Jump to content

Kobra_warlords

Members
  • Posts

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Legacy Profile Fields

  • LOCATION
    Hobart, Australia

Kobra_warlords's Achievements

Explorer

Explorer (4/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. It would be very useful to be able to set Nav Points, both for yourself and for your allies. The idea would be that, when giving an order such as Jump, Move or Patrol, which require you to double-click on your destination, you could either do that, or select one of your "bookmarked" co-ordinates (e.g. "Home", "Nav Alpha", "Rally Point", whatever you want to name them) from a list on the left screen. This would save a lot of time and grief when moving units into battle zones, as you'd avoid not only the searching/scrolling/zooming but also the GUI slowdown caused by manually selecting a crowded sector or doing mouseover on a stack of units. Nav Points should be either visible to allies or (ideally), selectable between Private / Allies Only / Public. This would help a lot with co-ordination between allies, but also make it possible to "rendezvous" with neutrals for e.g. trade, or even with enemies for duels - no need to roam around looking for something to shoot at. Of course there should be a limit to the number of nav points -especially public ones-, as otherwise it can get quite messy. One interesting way to do that might be to implement them as a "beacon" unit, unable to move but either deployable by a spaceship or jump-capable, and give each player three or four.
  2. One of the main problems is that, to change the orders of a group of fighters, and make sure they're not each doing their own thing, it's often necessary to Clear All Orders. It's a pain to have to re-enter the whole break/refuel thing every time this happens. Anyway, if all fighters should receive these orders at creation, and they should never need to be edited... why can't they be built in? All the user would need to see is the BREAK% setting - all else would be transparent. Of course, the fighter would also need to be assigned to a home ship, or at least be able to navigate to the nearest one. But like DW and I said, that should probably be enforced anyway (which would also avoid things such as TD swarms). About warheads, downgrade-only would be the better option I think.
  3. Well, in theory the 'weakness' of PTs is that they can be shot down (the longer range the delivery, the higher the chance). I can imagine implementing this would require some non-trivial re-coding... You could give them a relatively high miss rate, even against capital ships - at least as long as they are moving. And a very very narrow arc.
  4. Another update. Small interface improvement, more indexing parameters, better range assessment of weapons. Also included the new damage/ROF values for warheads, and doubled their attack rating (as they ignore shields). You can download it here: http://www.highexplosive.net/galsim/galsim_shiplist_3.5.xls
  5. Intriguing. Sounds promising. And confusing. I think I like it Mark you are one insane person ;D Be sure to tell us more as it progresses. And as usual I'll be glad to spew tons of dirt out of which you might be able to dig a diamond or two, LOL.
  6. Elaborating a little further on the "squadrons as ship properties" issue... Within each dock-capable capital ship's info/order screen there would be a "create squadron" button, which would let you define a Squadron assigned to that ship, by selecting type and number, e.g. "12 TF". There would also be a clickable list of Squadrons and their status. An example for ISD Chimaera: TF Alpha: Attacking (6/12) TF Kappa: Attacking (10/12) TF Iota: Docked (8/12) TB Beta: Rearming (7/12) TI Gamma: Docked (12/12) TD Delta: Destroyed (0/6) SHU Lambda: Docked (6/6) Unassigned Craft (12) For each, the following options would be available: A "Reinforce Squadron" button would attempt to transfer fighters from Unassigned Craft to refill losses. If not enough onboard, it could give the user the choice to call them in from outside. Then, any Unassigned fighters within a certain range (anywhere, if jump-capable) would move to dock with Chimaera. As soon as the fighter had docked, it would be shown as having transferred to the Squadron and received the appropriate name, but it wouldn't physically join the Squadron until the next time they docked to resupply. No mid-flight reinforcements, as it were. A "Reassign Squadron" button would set a new Home craft for the Squadron (provided it had enough space of course). A "Dissolve Squadron" button would move its remaining members to Unassigned Craft. They could later be used to reinforce that ship (or another's) other Squadrons. In the event that the Home ship for a Squadron was destroyed, the user could either try to fit it somewhere else by Reassigning it, or would simply Dissolve the Squadron - the individual fighters would then become Unassigned Craft (with no Home), and could be picked up by any friendly ship(s) and reabsorbed into their own Squadrons. Unassigned Craft floating in space would be considered destroyed after a period of time (e.g. 50 turns).
  7. Yes, I had a "No Target" priority afterwards, that's what I meant. I seem to recall fighters with orders to attack Small Craft then No Target also run off to chase a capship at some point. Could it be that giving a set of priorities to a group of units, then changing the priorities of an individual within that group somehow affects the priorities of the other individuals within that group? Anyway I'll let you know in more detail if this happens again.
  8. Don't worry, I understand very well that certain things can be code hell (I had already thought of most of the examples you mentioned, but didn't want to extend myself too much). I'm happy to just make a wishlist, and anything that can be done out of that is a welcome addition If you think the end result might be worth a big re-working of the code base, I'll also be happy to help with ideas for solving problems that may arise. I will elaborate on some of the points you raise: Flagships. The main "code" reason to implement them at this stage is so that the "fleet" object has an actual position in space, around which the formation can be arranged. As the game expands in the future, though, there will undoubtedly be more reasons to implement them, e.g. Admirals might only give bonuses when aboard a fleet's flagship, there may be morale checks when the flagship (and thus chain of command) is destroyed, etc. From a user-side point of view, they're just a cool thing to have They're also the unit to give orders to if you want the rest of the fleet/formation to follow, so it makes sense they're highlighted somehow. Squadron targeting: I think few of us want to tell TD Alpha 17 to engage X-W Red Four In 99% of cases, with a Class or Category priority it will be more than enough. If you absolutely positively need to change the target of an individual fighter, you just revert the SQDRN to FLT and micromanage away. Squadron reinforcement: This is something I wanted to suggest at a later stage, as it was a bit too detailed for my previous post. *If* Squadrons have a predetermined size (which is probably not necessary, but might be useful in some cases), then there could be a "Reform" function (an order or just a GUI button) which re-arranges units between squadrons in the same fleet. So if you have three 12-ship squadrons with only 11,9 and 7 fighters remaining, the Reform function would rearrange them into 12,12,3 (it would still be a 12-ship squadron, but at 25% strength). Also, if you had fighters of that type in the Unassigned Units group, they could be assigned to fill the gaps - at least if jump-capable, as they could simply get a JUMP order to join their new group. For non-jump-capable fighters it might be harder, as you'd need to put them into a carrier and move them to the general vicinity of the rest of the Squadron before they could join it. It might be as simple as having the Reform function only 'call in' unassigned units if they're either jump capable or within a selected radius of the Squadron leader. Squadron docking: This is probably the trickiest part. Then again, it's a tricky issue already even without the squadrons. One possible (albeit admittedly ugly) solution is to not let the Squadron dock unless there is room for all its fighters. To some extent, it makes sense that a fleet should have enough docking space for all its fighters - unless they're self-delivered jump-capable ones, which would be based off-sector and would have to return there anyway. In fact, I will go out on a limb here and say you shouldn't even be allowed to build Small Craft (basically anything which can run out of fuel) unless you can base them somewhere, even if it is a planetside base. Furthermore, all Small Craft should have a "Home" unit/base they will automatically return to when their fuel runs low (or, optionally, when they run out of warheads). This became essential the instant fuel expenditure was implemented. Another thing that might help, by the way, is a RESUPPLY order, where a unit would go to their Home base, dock and do nothing until it was fully resupplied (or the mother ship had no more supplies available). Thus a Squadron would not leave dock again until all its fighters had docked and resupplied, which would help preserve a formation (in the example I gave earlier, the TIE Bomber squadron would be screwed if, after expending all their ammo, not all of them docked at the same time - as soon as one fell out of formation, it wouldn't resupply at all). <--- while I was typing, Idle_Scholar suggested something along these lines Going one step further yet, even the basic hierarchy of units may need to change for this to work. Small Craft may well be a sub-property of their "Home" ship (or space station, or planet base, or whatever). That would tie in nicely with the reinforcement function discussed earlier, and make it much simpler.
  9. I haven't seen any billion dollar corporation put out a persistent-world strategy/management wargame Don't worry about it if it's too much work - it was just a way of making sure you could do more or less well in a long battle without having to be there every single turn. By the way, this didn't seem to work too well for me. I have two squadrons of TD with strict orders to engage Ferrets and Prowlers only, and I keep finding that they target and follow capital ships halfway across the sector, which is a magnificent way to waste fuel. It doesn't happen all the time, though. I think it may have been triggered by the previous manually-fixed target disappearing (destroyed or otherwise).
  10. Join the club > Frankly I think the best short-term solution to this matter would be to implement a "SCUTTLE" order, as those of us who were going for a swarm strategy are stuck and helpless. In my case (I had one AFRG and 150 TD), even if I had the time to refuel them, it'd still take 50 turns! Now that warheads are working, fighters are taking a back seat to bombers - and bombers have a limited payload which affects them far more than the fuel limit anyway. So I'm unsure it's at all necessary to use such a harsh fuel limit. Perhaps it could wait until there's more automation and we don't have to manually check each fighter and send them to refuel? Having a Space Station / Factory at each of our home sectors, where we can resupply our small craft, would also help immensely. BTW, it would also be helpful to add "tractor beams" to capital ships so they can bring in nearby craft that are out of fuel (I have no idea how tolerant the DOCK order is right now). A range of a few hundred meters should be more than enough.
  11. One thing to note is that right now, the only effect of the ESCORT order (on its own) is to create a formation. So if we implement a fleet-based formation, and allow the DEFEND order to optionally point to a unit instead of only a co-ordinate, maybe we could remove it altogether (or make it attack enemy units that are targeting the escorted ship). But that's just a small aside. My general proposal would be something along these lines: 1) Each FLT should have a "Flagship", that could be set manually, but by default it would be the largest unit in the fleet or failing that the first listed (e.g. Alpha 1). The location of the FLT unit as a whole would then be evaluated to the location of the Flagship. 2) Each FLT should have a "Set Formation" button (either in the FLT screen, e.g. next to "Rename", or in the "Give Orders to Whole Fleet" screen, e.g. next to "Set Priority Targets"). Clicking that button would bring up a Formation display where you could set a general formation type and/or locate each unit manually. In the case of nested fleets, only the flagship of one fleet would be located by its parent fleet's formation - the rest of the units within the subfleet would follow the internal formation of that group around their leader. Finally, "In Dock" should be a valid location within the formation. 3) Each formation should have a "Tight" / "Loose" setting, which determines whether units will move from it to fulfill their mission or not. In a Tight formation, even if a ship is engaging a target it will not move from its assigned position (this is important e.g. for anti-fighter gunships escorting a capital ship - they shouldn't go off chasing fighters and leave their flagship unprotected). In a Loose formation, the units will have a user-assigned radius within which they will do whatever it is they have been ordered to do (attack, look for salvage, etc), and will return to their position as soon as they do not have anything to do (e.g. no valid targets/salvage within radius). It would be important, of course, for the Tight/Loose setting to apply to be settable per-unit. Example of this system at work: FLT Chimaera contains: - ISD Chimaera (Flagship) - CGUN Saber - CGUN Foil - FLT Alpha (36 T/F) Flagship: Alpha 1 - FLT Beta (24 T/B) Flagship: Beta 1 - FLT Gamma (24 T/I) Flagship: Gamma 1 - FLT Rho (12 XG1) Flagship: Rho 1 The Formation of FLT Chimaera is: - CGUN Saber is manually located 600m to port of the Flagship (Tight) - CGUN Foil is manually located 600m to starboard of the Flagship (Tight) - FLT Alpha (in fact, Alpha 1) is manually located 1000m ahead of the Flagship (Loose, 10km radius) - FLT Beta (in fact, Beta 1) is docked inside the Flagship (Loose, 10km radius) - FLT Gamma (in fact, Gamma 1) is docked inside the Flagship (Loose, 5km radius) - FLT Rho (in fact, Rho 1) is manually located 100m ahead of the Flagship (Loose, 10km radius) FLT Alpha is set to a loose (3km) Wedge formation around Alpha 1. FLT Beta is set to a tight Line formation around Beta 1. FLT Gamma is set to a loose (3km) Vee formation around Gamma 1. FLT Rho is set to a loose (500m) formation around Rho 1. The effect of these settings (and adequate Target Priorities) would be: - The CGUNs stay right by the ISD and protect it from fighters and other small craft. - The T/F (Alpha) will run off to engage any group of fighters of bombers, with certain freedom of engagement and pursuit (3km from their leader). - The T/I (Gamma) will be the "last line of defense" and will undock only to attack fighters or bombers that get too close to Chimaera. - The T/B (Beta) will stay in dock until a big target is targeted and at strike distance, and will advance together and release all warheads at the same time, then (if their lasers have been set to "engage no target") they will register as Ide, head back to dock, and as soon as they are rearmed their attack order will be again valid and so they will leave dock again for another attack. - The XG-1 (Rho) will attack any small capships or other small craft, but unlike the T/F they will remain in a more or less compat group. I think that pretty much sums up what I would like to see in terms of formations. On a slightly different level, probably much harder to code, I would like to see a distinction between "Fleet" and "Squadron" groupings, and be able to switch any given group between the two, basically to heavily cut down on micromanagement. A Squadron would be a number of identical units (typically small craft) which no longer can be individually selected or controlled (though they can still target different enemies). When you click on one, the whole set is selected and will list its contents (as e.g. 36 T/F). Then you can give it orders and so on as if it was a single unit - same interface (right now you cannot view the orderlist for a group, which is a real pain). The only visible difference between the command interface for a Squadron compared to that for a single unit is that that you can also assign it a formation as if it were a FLT group. The squadron health status could be evaluated as either the average health of all surviving units or the overall % compared to the defined squadron health (e.g. if half the units were destroyed and all the others 50% damaged, it would evaluate as 50% or 25%, respectively). One interesting result of this order is that you could assign a SQDRN of fighters to Escort/Defend a SQDRN of bombers, which is very important (arguably the main purpose of fighters) yet extremely difficult to do at the present stage. Another big advantage is that, when doing a group-select or seeing the list of units in a sector, you will get this: ISD Chimaera CGUN Saber CGUN Foil SQDRN Alpha (36 TF) SQDRN Beta (24 TB) SQDRN Gamma (24 TI) SQDRN Rho (12 XG1) Instead of: ISD Chimaera CGUN Saber CGUN Foil TF Alpha 1 TF Alpha 2 TF Alpha 3 TF Alpha 4 TF Alpha 5 TF Alpha 6 ...and so on for several pages.
  12. I would instead suggest having a "CONDITION" (or "IF") order. It gets evaluated every cycle and, when true, the orders above it are replaced by the orders below it. An example of the functionality this would add: ATTACK CONDITION (shields below 20%) JUMP but equally JUMP CONDITION (enemy ships nearby) DEFEND CONDITION (no enemy ships nearby) SALVAGE and so on. The type of conditions that could be specified is potentially limitless, but this is the kind of thing that can grow over time.
  13. I've been away since last night, so I have no idea (yet) what my units have killed in that period of time. My losses, however, amount to 69 TDs. EDIT: Woah, I just read the report for the 15 turns or so I missed... what a bloodbath!!!
  14. 200? Isn't that supposed to be represent over 3 minutes of in-game time? I wouldn't want to be the engineer who built them Jokes aside, it looks like a reasonable number for continuous play. However, assuming 45min turns, that's just 15 hours of real-life time - shorter than many people's sleep+work time. That means that, if we send the fighters out before going to sleep (or if they suddenly pick up a target halfway across the galaxy and decide to engage it), they'll be empty and useless by the time we return to the game. Painful, unless there's some way of automating the fighters' resupply process (detect "low fuel" status, disengage, return to assigned/nearest carrier, dock, resupply, launch, resume previous orders). Other than that, I would suggest a variable expenditure based on top speed and perhaps maneuverability and/or shields. Since these seem to be the most 'undercosted' features of fighters (and the reason TDs are so vastly superior to all other fighters), it would make sense to limit their use in this way.

Copyright (c) 1999-2022 by SWRebellion Community - All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters. Star Wars(TM) is a registered trademark of LucasFilm, Ltd. We are not affiliated with LucasFilm or Walt Disney. This is a fan site and online gaming community (non-profit). Powered by Invision Community

×
×
  • Create New...