Author Topic: Suggestions Thread for v2.0  (Read 86622 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline xenoscepter

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1159
  • Thanked: 320 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #600 on: July 31, 2023, 01:18:04 PM »
Very, very minor request: Please bump the starting age for commanders up to 31.

The 2.0 change to have varied starting ages was great mechanically, but I'm still tired of seeing commanders, colonels, presidents and lead scientists in their early 20s. Especially the last one, not every setting has to be a Marvel movie after all.

Preferably let us specify the min / max starting age.
 
The following users thanked this post: Warer

Offline superstrijder15

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • s
  • Posts: 73
  • Thanked: 22 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #601 on: July 31, 2023, 01:33:35 PM »
Add a column in the medal management column denoting whether they have any automatic conditions associated. I manually do some of my medals (I imported them from a fine pack put up somewhere on this forum) but it can be annoying to find the ones which aren't automated.
 

Offline Ush213

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • U
  • Posts: 29
  • Thanked: 22 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #602 on: August 01, 2023, 03:33:27 AM »
Like how you can crtl+click to select multiple systems to move them all on the star map, allow the same to select multiple weapons on a ship, to then move them all to an FC in one go. If that is easy to implement, also allow shift+click to click on a starting and an ending weapon and select all inbetween.

My missile ships have a lot of tubes and often I want to fire a fraction of them. Maybe firing 10/40 now and for the other 30 wait to see if the enemy moves or if there are more somewhere. Maybe the enemy is weaker and only 5 shots are sufficient today. Or I need to divide my fire over exactly 2 targets but my weapons are currently divided over 3 FCs. Because of that I often move them around but this is currently cumbersome.

Steve added an assign x option for 2.2 to cover this. You can find the post in the changes thread if you want to check it out.
 
The following users thanked this post: superstrijder15

Offline Impassive

  • Gold Supporter
  • Chief Petty Officer
  • *****
  • Posts: 37
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #603 on: August 01, 2023, 08:12:48 PM »
Not sure if anyone has already suggested this, could we have a reserve level at colonies for fuel and MSP? this would allow automating to reserve levels for forward colony bases. Prevents the scenario where you have to suddenly work out where all of Earth's fuel went and why it is 30b Km away :)
 

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1344
  • Thanked: 597 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 #604 on: August 01, 2023, 08:50:54 PM »
Not sure if anyone has already suggested this, could we have a reserve level at colonies for fuel and MSP? this would allow automating to reserve levels for forward colony bases. Prevents the scenario where you have to suddenly work out where all of Earth's fuel went and why it is 30b Km away :)

I encountered the same issue, and while waiting for an implementation, I found a simple workaround.

Basically, I create a flow from Earth to a pickup base in orbit through a simple loop of orders and tankers/supply ships. This way, I can set the minimum amount of fuel and MSP to be stored in orbit, creating an emergency vault in case things go out of hand. Please note that I use SM to expand and create such orbital structure, and as I use it as a fix for a game issue, I don't consider it a cheat.

However, the downside is that it could still be vulnerable and potentially blown away. To enhance its protection, you can consider turning it into a ship and adding some armor layers, which would create an extra interesting strategic challenge in ensuring its safety.

It's worth noting that now I have moved a bit away from this and I try to tweak the routes to ensure they never exceed my annual production. It becomes challenging when you add another main HUB to Earth, and distributing nodes while keeping all systems operational becomes a fun and engaging aspect of the game for some.

Offline Impassive

  • Gold Supporter
  • Chief Petty Officer
  • *****
  • Posts: 37
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #605 on: August 01, 2023, 09:58:26 PM »
Not sure if anyone has already suggested this, could we have a reserve level at colonies for fuel and MSP? this would allow automating to reserve levels for forward colony bases. Prevents the scenario where you have to suddenly work out where all of Earth's fuel went and why it is 30b Km away :)

I encountered the same issue, and while waiting for an implementation, I found a simple workaround.

Basically, I create a flow from Earth to a pickup base in orbit through a simple loop of orders and tankers/supply ships. This way, I can set the minimum amount of fuel and MSP to be stored in orbit, creating an emergency vault in case things go out of hand. Please note that I use SM to expand and create such orbital structure, and as I use it as a fix for a game issue, I don't consider it a cheat.

However, the downside is that it could still be vulnerable and potentially blown away. To enhance its protection, you can consider turning it into a ship and adding some armor layers, which would create an extra interesting strategic challenge in ensuring its safety.

It's worth noting that now I have moved a bit away from this and I try to tweak the routes to ensure they never exceed my annual production. It becomes challenging when you add another main HUB to Earth, and distributing nodes while keeping all systems operational becomes a fun and engaging aspect of the game for some.

I guess this is also more viable once the fix goes in to orders to transfer fuel/supplies to the structures so I can automate the resupply process. Still would have to wait till 2.2 though. How do you currently setup your orders with the structure? I originally went for structures because the capacity was fixed but the issues I had with automating it was annoying :)
 

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1344
  • Thanked: 597 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 #606 on: August 01, 2023, 11:00:38 PM »
Not sure if anyone has already suggested this, could we have a reserve level at colonies for fuel and MSP? this would allow automating to reserve levels for forward colony bases. Prevents the scenario where you have to suddenly work out where all of Earth's fuel went and why it is 30b Km away :)

I encountered the same issue, and while waiting for an implementation, I found a simple workaround.

Basically, I create a flow from Earth to a pickup base in orbit through a simple loop of orders and tankers/supply ships. This way, I can set the minimum amount of fuel and MSP to be stored in orbit, creating an emergency vault in case things go out of hand. Please note that I use SM to expand and create such orbital structure, and as I use it as a fix for a game issue, I don't consider it a cheat.

However, the downside is that it could still be vulnerable and potentially blown away. To enhance its protection, you can consider turning it into a ship and adding some armor layers, which would create an extra interesting strategic challenge in ensuring its safety.

It's worth noting that now I have moved a bit away from this and I try to tweak the routes to ensure they never exceed my annual production. It becomes challenging when you add another main HUB to Earth, and distributing nodes while keeping all systems operational becomes a fun and engaging aspect of the game for some.

I guess this is also more viable once the fix goes in to orders to transfer fuel/supplies to the structures so I can automate the resupply process. Still would have to wait till 2.2 though. How do you currently setup your orders with the structure? I originally went for structures because the capacity was fixed but the issues I had with automating it was annoying :)

Just refuel and resupply from the "ship" and loop it with a delay at the destination. Your problem is probably the same as mine where to "unload" from ship to ship it's not straightforward, which is why I have highlighted "I create a flow from Earth to a pickup base in orbit through a simple loop of orders and tankers/supply ships". Basically, you have (Assuming Alphan Centauri as the new HUB)

  • A Earth Colony - Earth Structure = which is route 1
  • B Earth Structure - Alpha Centauri Colony = which is route 2
  • C Alpha Centauri Colony - Alpha Centauri Structure = which is route 3

Ideally, you may use the structures as main nodes for all intra-system commercial operations.

With this system, you can have smaller liners doing the Colony Structure route only, or a bigger ship could do the whole. So if you pick up Fuel from Earth and load 10,000,000 litres, drop it at the Station and then pick it up again to drop it off at Alpha Centauri, assuming you do not have enough fuel and hit the reserve level, the ship will load only what is effectively available. You will still encounter the random bottleneck of ships going with just the bare minimum amount of fuel to do the round trip, which is why, as I said, recently I have been trying to understand what my actual intake per year of fuel and MSP actually is, prior committing to any loop of transfers.

The last time I used this method, I had a big dedicated ship to transport both Fuel and Supplies. I found out that capacity is more pressing than time, so it's not a fast-paced cargo. Since the arrival of Riders you also include a commercial hangar for a couple of fighters in case of random encounters, however, it will make automation obsolete if you are "forced" to use them to defend your cargo.
 
The following users thanked this post: Impassive

Offline papent

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 163
  • Thanked: 45 times
  • Off We Go Into The Wild Blue Yonder
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #607 on: August 03, 2023, 03:21:17 PM »
Very, very minor request: Please bump the starting age for commanders up to 31.

The 2.0 change to have varied starting ages was great mechanically, but I'm still tired of seeing commanders, colonels, presidents and lead scientists in their early 20s. Especially the last one, not every setting has to be a Marvel movie after all.

Would prefer to be able set custom starting ages overall or per category. My genetically enhanced crabmen may start careers at 7 Earth years old.

I personally would prefer for administrator and scientist to be older than the warfighters.
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 QuakeIV

  • Registered
  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 759
  • Thanked: 168 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #608 on: August 03, 2023, 11:06:55 PM »
For now it might be better to just bump it up to 31 (easy) and then later it may become a racial thing
 

Offline ArcWolf

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • A
  • Posts: 160
  • Thanked: 80 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #609 on: August 04, 2023, 11:05:55 AM »
If there is a change to starting age i would rather it be adjustable. I always start with my lowest ranks as Captain (army) and Lieutenant (Navy), Ranks that are reachable by 25 today and in a sci-fi setting could be younger.
 
The following users thanked this post: papent, Agraelgrimm

Offline superstrijder15

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • s
  • Posts: 73
  • Thanked: 22 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #610 on: August 05, 2023, 10:34:20 AM »
Add a toggle to each colony, similar to the one for what civilian colonist ships do, for what to do with minerals on a planet. Options: Import, nothing, export. Freighters should then try to pick up minerals once there is a full hold of minerals on a colony.
Since this is much easier than manually setting up this sort of thing, perhaps have it require something on the colony, eg. a cargo shuttle station.
 
The following users thanked this post: Skip121

Offline nakorkren

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • n
  • Posts: 221
  • Thanked: 194 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #611 on: August 06, 2023, 10:36:52 PM »
Add a toggle to each colony, similar to the one for what civilian colonist ships do, for what to do with minerals on a planet. Options: Import, nothing, export. Freighters should then try to pick up minerals once there is a full hold of minerals on a colony.
Since this is much easier than manually setting up this sort of thing, perhaps have it require something on the colony, eg. a cargo shuttle station.

It would need to be on a per-mineral-type basis, and you'd still want to set a target (vs a reserve as currently). For example, for Duranium you could set "Export" and a target of 0, meaning you'd export everything you mined, or a target of 2000, meaning you'd export everything over 2000 tons (still allowing the same functionality as a reserve level). Alternately you could now set "Import" and a target of 5000, so civilian haulers would bring Duranium from other worlds with an excess until you reached 5000. This would be a WONDERFUL use of civilian haulers, and a big quality of life improvement for the player. It would also generate even more soft underbelly of the economy for spoilers to prey on, which in my mind is a good thing.
 
The following users thanked this post: papent, Tavik Toth, Skip121

Online Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2806
  • Thanked: 1068 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #612 on: August 07, 2023, 10:45:06 PM »
You'd only need target for import though as export could and should use Reserve Levels. Meaning that for UI purposes, it's probably best to use the existing civilian contract window instead of the mineral window, especially since the latter is already quite cluttered but the former is not. Perhaps a letter I and E could appear on the mineral window if a contract for Import/Export has been assigned so that player can see the status of each mineral at a glance.
 
The following users thanked this post: Scandinavian, nakorkren

Offline superstrijder15

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • s
  • Posts: 73
  • Thanked: 22 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #613 on: August 09, 2023, 09:27:18 AM »
A few changes to decrease the amount of changes of dominant terrain that planets have.
My current race homeworld has a pretty high eccentricity (0.3, periapsis of 164m, apoapsis of 298m) and I get this set of updates over a 1.6 year long year:
Off-Topic: show
June 20: To Archipelago
October 18: To Barren
Y2:
January 16: To Jungle
April 30: To Archipelago
June 19: To Temperate Forest
July 14: To Taiga
December 6: To Temperate Forest
Y3:
March 7: To Archipelago
June 5: To Barren


So I was trying to think of some rules to decrease this chance. Here are some ideas:
- Hydro > 95%: Always Archipelago (change all other terrains to have 95% as the max hydro) (potentially break it up based on ox% and/or temperature and/or tectonic into XX Archipelago)
- If you have the option for one of the new, larger temperature variance, biomes, take it (this prevents flip-flopping between eg. Desert and Cold Desert, and issue I've had in a previous game)
- If a terrain is viable for less than 10% of the time at the peri- or apoapsis of the orbit, don't change to it (to prevent a planet from going Barren each closest approach for a short time)

 

Offline Pury

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 52
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: Suggestions Thread for v2.0
« Reply #614 on: August 09, 2023, 03:27:07 PM »
I would propose a diffrent solution. A planet dominant terrain can be calculated once a year, taking into account an average of that year. (for example one sample every 30 days) This way you both solve the constant change of terrain on some planets, and make terraformation (both natural and artificial) a slower, more "accurate" process.



A few changes to decrease the amount of changes of dominant terrain that planets have.
My current race homeworld has a pretty high eccentricity (0.3, periapsis of 164m, apoapsis of 298m) and I get this set of updates over a 1.6 year long year:
Off-Topic: show
June 20: To Archipelago
October 18: To Barren
Y2:
January 16: To Jungle
April 30: To Archipelago
June 19: To Temperate Forest
July 14: To Taiga
December 6: To Temperate Forest
Y3:
March 7: To Archipelago
June 5: To Barren


So I was trying to think of some rules to decrease this chance. Here are some ideas:
- Hydro > 95%: Always Archipelago (change all other terrains to have 95% as the max hydro) (potentially break it up based on ox% and/or temperature and/or tectonic into XX Archipelago)
- If you have the option for one of the new, larger temperature variance, biomes, take it (this prevents flip-flopping between eg. Desert and Cold Desert, and issue I've had in a previous game)
- If a terrain is viable for less than 10% of the time at the peri- or apoapsis of the orbit, don't change to it (to prevent a planet from going Barren each closest approach for a short time)
 
The following users thanked this post: superstrijder15