Author Topic: Suggestions Thread for v2.0  (Read 85894 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ghrathryn

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #330 on: December 05, 2022, 12:48:27 PM »
We already have a Move to System Requiring Geosurvey order, although a priority option for partially-completed surveys could be useful.

I'll be honest, I did not see that standing order until you pointed out that it was there. Maybe we need to have the standing order listing cleaned up as well

Quote
This would be very useful in some cases, such as not interrupting a survey in progress when deployment time ticks over.

Yeah, primarily when trying to get civilian ships to do something long winded like setting up a colony with a minimum of facilities and colonists which requires a lot of back and forth, or the same for starting up automine sites. Or surveys in other systems than the one your nearest base/colony is in.

  • I would absolutely love this options
  • In the next update some of what you purposed has been added, check out the changelog and see if that is what you were thinking about
  • Like adding more variants of the unload standing order? may you clarify this.
  • That's interesting/may be useful and possible a mirror one to go Geo Survey fully Grav surveyed systems?
  • Idk if that is feasible with how the order system is built. Perhaps it could do the conditional order and return to the location is was prior but you might run into a loop for something like refuel at 50% as the ship was already at the end of it's operating range. this one is a technical toughy on initial glance.
  • this is one i've previously suggested and would love to have available. Simple movement of minerals and colonist movement.
    I would even go farther allow movement of ship components, Missiles, and Ground Unit by Series (Only from formations that are listed as replacements and placed in a formation on the receiving colony named {Colonyname_Replacement_Pool} to allow for easier replenishment of Ground Unit Formations

  • Yes, plus it means we're less likely to forget freighters over various worlds if they're actually doing something
  • Cool, I'll see what that actually is
  • At present the standing orders are just literally 'Unload Passengers' or 'Unload Colonists', it'd be nice to either have a clarification as to where this will occur so we don't run the risk of telling the ship/fleet to load and unload as standing orders and it sits over a planet and does that, or at least we know it won't do something that dumb. That said, additional options like 'at nearest destination' or 'at newest' could come in useful.
  • Pretty much, we can currently have ships auto scout for jump points in systems that don't have the Grav Survey Complete flag through standing orders, but the Geo Survey ships have to be told to go there and set to explore for minerals. Adding the Geo version would probably alleviate that. It'd likely also be useful to have some options to target the most/least explored systems or possibly a conditional to say 'return to last system' if the ships have to jump back to a colony/base if there's no refuel point in the system they're exploring.
  • I think it'd be most common on repeated but not standing orders or on longer order queues. I'm not sure how Steve's got things set up, since I'm no programmer, but the theoretical route would be that either by default or if a box is checked, then instead of going "wipe queue, create order (move to nearest colony and refuel)" as an example, it would make the order, shuffle it to the top of the queue and possibly put a delay on the next order in the list, presuming that it's required. It kinda mostly depends on how list shuffling works to start with
  • I'm not sure how you'd do the individual ground units given things are made in bulk depending on the template. It'd probably be useful for getting replacements near the front lines or to newly conquered colonies if it can be done though. That might be a case of changing the way military build works or having some set up to queue formations to move and letting ships flagged as troop transports do it. The missiles and ship components though, those I can see, though it might require a few tweaks to allow their flags to be set for civilian cargo.

That's an interesting take on the concept. If I may further suggest your line of reasoning:
  • 2 weapon sizes to choose from
  • only tech improvement line is for raw damage. Increases damage, power needed, and resource cost But does not increase tonnage.
  • Weapon Gradient 2 or 4

It's a simple tweak and may be worth exploring in detail.

Not exactly what I was thinking. More along the lines of Plasma Carronades start at the same size as other direct fire weapons (mostly so fighters/bombers can rack a second one in), however they're more powerful on direct damage and shorter ranged, or at least they've got a shorter effective range, maybe a slower refire rate as well. This results in them having a larger size selection, potentially ending up larger than anything bar a max-tech spinal weapon of any other type and maybe their own spinals are even larger.

The big thing is their damage dispersal. I don't recall what the set up for each weapon is currently, but I know missile warheads need to be a square number for their damage dealt to pen an additional armour layer. I think lasers have a deep but tight penetration, meaning each hit can potentially kill internals, but it's like sticking a needle into a foam ball. What I'm thinking for plasma is that they're a splash anti-armour. Minimum of two layers penetration on their lowest damage, with at least a similar area covered ala:

-xxx-
-xxx-

-xxxxx-
--xxx--

-xxx-
-xxx-
-xxx-

One of those patterns on the 10cm where the x is the destroyed armour block. Larger carronades go wider and deeper meaning even a few can in theory strip a ship of its hull PDQ or melt the internals given there's some RNG on where damage goes.

On the flipside, they're less effective on shields where mesons completely bypass those, maybe the armour as well.

For range, by max tech, they're probably half or less the range of the other weapons, maybe an outside of 80% due to the fact the magnetic bottle is a PITA to keep stable. Whether that's an effect of the size increases or a range tech that crops up around half as often as the ones for the other weapons is up to Steve.
 

Offline papent

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 163
  • Thanked: 45 times
  • Off We Go Into The Wild Blue Yonder
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #331 on: December 05, 2022, 01:48:26 PM »
Couple of suggestions:
  • Would love to have Missile Series back into C# from VB6.
  • something similar to the former Spoiler Torpedoes - the indirect fire missile-like weapon.


Not exactly what I was thinking. More along the lines of Plasma Carronades start at the same size as other direct fire weapons (mostly so fighters/bombers can rack a second one in), however they're more powerful on direct damage and shorter ranged, or at least they've got a shorter effective range, maybe a slower refire rate as well. This results in them having a larger size selection, potentially ending up larger than anything bar a max-tech spinal weapon of any other type and maybe their own spinals are even larger.

The big thing is their damage dispersal. I don't recall what the set up for each weapon is currently, but I know missile warheads need to be a square number for their damage dealt to pen an additional armour layer. I think lasers have a deep but tight penetration, meaning each hit can potentially kill internals, but it's like sticking a needle into a foam ball. What I'm thinking for plasma is that they're a splash anti-armour. Minimum of two layers penetration on their lowest damage

Currently PC's are using gradient #1 http://aurorawiki.pentarch.org/index.php?title=C-Beam_Weapons#Armour_Damage_Templates
If I understand correctly you're suggesting:
  • switching to gradient #2 (like railguns or particle beams) or an new gradient where it's guaranteed to go 2 level of damage of armour damage before mushrooming out?
  • option for spinal mounts

Please let me know if that's closer to what you was thinking.
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 jatzi

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • j
  • Posts: 17
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #332 on: December 05, 2022, 08:14:09 PM »
Just a thought that came up recently in the discord as we were talking about mines since they work again.  Someone said static spoilers used to have minefields and I was wondering if ppl would like the idea of Precursors having minefields.  I don't know how feasible this is but what if part of the precursor template was a mine, and a minelayer.  I imagine some work on their behavior would have to be done to ensure they use them correctly.  But the precursors are almost purely defensive so it makes sense to me that they'd use mines.  Or defensive stations around JP's.  It'd be cool to see them fortify their systems a bit more.  Perhaps this behavior would only activate on higher difficulty settings, like if you cranked it up past 2 or 300%? Just a thought
 
The following users thanked this post: papent, Gabrote42

Offline xenoscepter

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1159
  • Thanked: 320 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #333 on: December 06, 2022, 02:00:46 AM »
 --- In the Ship Design window, it would be nice to have the option of armoring individual components. An idea I had for implementing this would be as such: You right click a component on the design. This generates an option called "Add Armor". When this option is selected, it generates a dialogue prompt where you put in an integer. This then adds that many HTK to the component. Likewise, a nice QoL feature would be to allow players to right click a category instead, like fuel for example. This would allow us to armor all of the fuel tanks. Cost wise, it should simply add 20% per HTK added, in wealth AND in whatever minerals your armor uses. So Duranium and / or Neutronium. The mineral cost will be equal to 20% of the components own mineral cost. So for example a component costing 100 wealth and 100 mercassium would cost 200 wealth, 200 mercassium, 100 duranium and 100 neutronium for 5 HTK of "armoring" if you use an armor that requires both.

 --- This right click function could also maybe allow things like bulkheads and whatnot, but I'm tired and so will leave such elaborations up to you guys. :) Bed time~
 
The following users thanked this post: papent, Gabrote42

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2839
  • Thanked: 674 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #334 on: December 12, 2022, 06:25:03 AM »
I like what is added for mining in the Empire Mining section of the new version. But what I really need is also a break down in the mining page for "yearly" production not just total production cost as it currently only shows. It is often much easier to see overal long term cost of any resource when I see the current yearly consumption of any planets industry.

It should not be difficult to add a selection on the mining page where there is an option to see the production in either total amount (current values) or yearly consumption of said resource instead. The same goes for the Empire mining page.

As mining is shown in yearly production I want to also see the yearly consumption rate based on current production.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2022, 06:27:53 AM by Jorgen_CAB »
 
The following users thanked this post: TheBawkHawk

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1341
  • Thanked: 595 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #335 on: December 12, 2022, 06:05:46 PM »
So we now have the Load Colonist, unload colonists options for Colony Ships, which is an excellent addition if you play without Civvies.

As the commands shall be there, I assume it is relatively easy for the following to be implemented:

Freighters command to fulfil Civilian Contracts (Automated)
Freighters to be able trading Trade Goods (Automated)

While I like for some plays to use civilians, I prefer to "Run" my own, especially now that through automated Admin assignments you can pretty much have officers be the CEO of the companies.
 
The following users thanked this post: mike2R

Offline mike2R

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • m
  • Posts: 180
  • Thanked: 117 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #336 on: December 14, 2022, 07:12:33 AM »
So we now have the Load Colonist, unload colonists options for Colony Ships, which is an excellent addition if you play without Civvies.

As the commands shall be there, I assume it is relatively easy for the following to be implemented:

Freighters command to fulfil Civilian Contracts (Automated)
Freighters to be able trading Trade Goods (Automated)

While I like for some plays to use civilians, I prefer to "Run" my own, especially now that through automated Admin assignments you can pretty much have officers be the CEO of the companies.

That would be awesome.  I've played a no civvy game, and it was really a lot of fun managing huge fleets of freighters and colony ships.  But felt a bit lifeless without the shipping of trade goods creating trade routes.  To be able to have my own automated trade fleets doing that would make it really good, especially with raiders in the mix.

And making my own freighters for use with civilian contracts would be really handy even with civvies on...
 

Offline nanomage

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • n
  • Posts: 6
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #337 on: December 14, 2022, 10:49:35 PM »
I would like to request a new ship component - Political Office, obviously staffed with a Political Officer, producing no benefits and having a token 5-10 ton mass cost.  The officer would be selected for Political Reliability, and the entire thing would be mostly for roleplay
 
The following users thanked this post: QuakeIV

Offline Andrew

  • Registered
  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 697
  • Thanked: 132 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #338 on: December 15, 2022, 04:24:25 AM »
Just use the current customs components and create a Political office of size 10 tons, thats what the feature is for adding things you want with no game effects
 
The following users thanked this post: nanomage

Offline wedgebert

  • Ace Wiki Contributor
  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • ****
  • w
  • Posts: 87
  • Thanked: 33 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #339 on: December 15, 2022, 08:55:48 AM »
I would like to request a new ship component - Political Office, obviously staffed with a Political Officer, producing no benefits and having a token 5-10 ton mass cost.  The officer would be selected for Political Reliability, and the entire thing would be mostly for roleplay

I think it should have no benefits, but should inflict a penalty to crew morale. No one likes having an official narc on the ship after all
 

Offline El Pip

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • E
  • Posts: 197
  • Thanked: 165 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #340 on: December 15, 2022, 09:14:59 AM »
I think it should have no benefits, but should inflict a penalty to crew morale. No one likes having an official narc on the ship after all
Penalty to morale but an increase to reaction time/fleet training because the political officer will ensure that the crew follow orders quickly, or else.

So the ships end up a bit bigger (need more space for the same deployment time) but can be rushed into combat a bit faster as they need less/no training.

 

Offline mike2R

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • m
  • Posts: 180
  • Thanked: 117 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #341 on: December 15, 2022, 10:04:22 AM »
Perhaps it could give no bonuses, but give the appointed officer an improved chance to level up other skills.  So you'd use it to try and make these officers, who are going to get promoted to high rank, a little more useful when they get there.
 

Offline nanomage

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • n
  • Posts: 6
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #342 on: December 15, 2022, 11:41:14 PM »
Quote from: Andrew link=topic=13020.  msg163372#msg163372 date=1671099865
Just use the current customs components and create a Political office of size 10 tons, thats what the feature is for adding things you want with no game effects
thanks, that actually gets me halfway there! Now if only we could add an officer post to those components, and specify the primary officer skill for appointment
 

Offline papent

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 163
  • Thanked: 45 times
  • Off We Go Into The Wild Blue Yonder
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #343 on: December 16, 2022, 10:44:30 AM »
Funny enough I've suggested something similar back in February & April of last year.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10640.msg158509#msg158509

Quote
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]

2 examples of additional 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."
 
The following users thanked this post: Skip121, nanomage

Offline nanomage

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • n
  • Posts: 6
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #344 on: December 16, 2022, 04:59:02 PM »
Quote from: papent link=topic=13020.  msg163378#msg163378 date=1671209070
Funny enough I've suggested something similar back in February & April of last year. 
hxxp: aurora2.  pentarch.  org/index.  php?topic=10640.  msg158509#msg158509

Quote
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]

2 examples of additional 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. 

yes, this is excellent
can i perhaps add it to my db?
« Last Edit: December 16, 2022, 05:01:18 PM by nanomage »