Next patch requests

[Crazy_Dog]

ok, my 2 cents.

independent ministers to ships / units.
capability to select all planets / ships in they respective menu and change all to minister controled on / off
possibility to raise the number of ships / units in the game (host or single player)
send order to all ships of class /model x to be upgraded to class / model y
AI must have a history of relations and evolve based in that, because is stupid to offer a treaty one turn and declare war next.
ships with specific cargo capability (fighters / mines / sat) right now can load other type of cargo (must be fixed).
if a ship have a destination and not enough supplies to go, select the nearest supply depot, refuel and stay on course.

[ 04 May 2002: Message edited by: Crazy_Dog ]</p>

[Phoenix-D]

"ships with specific cargo capability (fighters / mines / sat) right now can load other type of cargo (must be fixed)."

Vote to leave that alone.

Things I'd like to see:
-add descriptions in the components.txt for to-hit modifiers! Too many people still underestimate the wave-motion gun because you can't tell it has a + to hit unless you take it into combat and compare or look in the text file.

PHoenix-D

[Taz-in-Space]

I just can't resist the urge to jump in on this!!
(Taz's have notoriously low temptation thresholds)

I'd like to see:
COMPONENTS that can store resources
COMPONENTS that can do research/intel functions
TRANSPORTERS that can steal cargo!

[Instar]

"ships with specific cargo capability (fighters / mines / sat) right now can load other type of cargo (must be fixed)."
Why not? space is space
In the real world, during a recent operation, they removed all the fighters off a Navy carrier and loaded it with choppers and made it a huge chopper carrier, because they were more needed than fighters. Part of a carrier's usefullness is its flexibility, so lets not restrict it overly

[Captain Kwok]

I was thinking of modding fighter bays to be able to launch both fighters and drones...instead of having two separate launch bays...

[Nodachi]

The other new patch thread isn't really covering requests, so here goes... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Restricted traits in the racial traits file do not work.
Weapon mounts tied to a certain tech.
Weapon mounts able to give an ability.
Weapon mounts can affect range and damage, why not rate of fire?
I'd love to see restricted techs; because you have tech a you can't have tech b.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are plenty of others that y'all can think of. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Nodachi

[Jourin]

I still DESPERATELY want drones to have a "move to" capability. PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE WITH SUGAR ON TOP!

[Q]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jourin:
I still DESPERATELY want drones to have a "move to" capability. PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE WITH SUGAR ON TOP!<hr></blockquote>

Me too!!!!

[Atrocities]

1. Wheel Mouse support
2. Ability to add 1 build job to all empty construction ques at one time. Kind of a "Build X facility or ship in all empty Ques" button.
3. Add Quatum Reactor to Tech that can be excluded from the game during game set up.
5. FIX THE FIGHTER BUG! The error that crashes the game when too many fighters/mines/ships/other are used in combat.

[Gandalph]

I'd like to be able to see colonizable/rock or gas or ice in the planets window.

In the construction queue window, an upgrade facility type would be nice, so you could upgrade all mineral facilities without upgrading everything.

Lastly, I agree with Crazy_Dog that independant ministers for ship and unit construction would be great.

[capnq]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> 2. Ability to add 1 build job to all empty construction ques at one time. Kind of a "Build X facility or ship in all empty Ques" button.

In the construction queue window, an upgrade facility type would be nice, so you could upgrade all mineral facilities without upgrading everything. <hr></blockquote>Both of these already can be done; shift-click the queues and press Multi-Add. If facilities upgrades are available, there will be an Upgrades button visible. You will have to check (F5) Colonies/Facilities to see where the facilities you want to upgrade are; Multi-Add only shows items that can be added to every selected queue.

I'd like to see:

1) the System - Damage ability implemented.

2) Quick Start and New Game default to the same settings as the Last game you set up.

3) Improve the combat pathfinding routines.

[ 05 May 2002: Message edited by: capnq ]

[ 05 May 2002: Message edited by: capnq ]</p>

[Derek]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Atrocities:
1. Wheel Mouse support
<hr></blockquote>

This one is really important, to me, at least. It is quite jarring to go from normal Win X enviroment, to the SEIV enviroment of no-wheel-mouse; honestly, it shouldn't be that hard of a fix.

Derek

[Atrocities]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> Both of these already can be done; shift-click the queues and press Multi-Add <hr></blockquote>


My request can not be done yet. You misunderstood what I was trying to say.

You have 100 planets. Of these 100 planets 75 have empty ques. You want to build Troops on each of these planets. You click a "ADD TO ALL EMPTY QUES" button then pick what it is you want. Then click "OK" and every one of the 75 ques is then filled with what it was you chose to have them build.

[mac5732]

One of the things I would like to see, (I don't know how everyone else feels) in regards to jammers.

If a ship has a jammer and you clik on it you are not allowed to see what it has, ok, However,

In tactical combat, you can still clik on any enemy ship and see its contents whether they have a jammer or not.
I would like to see, if a ship has a jammer, even in tactical combat, nothing is revealed until the jammer unit is destroyed at which point, everything would be open to view.

Just some ideas mac

[Derek]

Another thing I would like to see is the memory space allocated for movement points in creased from where it is. Right now, it can only handle numbers up to 255; it gives a range check error with anything larger.

Why is this important?

Well, if you are implementing both quasi Newtonian propulsion and large ships, and you set the 'engines per move' to something high, and when creating a ship you want it to be large, but also fast, you have to put a large amount of engines, creating a large amount of movement points, in order to make sure the ship has enough propulsion. Thus, you run into range check errors.

Derek

[Jmenschenfresser]

1) Research/intel/spaceport ability for components. Just fixed so it works...no extra components need be added. (And Taz's other two ideas.)

2) Restricted tech would be a nice addition.

3) Would like to see a colonization restriction to certain size planets. I.E. Colonization component A can only colonize tiny planets. Would be nice if this could also be expanded to differentiate between planets and moons, but need not be.

[capnq]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> My request can not be done yet. <hr></blockquote>Yes, it can; it "just" takes a lot more clicks than you want to do. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Atrocities]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>2) Restricted tech would be a nice addition. <hr></blockquote>

This can be done now in the game set up. Look (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newuploads/1020741250.bmp)

[Phoenix-D]

I doubt that's what he meant. More likely along the lines of "if you take tech A you can't take B" and racial traits that are the same way (there are entries in the racialtraits file for this, they just don't DO anything)

Phoenix-D

[Phoenix-D]

Here's a screwball request:

Add more useless abilities, and keep the ones that currently don't work.

Why? These things are GREAT for getting the AI to do what you want without actually changing components. Add the "palace" ability to a new engine type and suddenly you can call for *just that engine type* (and/or anything else that has that ability.. hmm). Add a variety of useless abilities and the AI can be coerced into adding components it wouldn't normally touch.

Phoenix-D

[Rollo]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
Here's a screwball request:

Add more useless abilities, and keep the ones that currently don't work.

Why? These things are GREAT for getting the AI to do what you want without actually changing components. Add the "palace" ability to a new engine type and suddenly you can call for *just that engine type* (and/or anything else that has that ability.. hmm). Add a variety of useless abilities and the AI can be coerced into adding components it wouldn't normally touch.

Phoenix-D<hr></blockquote>

What would be even better is give modders the possibility to create their own "useless" abilities.

Rollo

[Dogberry]

It would be nice in the tactical combat mode if the satellites were evenly distributed around the four corners of the warp point or planet "picture"... rather like the traditional symbol for a castle .. a square with a tower at each of the four corners. In this way you would have 360 degree coverage, instead of the 120 or so you get now.

This would help the AI & occasionally the human player.

Dog

[Gimboid]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jmenschenfresser:
3) Would like to see a colonization restriction to certain size planets. I.E. Colonization component A can only colonize tiny planets. Would be nice if this could also be expanded to differentiate between planets and moons, but need not be.<hr></blockquote>

I love this idea!

Would add a whole new dimension to exploring and colonisation especially in mid-game when empires all started getting max planet sized colony techs...

[dogscoff]

- Larger and/ or wrappable combat map.

- Alter the route- finding code so that ships and fleets carrying out "move to" orders will look for a friendly resupply depot in their current system, and check to see if it can be included in their flight-path without adding extra time to their journey. If it can, the ship/ fleet should automatically resupply and continue their journey.

I'm sick of seeing half-supplied fleets sail within one square of a resupply depot when they could have easily resupplied without using any extra movement points.

I should think this feature would also improve the AI's performance slightly, since it would reduce the chance of AIs sending under-supplied ships into battle. This is especially important since the Last patch, which (rightly, imho) took all weapons fire away from zero-supply ships.

[oleg]

- give at least some abilities to new systems. It is quite boring to have "organic infestation" or "green giant" with nothing, nill, ziltch. Proportion's systemtypes.txt is a good start, IMHO.

[MKSheppard]

Add a new weapons mount enhancement modification:

QUICKFIRE=1

If it's 1, then the weapon only fires once
a turn, if it's more than 1, the weapon fires
that number each turn, allowing us to simulate
small, fast firing close in CIWS systems, etc.

[LGM]

I would like to see units or components that foil Intelligence operations and the elimination of Counter Intelligence or at least make it unnessary except as an extra defense. Thus races can develop defense against Intelligence without putting much effort into Intelligence against other race.

Allow Troops to have a chance stop intelligence against a planet. Chance should never go to zero, more troops should be a diminishing return.

Allow Security Stations and Boarding Parties to inhibit intelligence operations against a ship. I think that to use intelligence against a ship, you have to have some way to establish a contact against that ship when it is visiting a planet. (Hard to infilitrate a ship when it stays away from a port).

Make an advanced trait that makes a race absolutely loyal (immune to many intelligence operations).

All operations must target a planet or a ship to gain information.

Intelligence Operations should take a minimum amount of time. It does not matter how many agents you have, infilitrating an enemy culture does not happen in one month. In fact the longer you take, the more effective it is, but also the great chance you will be caught (time is a double edged sword).

Foiled Intelligence operations should penalize further operations in the near future (discovery of captured agents contacts).

Right now the current Intelligence system is a pure points on points system. Like ships looking for weakness in enemy fleets, Intelligence should require finding weakness in the enemies security. Find planets with no troops or ships with no security component.

Perhaps instead of picking targets, intelligence should always be opportunistic. Allow instead of 'any Planet', weakest planet. Operations against ships would be deferred until one turn after they leave a friendly planet.

Another thing to consider, instead of points have units for conducting intelligence operations. These units would have concealed movement (not cloaked) to their targets. The longer they stay at an enemy planet, the more ability they have. Each turn, troops would have a chance to detect them. If their orders are to infilitrate an enemy ship that comes to the planet, they have a chance to work on establishing a mole in the crew to conduct some sort of damage, sieze control, etc.

I would like to see Intelligence be an important consideration, but not an overpowering aspect in the game. I dislike using intelligence in games because you can totally wipe someone out using it: Pop Posion on colonies, Revolts, Steal Minerals. It is much faster to steal all of a smaller empires minerals than it is to destroy all of their ships and planets.

You should not be able to win a war primarily based on Intelligence, but it should be a factor to help your military forces have some sort of edge and cause some economic disruption.

[Gandalph]

It would be nice if we could get the AI to build defensive capabilities on a newly colonized planet before building facilities just as we human players do. If the newly colonized planet is breathable/huge, it can be 30+ turns before defenses go up, making it an easy target to capture/destroy.

[Gozra]

I just played a turn against an AI. They had 112 troops on the planet. My first ground attack killed them down to 82. when the second wave went in they again had 112 troops. The third wave hit the planet head and again they had 112 troops. I lost over 250 troops in 3 attacks. (Then the fleet glassed the planet.) Is this a glitch or intentional?

[Gandalph]

It would also be nice if the AI would recognize what a supply ship was and use it appropriately. Same goes with a repair ship, and a flak ship.

It would also be nice if the vehicle construction file and unit construction file actually worked. The AI only sometimes builds via name, mostly it builds by type, which makes it hard to give the AI a well rounded fleet. I mean, it was a great idea to put the name ability into the file, but if the AI doesn't use, what's the point?

[Phoenix-D]

"Is this a glitch or intentional?"

I think that's intentional. Those weren't troops, those were *militia*. Defenders generated on every colony, based on the colony's population. Normal troops, you kill them and they stay dead. Militia only stays dead as long as some of your troops survive (i.e. stalemate) otherwise it regenerates; I assume that's the militia recruiting more soliders.

Phoenix-D

[Q]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gandalph:
It would be nice if we could get the AI to build defensive capabilities on a newly colonized planet before building facilities just as we human players do. If the newly colonized planet is breathable/huge, it can be 30+ turns before defenses go up, making it an easy target to capture/destroy.<hr></blockquote>

That would be very good. Just allow the inclusion of units in the planet construction file so you could build some weapon platforms first before building facilities.
Another small but IMHO very valuable addition would be the race specific anger modifier (I made this suggestion before but until now withour effect):
You specify in the politics file something like this

Number of race specific modifiers : 2
Race specific modifier race 1 : Terran
Race specific modifier amount 1 : 20
Race specific modifier race 2 : Phong
Race specific modifier amount 2 : -20

The race with this politic file would react very hostile to the Terrans but be very friendly against the Phongs. You could specify as many races as you want. This would prevent the alliance of "mortal enemies" like Eee and Drushoka that we see now. It would also allow you to reduce conflicts between AI's in a solo human player game without making them all declare war on you when you select the "team player mode".

And another old suggestion: starting tech levels (as in SE III).

[ 08 May 2002: Message edited by: Q ]</p>

[Crazy_Dog]

I like the love / hate relations file idea.
That way is possible to make better mods like star trek / star wars.

[MKSheppard]

You know how you can re-name ships?

Well, add a drop-down dialog box for the
re-naming box, so that instead of having
to remember a ship name, or have a print
out next to you, you can just rename a ship
by going down the list of design names...

Do it like so...

http://cgibin.starpower.net/ryanwolf/suggestion.jpg

[ 08 May 2002: Message edited by: MKSheppard ]

[ 08 May 2002: Message edited by: MKSheppard ]</p>

[Captain Kwok]

MKShep:

I really like that idea! I can't tell you how many times when I've gone to name a ship and can't remember which names have been used nor come up with a new one...

[Val]

I think racial anger modifiers would be great - something that would allow you to represent long standing hatred between races!!

Would also be nice if you could set anger modifiers for use of certain weapons or actions - so you can set an AI to react negatively to a race that uses a planet killer.

One thing I would love to see is more abilities for Warp Points (and other stellar objects) - top on the list are :
1) Delayed transit Warp Points - Set a time delay for how many turns before the ships get through, or alternately set a movement cost to use the Warp Point so you can tell a ship to jump and it will stay 'in queue' until it pays the full move cost.
2) Warp Points with auto close time delays - These warp points will automatically close after a set number of turns. This would better allow the simulation of 'warping' through space (imho).

Would also be cool if they get the restrict tech to ship type thing working.

[dmm]

OK, maybe these aren't appropriate for a patch, but I can ask.
1) Scenario Editor
2) Add genetic engineering area (to biology tech tree?), which would allow you to colonize other atmospheres. Obviously, each race would start with one of these techs for free. Would help the AI a lot, since it is too stupid to shift captured pop around.
3) I like the idea of restricting colony modules to a specific planet size, but I only like it if you could research the other planet sizes. So a Gas race might start off with only Huge and Large techs, but could research the other sizes.
4) Allow players to use racial points to buy techs at setup. At least some techs. For example, you could have a space-rats race that is stupid and unlovable but that breeds like ... well, like rats, and that can colonize both rock and ice or both O2 and CH4 atmospheres. Another example: a cowardly psychic race, with lousy offense and defense, but it starts with mind-control tech (but no prelims to it).
5) Anything that will help no-planet races/monsters come into being.
6) Allow the option, in Single Player or HotSeat, of manually entering combat results. The player(s) could derive the combat results in any fashion of his/their choosing: dice, RTS, arm-wrestling, StarFleet Battles, etc.

In a nutshell: Add variety wherever possible!

[Krakenup]

1) Improved ministers.
2) Improved ministers.
3) Improved ministers.
4) A popup dialog box for colony ships asking "Do you want to leave the planet without loading population?"
5) Hard code the QNP system. The current system makes no sense. The easiest/best way would be to make the engine size, cost, supply storage, and supply usage proportional to the hull size. The same could be done with the bridge, life support, and crew quarters. There would be reductions for colony ships and transports, but their combat speed would be way down.
6) Add a "Maintain current formation" option to combat so that if the leader moves forward 2, everybody moves forward 2, and if the leader moves back 2, everybody moves back 2 instead of trying to wheel the entire formation around.
7) Make mines and minesweeping less than 100 percent effective. There should be a chance that a mine will miss and that minesweeping will fail.

[Growltigga]

a miraculous patch that somehow keeps the strategic and design playability of SEIVG but then jumps to a 'Homeworld-esque' visual extravaganza on the tactical side

yeah yeah I know - no chance but I keep on smoking this shoe polish and hoping!

[Suicide Junkie]

5) Hard code the QNP system. The current system makes no sense. The easiest/best way would be to make the engine size, cost, supply storage, and supply usage proportional to the hull size. The same could be done with the bridge, life support, and crew quarters. There would be reductions for colony ships and transports, but their combat speed would be way down.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Ahhh! No!!!
Even though I love QNP, and am pretty much using it exclusively, it SHOULD NOT be hardcoded.

Adding it to the default data files is fine, but for goodness sake don't hardcode things like that!

[damien]

I used to play a pretty cool Star Wars derived strategic game. I cant remember what it was called, but it introduced characters with different abilities into play, and these characters (with help from special forces and spies and such) were the ones who performed intelligence activities.

Id like to see every ship have a captain, every fleet have an admiral, every world or system have a govenor or a general, and so on and so forth. If your ships have master computers then those would be AIs; treated as characters like any other.

You could infiltrate these characters onto other worlds to make contact with rebels or steal technologies or whatever.

I dont think you should be able to perform espionage on an empire you have no contact with. Intelligence is something like trade, and linked to trade - its potential grows with contact and time.

[Arbitrary Aardvark]

I would like to see an ability to organize fighters into swarms with a little more precision than is current. I like to use fighters as system defense squadrons, but the game organizes all 100 or so fighters into a single unit on the combat map.

[Suicide Junkie]

I dont think you should be able to perform espionage on an empire you have no contact with.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Well, you can't. Though, you may be using a different definition of contact.

An infiltration factor would be nice, though... some sort of infiltration project would increase the chance of success of your later projects. There would have to be a small decrease over time, and you would lose larger amounts when attacking with a project (since the people involved expose themselves doing it).

When you are infiltrating operatives, there should be a multiplier based on your current relations.
Someone you're at war with would be very hard to add operatives to, while partnership allies would be easy to infiltrate.

[dmm]

Just thought of another one:
Separate strategic and tactical movement points. So you would have strategic engines for moving within/between systems and tactical engines for moving in battles. For many ships, you would balance these engines and things would be as they are now. But you could make special-purpose ships with minimal tactical movement (e.g., minesweeper, pop transport, medical, construction, supply, repair, explore, colonize) and could use the extra space either for more stuff or for more strategic engines. You could also do the opposite -- make vessels with max tactical movement and little or no strategic movement (e.g., fighter, planetary defender, combat drone). You could even have things like allowing sats and bases to have 1 combat MP but no strategic MP, which usually would help with planetary defense.

Would also be cool to have a special component needed for using warp points, but that may be too complicated for some people's tastes (not to mention the AI).

[Val]

Can't you represent that with Standard Movement v. Combat Movement?

[kalthalior]

I like Krakenup's suggestion on mines.

7) Make mines and minesweeping less than 100 percent effective. There should be a chance that a mine will miss and that minesweeping will fail.

[Derek]

Originally posted by dmm:
You could even have things like allowing sats and bases to have 1 combat MP but no strategic MP, which usually would help with planetary defense.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You can do that now, at least with bases. See the Devnull mod, or my mod (Derek's Mod Gold) for an example. Basically, you can have whats called a 'Station Keeping Engine' which gives a base one or two (or more, if you like) combat only movement points.

You can't do it with satellites, however. Dats are hardcoded to have no movement. What would make me happy is if the sats weren't all in one group, but split up into three or four Groups around a planet, so every quadrant is covered

Derek

[capnq]

I used to play a pretty cool Star Wars derived strategic game. I cant remember what it was called <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Your description sounds like Star Wars Rebellion.

[Phoenix-D]

"Can't you represent that with Standard Movement v. Combat Movement?"

No. Strategic move will ALWAYS give you a certain amount of combat move, and the extra combat move abiltity does not stack.

Phoenix-D

[eorg]

Originally posted by capnq:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> I used to play a pretty cool Star Wars derived strategic game. I cant remember what it was called <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Your description sounds like Star Wars Rebellion.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">star wars rebellion yes :-) if we can just copy intel from there :)

[jimbob]

Really, the only redeaming item in Star Wars Rebellion were the intelligence/counter-intel wars (plus the major characters). The computer was still pretty dense, but intel wars between humans was a heck of a lot of fun!

[TerranC]

If there is one thing to request in the next patch is this:

A Supply Transfer window http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Just for those desperate moments...

[henk brouwer]

1)Learn the AI to use captured populations.

2)space monsters :-)

[HEMAN]

Among the brilliant topic from others ?, I would request these top ideas:

) The long awaited age race experince point theorie.
) Independent AI ministers &gt; to ships / units?.
) Improved AI communication & trade with player.
) SHIP/UNITES MENU &gt; Ship types&gt; how many # of cruisers, destroyers the number amount per TYPE like in se3.
)Fill in the TAB gaps.

Ferengi Rules of Accquistion #75 Home is where the heart is... but the stars are made of latinum.

[Derek]

Did I mention wheel mouse support?

Well, if I didn't, here you go:

WHEEL MOUSE SUPPORT

Why SEIVG doesn't have it, I don't know, but it is surely annoying.

Derek

[Captain Kwok]

There is a few shortcuts I would like to see in the Map Editor to make it a little less tedious and a little more useful.

1. Easy to add warp points: Just click on two systems and viola - a warp point.

2. Make random system: Pick a system and have it make random planets/asteroids/etc.

These two shortcuts I think would result in a whole lot more custom maps for this game.

[Suicide Junkie]

A simpler way to simplify the WP creation might be a "Add reciprocal warppoint" checkbox in the window while you are adding the first one.

I agree that the random system generator would be immensely useful.
An option to specify a particular system type would be nice.
IE: - Add "BlackHole 1" system at map position (24,37).
- Add "Binary 3" system at map position (10,12)

Then you get enough control, but with all of the real busywork of planet forming done for you.

[TerranC]

On the Map editor: Maybe make it more flexible to substitute it as a scenario editors?

For Starcraft (and warcraft I believe) there were Scenario Editors that could make maps and scenarios. (Although lots of people couldn't understand the triggers or how to use them)

Maybe make it so we can add ships, colonies and empires in the map making process?

And also (I know I'm asking a lot here but I feel like Christmas-y) maybe add an option to create systems and warp points in some sort of pattern that you can set; that goes beyond Just setting Spiral Arm galaxy or Midlife galaxy, more like

Make: Spiral Arm
Choke Points: 5-10
Black holes: 10
Nebulas: 30

And so on.

[Captain Kwok]

TerranC,

I think a lot of those changes are beyond Aaron's commitment to SE:IV, but would be good ideas for SE:V!

I think the few I suggested would be easy to implement and could even be added for the next patch.

BTW, how's the 40cm of snow? Ha Ha Ha! Maybe the Calgary Flames can shovel it up for you since they have nothing better to do.

[ 10 May 2002, 06:31: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

[Val]

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
[QBNo. Strategic move will ALWAYS give you a certain amount of combat move, and the extra combat move abiltity does not stack.

Phoenix-D[/QB]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Yes, but you can give an 'engine' Combat movement only (and make it a Base component - checking to see that all other engines are Ship only) and limit it to One Per Vehicle. Then a space station can manuever during combat, but not fly away from the location it was built.

[kalthalior]

I like Ratqueen's idea about the game saving your settings. It would be really cool if I didn't have to go in and change everything every time I started a new game, like add planet names, turn on system grid, turn off galactic map grid.

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=005529

[oleg]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kalthalior:
I like Ratqueen's idea about the game saving your settings. It would be really cool if I didn't have to go in and change everything every time I started a new game, like add planet names, turn on system grid, turn off galactic map grid.

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=005529[/QUO TE]

Just like with ship designs: saving empire during the game saves all settings, like turn on system grid, for later use. There is no need to sort out all empire settings every time.

[Jmenschenfresser]

Maybe this was mentioned a long time ago somewhere, but it is my only wish. I don't want any of the previous ones I mentioned. If I get this one, I will be the happiest camper in the whole galaxy.

-Take out the requirement that in order to create a constructed planet (i.e a sphereworld) there must be a star present, or at least make it moddable that one needs to be there or not.

Why?

I really don't care about building sphereworlds on anything but a star, but this would allow other designs, smaller designs, to be built as bases anywhere in the system.

Think about it folks. This one small change solves the problem, from a certain point of view, of having facility abilites on vehicles. Not on ships obviously, but on bases, which I think would be the only logical place for say an intel facility.

Yes, this doesn't help the AI, but what mod does really, 'cept the TDM and maybe one or two others.

You'd have to colonize these planet-bases, and their only weapons capabilities would come from WPs, but I sort of like the idea of having to invest population in a base. And the weapons capabilities of such a base could change with the weather, not needing to retrofit.

Dear Santa,
...

[tesco samoa]

I Still want my sortable screens.

Ie. Cargo on planents

Show me what i want to see. Not all cargo on all planets.

This should subdivide into all,mines,fighters, etc...

Royal Pain the way it is now.

[Dracus]

Originally posted by Jmenschenfresser:
-
I really don't care about building sphereworlds on anything but a star, but this would allow other designs, smaller designs, to be built as bases anywhere in the system.
...<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The sphereworld concept is based on some forumula/table where a super advanced race would build them around a star. I will try to find that site that talks about sphereworlds. it is one of the few things that follow and actual concept.

[TerranC]

Sphearworlds: Dyson Sphears:

Ring or shell constructed around a star or black hole. In the ring live people;
the ring is powered by the energy emissions of the star/black hole.
The construction of this habitats are proposed by the 20th century physician
Dyson, but never taken serious.

The Dyson sphere is named for the 20th Century Earth scientist Freeman Dyson; Dyson suggested that civilizations could be classified by the amount of power which they could tap and control. He proposed that eventually a civilization would tap the entire energy output of a star; some suggested that this would best be achieved by orbiting huge numbers of solar collectors, but this idea was quickly replaced by the idea of constructing a large solid sphere around it. This would not only allow all of the suns energy to be tapped if required, but would also potentially allow a colossal living area to be built.

Got it from
The Daystrom Institute (http://www.ditl.org)

[Dracus]

Originally posted by TerranC:
Sphearworlds: Dyson Sphears:

Ring or shell constructed around a star or black hole. In the ring live people;
the ring is powered by the energy emissions of the star/black hole.
The construction of this habitats are proposed by the 20th century physician
Dyson, but never taken serious.

Got it from
The Daystrom Institute (http://www.ditl.org)<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Good old Star trek

Here is an interview with Dyson about this:

http://www.omnimag.com/archives/interviews/dyson.html

[TerranC]

Ironic.

Nuclear reactors in space, 30 years ago and now, absolutely no difference.

At least the Jet Propulsion Lab are researching Ion Engines.

[jimbob]

JPL's ion engines are low thrust, long burn engines, quite a departure from what most of us think of (ion drives on TIE fighters). But hey, it'll help JPL sucker money out of some of the... er, less sharp politicians.

[Phoenix-D]

"But hey, it'll help JPL sucker money out of some of the... er, less sharp politicians."

It's not just suckering..

Let's say you have two cars. One can go 0-60 in one minute, but can only stay at 60 for one hour. Distance traveled: 60 miles. Time: 1 hour.

The second car can go 0-60 in one hour, but can stay there for a week. Distance traveled: 10,020 miles. Time: 168 hours. So you go 167 times the distance, for 168 times the time spent. Clearly if you need to go farther than a mile the second is a better choice..

That's why the current ion engines are useful. I have no idea why SF hit on "ion" engines being these speed demons, really.

Phoenix-D

[oleg]

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
[QBThat's why the current ion engines are useful. I have no idea why SF hit on "ion" engines being these speed demons, really.

Phoenix-D[/QB]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Because in comparisson to chemical engines they are ! Well, potentially at least. There are no concevaible means to acclerate any more the exhast of standart rocket, while there might be ways to improve the thrust of other, so far exotic rocket engines. The close marking of any hints from academic establishment by mass media makes a perfect sense if you taxonony sci-fi literature according to its original postulate : a literature on the edge of our scientific progress. ( Star Trek is random string of techno bubble and has no right to be considered as a SCIENTIFIC fiction IMHO)

[Baron Munchausen]

Yes, ion drives have a strange Cache. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif First, I think 'ion' just sounds cool, and NASA has been talking about ion rives for ages. But also there was a specific Star Trek episode that touted the ion drives of some space ship that ambushed them and captured Spock, erm, Spock's brain, and I think that stuck in the popular imagination. While the exhaust speed of an ion drive is far greater than any current chemical rocket the thrust is very small and so the rate of acceleration is also very small. This high exhaust speed makes for great efficiency, though, so once you are out of the atmosphere it is a better thing to have for long-range probes that cannot come home and tank-up like a plane or ship can on earth. You get much more total thrust out of a given weight of propellant but it takes much longer to take effect. I don't think an ion drive can even operate within our atmosphere. They have to test them in a vacuum chamber.

Oleg -- Yes, treknobabble is garbage. I've made a distinction in my own mind between Science Fiction and 'Techno-drama'. Real SciFi actually has a plot that turns on the effects of scientific issues on how we see the universe and our place in it. Techno-drama is just soap opera with technological stage props and techno-babble. All but a handful of Star Trek episodes are nothing but Techno-drama.

[ 11 May 2002, 01:15: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

[TerranC]

Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
I don't think an ion drive can even operate within our atmosphere. They have to test them in a vacuum chamber.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes they do. Albeit a Vacumm chamber filled with Xenons I think.

The Ion Engines that JPL is testing goes into the Ionosphear, charges up Ions, makes a "wall" of Dense Ions and gets out and push http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif into a great distance... I think.

The Thing with the Ion engines is all it needs are Electricity that are generated by the Solar Panels, rather than Chemical fuels which run out.

Although you can't use Ion engins in a planet: It'll just cause electroshock to anything that surrounds Kenedy Space Center.

[Rusty_Nail]

If there is just ONE thing Malfador does, this should be it: give the AI some better movement strategies in combat. The following would at least TRIPLE AI effectiveness, especially if the same strategy was (optionally)NOT made available to humans (who I am sure use it always in tactical combat. I call it "just out of range". The AI usually moves right into the human's range without thinking, giving him first shot. As any human knows, first shot means guaranteed victory (I mean 100%) in a one-on-one all tech environment with equally good and optimal ships, no matter how good the opponent, and is a BIG advantage at any time. A single human ship in tactical combat can often take out a superior AI fleet without losing a single component as it is now. The game is just too easy in this respect. But suppose the AI practiced "just out of range", stopping his advance as a human would (i.e. stopping at distance 1+ opponent's minimum range + his number of moves) and let him come to you). That would really even the playing field and make strategic and simultaneous combat far more challenging for the humnan player. It can't be that difficult to program and would make a world of difference. Secondly, if they can do TWO things, teach the AI how to design better ships, using worms, subverters, talisman and ionic dispersers, the things that make the critical difference in who wins strategic combat between equally good designers (at least this is my experience to date). The first is, however, the key thing as the latter can be done with mods.

[Captain Kwok]

The biggest problem is humans can always find a way to exploit the AI, no matter what Aaron does to make the AI better. Of course you can crush the computer in tatical combat because you can react to thousands of different situations in a thousand ways. The AI has just a limited number of choices. If you want a challenging game...then don't cheat the AI by trading worthless junk for stuff, use strategic combat, things like that. You'll the notice the game becomes much more difficult.

[Rusty_Nail]

Another move strategy that humans use in tactical combat that the AI could use to advantage but doesn't is the following. This we could call "moving in and out of range". The cleanest example is in attacking a stationary target which has a certain range, say a WP or a ship with engines knocked out. The human moves into range, shoots and moves back to distance (1+opponent's range). It seems trivial, but the AI now sits still within a planet's range and lets himself get knocked to pieces unnecessarily. Once again. it can't be all that difficult to program. Perhaps the movement strategy should be split into two parts (1) before shooting (2) after shooting, to give the possibility of more variation. for example. (1) "optimal range" AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE (i.e. no parallel moves as the AI does now) followed by (2) move "just out of range" if possible.

[Rusty_Nail]

Catain Kwok, I agree and for that reason I don't use tactical combat any more. But what I am trying to do here is suggest that Malfador improve AI strategical combat by using some simple moves of the kind that a human would use in tactical combat, thus evening the playing field a little.

[capnq]

The cleanest example is in attacking a stationary target which has a certain range, say a WP or a ship with engines knocked out. The human moves into range, shoots and moves back to distance (1+opponent's range). It seems trivial, but the AI now sits still within a planet's range and lets himself get knocked to pieces unnecessarily<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I have lost planets to unmodded, standard AIs that did exactly what you describe.

[Crazy_Dog]

The destrutction of ion stroms is still not reported in the log.

Sometimes, the ministers add itens ti queues of shipyards under human control (example: i use some space stations with huge cargo capability to build units in a loop, not minister controled of course, and sometimes appear ships/etc added to the queue.

[Crazy_Dog]

If the Intelligence make a ship turn to us, in the log they report it but the go button take us to the place it appenned and not to the ship itself.
I think need to be fixed.

[Q]

I always felt that the possibility of "move-fire-move" was problematic and opened the possibility of very unbalanced combats. Personally I would prefer that the ships can't move any more (only in the same combat turn of course) after they fired. That was the rule in SE III and I don't see the reason why MM changed this.