Suggestions Thread for v2.4.0

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

PLEASE. Let us resize the windows or at least change the UI size and font size. moving the window around to access buttons is getting painful...

Re-arranging window controls to handle different UI or font sizes would be a huge amount of work, plus it would not benefit my own play at all. Given this is a free game and I have limited free time, I usually focus on things that will either improve my own enjoyment of the game, or are relatively quick to implement.

Besides, the UI already supports 1440x900, so I am squeezing things into smaller windows than I would prefer. My own laptop is 2560x1600 and my desktop monitors are (I think) 3440 x 1440. Aurora just isn't designed to be played on a small screen. You can probably get a cheap external monitor with a higher resolution.

[boolybooly]

PLEASE. Let us resize the windows or at least change the UI size and font size. moving the window around to access buttons is getting painful...

Hi Mint Keyphase. I use Windows 10 display scaling option to get the bigger interface.

and you can make bat buttons to quickly change the scaling, see link
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13306.msg165664#msg165664

[Aloriel]

While you are tinkering with standing orders, could you perhaps add two additional conditionals on <55% and <60% fuel?

Quite often, I send out a survey ship with the conditional to return home on 50% fuel. However, it doesn't reach Earth because Earth is in a further alignment than where it left. With 55% and/or 60%, this shouldn't happen any more. 55% is probably sufficient for Earth, but 60% might be required for a home base that has a larger orbit.

[boolybooly]

While you are tinkering with standing orders, could you perhaps add two additional conditionals on <55% and <60% fuel?

Quite often, I send out a survey ship with the conditional to return home on 50% fuel. However, it doesn't reach Earth because Earth is in a further alignment than where it left. With 55% and/or 60%, this shouldn't happen any more. 55% is probably sufficient for Earth, but 60% might be required for a home base that has a larger orbit.

Rather than have multiple lines, what about a way to edit the condition value in the same way you can set fleet speed. Just thinking out loud.

[vesisko]

Hi.
It would be great to have a possibility to hide civilian fleets on the main screen.
I hope it is the right place to post the suggestion for the 2.6.0 update.

[skoormit]

Hi.
It would be great to have a possibility to hide civilian fleets on the main screen.
I hope it is the right place to post the suggestion for the 2.6.0 update.

Left side of main map, select Contacts tab.
Untick the "Civilians" checkbox.

[xenoscepter]

So Active Terminal Guidance.

Kind of... boring, honestly. And mostly useless.

Proposal:

 - Make the ATG bonus a flat addition. So a 90% hit, if given a 10% ATG, would be 100%. Simple enough, but this change would render ECCM pointless. So to counter that, ECM should nullify ATG bonus unless an ECCM is present. However, this would be weird, since it could create a novel use for ECCM that breaks existing E-WAR mechanics. So I propose the interaction thusly.

The malus for ECM is applied to ATG after ECCM is applied. So a 10% ECCM with a 20% ATG would have 20% ATG if the Enemy ECM was only 10%, but no ATG bonus is the enemy ECM was 11% or better.

Desired results:

 - I think this proposal would make ATG a more interesting option overall and expand the number of viable missile designs. It would enable Gundam-style "funnels" (Or Orbit Cannon Launchers for the Armored Core fans out there). It would add utility to an otherwise marginally useful if not outright useless option, which has already been implemented. It would likewise add some additional flavor / purpose to large missiles, although these are already in a pretty good place already IMO. I do not think large missiles are in enough of a good place for these ATG changes to push them over the edge to OPness though.

 - It would also enable the use of slow missiles, opening up a slew of other options via engine choices which at the moment, don't really have any viable variety outside of "go fast as frakk". Slow missiles, for those who will inevitably say "but slow missiles will get shot down!", would need to find ways around the inherent disadvantages. Perhaps being cheap and small, thus easier to mass and fire en masse. Or high ECM, decoys, etc. I am convinced there are enough penaids that slow missile would not be so hopelessly outmatched by enemy PD to the point of uselessness.

[nuclearslurpee]

So Active Terminal Guidance.

Kind of... boring, honestly. And mostly useless.

I'm sorry, what? 

Once you have put a few tech levels into it, ATG is quite effective especially for larger missiles where it gives a better return for the MSP in terms of accuracy boost compared to more engine mass. This isn't a simple optimum, either, since speed is still needed to avoid point defense and there are trade-offs against other component types as well (e.g., does expected damage increase more with the same MSP of ATG or of warhead?).

It is certainly not useless. I would argue that it is not boring either, but I acknowledge that this may be down to personal taste.

[vesisko]

Hi.
"Ordnance and missiles" tab of "Class design" window has no clear information about class capacity. I suggest to add on "fighter" and "missile" areas labels with total and used capacities. F.e. "Fighters N/A" and "Missiles 60/391".

[Kaiser]

I like the random wrecks add-on, also I would to suggest once again to add a random chance to discover intact (or most of the time damaged) abandoned alien ships and stations that can be boarded on and taken control of.

Eventually the challenge for the player would be to repair them especially if they are in some far distant system.

This will add some variety to the player fleet and occasionally speed up the process of colonization of a system (if you discover a station for example).

The same as the random wrecks, these may attract others eyes in the system.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Hi.
"Ordnance and missiles" tab of "Class design" window has no clear information about class capacity. I suggest to add on "fighter" and "missile" areas labels with total and used capacities. F.e. "Fighters N/A" and "Missiles 60/391".

This is already in the changes list for v2.6
Added capacity remaining to the parasite, ordnance and troop lists on the Ordnance & Fighters tab of the Class Design window.

https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13463.msg168338#msg168338

[Ush213]

With all the changes to 2.6 is it possible to create/compile a single 2.6 exe application/download without the need for patching. Just to make it easier for the expected new players that will join.

[alex_brunius]

(From change discussion but this belongs in Suggestions more)

Wrecks will usually appear in systems with planets. They may be in orbit and, if so, they are more likely to appear in orbit of planets with better environments.

I like the idea of a 'fallen race'. I could probably generate the race normally, then wipe it out, then pass a random amount of historical time to reduce what remains, including radiation. Substantial addition though, so might not be soon.

Following along the lines of "simulated historical time" to generate a more plausible universe (some of them might be even more substational to add though). Here is some more brainstorming for potential storylines.

1.) Subjugated Races.
2-4 Races are generated instead on the same territory. One "Master" which get the territory, military and buildpoint might of all combined, with the other races being enslaved/subjugated and occupied by the "Master" race. Large subjugated populations in Forced Mines/Factories and so on.

2.) Eternal enemies.
Two races bordering eachother that are in perpetual war. By attacking one you get a massive bonus to the others relation, befriending one make the other an automatic enemy. Or you can try and stay neutral and bring out the popcorn to watch the fireworks.

3.) Symbiotic Races.
2-3 Races are generated on the same territory. They are hardcoded max relationship with eachother and even if they might persue somewhat different agendas they have evolved to be reliant on eachother. Possible extra interesting with situations where one handle all groundforces and the other all space forces or some kind of other combinations. Perhaps one build only warships and the other all commercial ships? Do they need to share minerals, wealth and other resources too?

4.) [Commercial Ship Module] Focus Race.
For some reason (your story can decide why) their goal is to build absurd amounts of a specific type of Commercial Ship. Could be either Fuel harvesters (Sorium Barons), Salvagers (Scrapyard masters), Terraformers (Gaia/Eden race) or so on. Bonus if your able to buy/rent these at affordable costs if you develop good relations with them.

5.) Trading Race.
Like above but they have some massive bonus to Civilian shipping generation. Ferengi? Do I need to say more?

[SpaceMarine]

Simple Suggestion: Change the default starting date to 2030 (or any approapriate new start date)

It is currently according to the gregorian calender the year 2025 (in real life)

Aurora 4x has always had a date that is in the future to start with, to maintain continuity this must be rectified as aurora now starts in the modern day on default start. I am sure everyone agrees.

[Ush213]

Simple Suggestion: Change the default starting date to 2030 (or any approapriate new start date)

It is currently according to the gregorian calender the year 2025 (in real life)

Aurora 4x has always had a date that is in the future to start with, to maintain continuity this must be rectified as aurora now starts in the modern day on default start. I am sure everyone agrees.

I alway just set mine to 2100 because its easier to see how many years iv been playing. I do this mostly because i cant count. ha