better, a way to allow the player to define their own stops?
-
Hey, about the "automatic research" feature, are the connected techs getting grouped up into a single tech in the research screen, so that it doesn't display the different troop transport techs as separately available research anymore?
The automatic techs all have the primary tech as a prerequisite, so they won't show up.
-
Regarding parasites landing on the mother-ship and forming a sub-fleet... can it also be possible that the sub fleet are created below the carrier wherever that is in the hierarchy of the fleet. Or is this already they way you set it up?
You might perhaps have the carrier in it's own sub-fleet.... I for example tend to have all ships in sub-fleets withing a fleet unless the fleet only have one type of ships in them. So the carriers and some attached escorts might be in one group as a sub-fleet and then another carrier with some escorts in another and then two battleships in one group and so forth.
When the fighter land I would like them to form up under the same sub-fleet as the carrier they land on if possible.
-
Is Gene editing gonna make it to 1.10 or are you holding off on it for some reason (changes from VB or something you want to add)?
Probably not. Not actively holding off - more lacking enthusiasm to add :)
It's not added? I conquered an NPR planet, and it had one Gene Editing building, as well as an indicator of yearly % genome change (something like that, I don't remember the precise wording)
The buildings exist. They just don't do anything yet.
It could be interesting if using gene editing, xeno-knowledge and a pinch of radiation, we could cook up some proto-molecule missiles that could infect/modify entire populations. I mean at that point, we're the evil race that should be stopped from going through the rift... :o
-
Hey I noticed there is approved mods now. Is there any chance features in the mods will be implemented into the base game in the future or will you leave it to approved mods to cover some user customization features (such as color scheme) ?
I'm just asking cause I would feel more comfortable using just Aurora without any mods regardless if they are approved or not.
Steve already answered that in the mod thread... he might get around to do those things eventually but for now he can focus his attention on other more important things. That was his answer, more or less.
-
I always liked the mechanics of shields consuming fuel to keep running, is it possible this can be added in the future as a selectable option at game creation or something?
+1 for this, shields which consume non-trivial fuel add considerable tactical depth.
*Edit: Reposting this to suggestions thread so it is not forgotten.
-
Main problem with shields consuming fuel would probably be the AI being able to handle when to use them or not.
-
I always liked the mechanics of shields consuming fuel to keep running, is it possible this can be added in the future as a selectable option at game creation or something? Also, I like the maintenance failures but personally find the rewind/overhaul mechanics really burdensome, is there any chance of decoupling these two mechanics in the game options?
I found it super annoying. Perhaps a better way would be to have increased wear on the shield components, forcing failure checks at certain intervals while its on?
-
I always liked the mechanics of shields consuming fuel to keep running, is it possible this can be added in the future as a selectable option at game creation or something?
+1 for this, shields which consume non-trivial fuel add considerable tactical depth.
*Edit: Reposting this to suggestions thread so it is not forgotten.
As Steve just removed the fuel cost on shield from the transition from VB6 to C# I don't think it is that likely he add it back anytime soon.
-
The message "maintenance problem" displays how far the maintenance clock of the ship is; a nice addon would be if it displayed also the maximum clock of that ship like "5.1 of 8.6 years".
-
I always liked the mechanics of shields consuming fuel to keep running, is it possible this can be added in the future as a selectable option at game creation or something? Also, I like the maintenance failures but personally find the rewind/overhaul mechanics really burdensome, is there any chance of decoupling these two mechanics in the game options?
I found it super annoying. Perhaps a better way would be to have increased wear on the shield components, forcing failure checks at certain intervals while its on?
As I said in the topic specific thread:
Maintenance supplies are already critical for short engagements due to beam weapons drinking them like water. Please don't add to that.
-
The message "maintenance problem" displays how far the maintenance clock of the ship is; a nice addon would be if it displayed also the maximum clock of that ship like "5.1 of 8.6 years".
The maintenance life isn't fixed. It is just an estimate of how long the MSP will last given average failures. The message does include how many MSP remain.
-
The message "maintenance problem" displays how far the maintenance clock of the ship is; a nice addon would be if it displayed also the maximum clock of that ship like "5.1 of 8.6 years".
The maintenance life isn't fixed. It is just an estimate of how long the MSP will last given average failures. The message does include how many MSP remain.
Rated life is fixed and knowing what fraction of that has expired matters when you are responding to failures. A failure on a 4 year old ship that is rated for 20 years maintenance life might not even be worth resupplying yet, but one only rated for 5 years needs to be brought in for overhaul.
-
The message "maintenance problem" displays how far the maintenance clock of the ship is; a nice addon would be if it displayed also the maximum clock of that ship like "5.1 of 8.6 years".
The maintenance life isn't fixed. It is just an estimate of how long the MSP will last given average failures. The message does include how many MSP remain.
Rated life is fixed and knowing what fraction of that has expired matters when you are responding to failures. A failure on a 4 year old ship that is rated for 20 years maintenance life might not even be worth resupplying yet, but one only rated for 5 years needs to be brought in for overhaul.
It depends on the MSP situation. If the 4 year old ship is low on MSP then it needs to be resupplied / overhauled, regardless of theoretical maintenance life and if is still has most of the MSP it is fine for a while regardless of theoretical maintenance life. Adding a maint life number could be potentially misleading, especially for new players ("my ship exploded but the event said it had 2 years left").
-
The message "maintenance problem" displays how far the maintenance clock of the ship is; a nice addon would be if it displayed also the maximum clock of that ship like "5.1 of 8.6 years".
The maintenance life isn't fixed. It is just an estimate of how long the MSP will last given average failures. The message does include how many MSP remain.
Rated life is fixed and knowing what fraction of that has expired matters when you are responding to failures. A failure on a 4 year old ship that is rated for 20 years maintenance life might not even be worth resupplying yet, but one only rated for 5 years needs to be brought in for overhaul.
It depends on the MSP situation. If the 4 year old ship is low on MSP then it needs to be resupplied / overhauled, regardless of theoretical maintenance life and if is still has most of the MSP it is fine for a while regardless of theoretical maintenance life. Adding a maint life number could be potentially misleading, especially for new players ("my ship exploded but the event said it had 2 years left").
For a long range ship it can mean the difference between meeting with a supply tender vs aborting the mission and returning all the way to the docks. Currently we need to look up the class design sheet to decide. I do concede the newbie problem. I've been playing for years and still get caught sometimes. :)
-
The message "maintenance problem" displays how far the maintenance clock of the ship is; a nice addon would be if it displayed also the maximum clock of that ship like "5.1 of 8.6 years".
The maintenance life isn't fixed. It is just an estimate of how long the MSP will last given average failures. The message does include how many MSP remain.
No, it isn't - but I thought that the time displayed here isn't the maintainence life but rather the deployment time. Did I misread? And max deployment time is fixed - so it woudl be a great help in deciding if after a breakdown I would rather send the ship home or decide that it can go on for a while (because I usually don't decide that depending on the amount of MSP left but the deployment time - sure, if the MSP is low, it has to go home...).
-
Deployment time is a crew morale issue independent of maintenance life. Both are easy to look up in the Naval window on either the fleet tab or the maintenance report tab.
-
Deployment time is a crew morale issue independent of maintenance life. Both are easy to look up in the Naval window on either the fleet tab or the maintenance report tab.
Opening that screen every time, searching the right ship... way more QoL if it is simply shown in the log.
-
Hi Steve,
Medals condition for CSV file. There are currently 52 IDs of the actual 60 IDs entries in the medal conditions tab.
Missing IDs:
- 3 Aliens Ruin Discovered
- 25 Recovered Abandoned installations
- 250 Recovered Abandoned installations
- Discover 25 New Star Systems
- Discover 100 New Star Systems
- Destroy 100,000 tons of Hostile Ground Forces
- Generate 25,000 research points
- Generate 250,000 research points
Can you please advise?
-
I get a lot of non-useful "Low Fuel" events--that is, when a ship's fleet currently has a refuel order in the order list, and the ship has more than enough fuel to reach the refueling location.
I would LOVE it if some logic could be added to only create the "Low Fuel" event when this situation does not apply.
-
Hey Steve, I'm thinking of starting a new game this weekend. Would you say 1.10.0 is looking more like a end of this week or end of next week thing at this point?
-
Hey Steve, I'm thinking of starting a new game this weekend. Would you say 1.10.0 is looking more like a end of this week or end of next week thing at this point?
Not this weekend, possibly next. I am running a test campaign at the moment so I want do that for a few days before release.
-
The new invader systems looks superb. I would also join my voice to making it possible to do some sort of local containment of some sort, at least a way to prevent a rift from growing. Perhaps a special ship component of rather large size? If a ship or station with said component is inside the area of the rift, it can no longer grow larger, but is still able to spawn enemies? This would allow active containment in important systems, at the price of maintaining a garrison there to prevent enemies from destroying the ship which is 'holding reality together'. Could even have it function as an 'antagonizer' where the if the rift cannot grow, it sends out larger raids in an attempt to remove the blockage.
-
If you think that it might currently be too easy to get enough ancient constructions to stop aether rift growth, have you considered adding some separate, more powerful kind of anomaly feature that, when worked by a colony, actually INCREASES the rate at which aether rifts expand?
Would act in some sort of risk vs reward way and make invaders stay relevant in the later game. It would require the player to strike some sort of balance between (weaker, but saver) ancient constructs and these (more powerful, but more dangerous) other anomalies, unless the player doesn't care about throwing the galaxy into chaos (literally).
-
The new invader systems looks superb. I would also join my voice to making it possible to do some sort of local containment of some sort, at least a way to prevent a rift from growing. Perhaps a special ship component of rather large size? If a ship or station with said component is inside the area of the rift, it can no longer grow larger, but is still able to spawn enemies? This would allow active containment in important systems, at the price of maintaining a garrison there to prevent enemies from destroying the ship which is 'holding reality together'. Could even have it function as an 'antagonizer' where the if the rift cannot grow, it sends out larger raids in an attempt to remove the blockage.
This sounds really cool. Cadia stands and all that.
If you think that it might currently be too easy to get enough ancient constructions to stop aether rift growth, have you considered adding some separate, more powerful kind of anomaly feature that, when worked by a colony, actually INCREASES the rate at which aether rifts expand?
Would act in some sort of risk vs reward way and make invaders stay relevant in the later game. It would require the player to strike some sort of balance between (weaker, but saver) ancient constructs and these (more powerful, but more dangerous) other anomalies, unless the player doesn't care about throwing the galaxy into chaos (literally).
Maybe an scaling option could be added in the options menu, like for research, terraforming, and survey speed?
-
The new invader systems looks superb. I would also join my voice to making it possible to do some sort of local containment of some sort, at least a way to prevent a rift from growing. Perhaps a special ship component of rather large size? If a ship or station with said component is inside the area of the rift, it can no longer grow larger, but is still able to spawn enemies?
I'd vote for it being a component with a range, that locks down any rift within range. Could set it up to scale like sensors do, with a very large HS range so you can have everything from 1kT components that need to be almost in the rift to 200kT components that reach out several hundred million miles.
-
Yeah, that could also be a really cool idea. Or maybe really go the planet method, and make it an installation, scaling range like deep space sensors. But of course that planet would become the primary target of everything coming out.
-
Steve mentioned PDCs in new abbrevations thread and they are there when you are choosing class in design window. They can't be build through Industry and they accept engines as well eventhough Steve says they sit on the surface of the planet. Are those in the works or do I miss something?
-
Steve mentioned PDCs in new abbrevations thread and they are there when you are choosing class in design window. They can't be build through Industry and they accept engines as well eventhough Steve says they sit on the surface of the planet. Are those in the works or do I miss something?
They were in VB but got removed, I'd be surprised if they were suddenly being added back in. Can you link to the post you're talking about?
-
Sorry, completely my bad as I didn't pay attention to dates. I thought it's a new list for C#.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=1863.0
-
Sorry, completely my bad as I didn't pay attention to dates. I thought it's a new list for C#.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=1863.0
Yea thats 2010 hahha, PDCs are probably never getting added back for various reasons, mainly that they make no sense for the current ground forces system.
-
The message "maintenance problem" displays how far the maintenance clock of the ship is; a nice addon would be if it displayed also the maximum clock of that ship like "5.1 of 8.6 years".
The maintenance life isn't fixed. It is just an estimate of how long the MSP will last given average failures. The message does include how many MSP remain.
Rated life is fixed and knowing what fraction of that has expired matters when you are responding to failures. A failure on a 4 year old ship that is rated for 20 years maintenance life might not even be worth resupplying yet, but one only rated for 5 years needs to be brought in for overhaul.
It depends on the MSP situation. If the 4 year old ship is low on MSP then it needs to be resupplied / overhauled, regardless of theoretical maintenance life and if is still has most of the MSP it is fine for a while regardless of theoretical maintenance life. Adding a maint life number could be potentially misleading, especially for new players ("my ship exploded but the event said it had 2 years left").
For a long range ship it can mean the difference between meeting with a supply tender vs aborting the mission and returning all the way to the docks. Currently we need to look up the class design sheet to decide. I do concede the newbie problem. I've been playing for years and still get caught sometimes. :)
I have added Average Class Maint Life and % of Deployment to component failure reports.
-
Hi Steve,
Medals condition for CSV file. There are currently 52 IDs of the actual 60 IDs entries in the medal conditions tab.
Missing IDs:
- 3 Aliens Ruin Discovered
- 25 Recovered Abandoned installations
- 250 Recovered Abandoned installations
- Discover 25 New Star Systems
- Discover 100 New Star Systems
- Destroy 100,000 tons of Hostile Ground Forces
- Generate 25,000 research points
- Generate 250,000 research points
Can you please advise?
Not sure what you mean. I can see all the above in the medal conditions tab.
-
I'm not gong to make any changes to the current rift system until I see some play test reports. So far my own campaign hasn't got moving due to real life distractions, so I might release 1.10 in a few days as a 'beta' release and let players test it instead.
-
I'm not gong to make any changes to the current rift system until I see some play test reports. So far my own campaign hasn't got moving due to real life distractions, so I might release 1.10 in a few days as a 'beta' release and let players test it instead.
Yes...yes, indeed. Do this! 8)
-
^ Agree! :)
-
Hi Steve,
Medals condition for CSV file. There are currently 52 IDs of the actual 60 IDs entries in the medal conditions tab.
Missing IDs:
- 3 Aliens Ruin Discovered
- 25 Recovered Abandoned installations
- 250 Recovered Abandoned installations
- Discover 25 New Star Systems
- Discover 100 New Star Systems
- Destroy 100,000 tons of Hostile Ground Forces
- Generate 25,000 research points
- Generate 250,000 research points
Can you please advise?
Not sure what you mean. I can see all the above in the medal conditions tab.
Somebody sorted for me looking at the database. I was referring to the number to add the condition in CSV file. In your post there 52 conditions listed of the 60 total available.
-
I'm not gong to make any changes to the current rift system until I see some play test reports. So far my own campaign hasn't got moving due to real life distractions, so I might release 1.10 in a few days as a 'beta' release and let players test it instead.
It makes since not to change anything until you get a look at how it plays normally. Hopefully we can provide useful feedback soon.
-
Will the invaders have any ground forces? this could lead to many interesting developments...
(Cadia Intensifies)
-
Right now you can't use the conditional order to overhaul in any useful way, if you set it to, <20% supply -> Overhaul , it just infanetelly loops because overhauling doesn't resupply the ship
I would really appreciate either:
1: Overhauls resupply the ship (makes a ton of sense thematically and from a game POV)
2: A conditional order to "Resupply and overhaul"
This would REALLY, REALLY help with the survey ship micro!
-
I had a heart attack looking at your test game that came with 1.10, Steve, you know that? I thought I was really, really bad at this game for a bit.
Then I looked at the events log in more detail and realized that you had automatically explored a few star systems, created a few fleets, and researched some tech in advance. I felt better after that.
-
Right now you can't use the conditional order to overhaul in any useful way, if you set it to, <20% supply -> Overhaul , it just infanetelly loops because overhauling doesn't resupply the ship
I would really appreciate either:
1: Overhauls resupply the ship (makes a ton of sense thematically and from a game POV)
2: A conditional order to "Resupply and overhaul"
This would REALLY, REALLY help with the survey ship micro!
Even better would be "Refuel, resupply, and overhaul."
-
I had a heart attack looking at your test game that came with 1.10, Steve, you know that? I thought I was really, really bad at this game for a bit.
Then I looked at the events log in more detail and realized that you had automatically explored a few star systems, created a few fleets, and researched some tech in advance. I felt better after that.
I didn't explore any systems in advance. They are all explored during the game. I did create fleets and tech at the start though using the starting build points and tech points.
-
Huh. Wonder what I'm doing differently. The biggest difference is probably that I don't typically take jump technology when I'm assigning starting techs. I'll have to think more carefully about the sorts of starts that I end up doing.
-
Is there an easy way to spawn an aether rift manually, for debugging purposes?
-
Is there an easy way to spawn an aether rift manually, for debugging purposes?
From what I understand they are broken until 1.11 anyways :)