.com.unity Forums - Status of systems not presently seen

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Status of systems not presently seen (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=10823)

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Quote:

They can be kept then. If you have 1000 ships which are named like Devastator 0001, Devastator 0002 etc. it's very easy to compress those names quite effectively. Personaly I don't need the names and it's annoying to see the ship's name instead of class when you click a sector containing enemy ships. If ships are retrofitted you have to click each one to know its class.

That would be your opinion then, which is not shared by a large percentage of the player base. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif The scrap window should have organization options rather than just order built, which will eliminate that problem nicely.

Quote:

I don't understand this. You can't see the damage of ships if they move out of scanner range so why you have to see it when you move out of the system?

Perhaps. Then, I would suggest that that data be stored somewhere with a date marker until the next time you scan the ships, even if they are in the same system as your ships still.

Quote:

Besides the damage is useful only 2-3 turns because then the ships are repaired.

In stock... do not forget about mods, which are what make this game great to a large percentage of its players (dare I say a majority? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).

Quote:

There's no point to store the status of each component, 99% of components aren't broken so it's better to list only broken components.

Umm... yeah. A bool for whether it is damaged or not is the best method. An array of damaged indices is not that good of a solution.

Quote:

If it's the same ships you can just add second coordinates to ships' data, which means only one byte more.

Unless the name changes. Or the damage changes. So, you would have to store that info more than once for each ship when you see them in mutliple systems.

Quote:

If ship data is too much what about planet data. Even Fyron have to admit that storing planets' data can't take much space. Ships are moving quite a lot so that's not very useful information.

No, planet data would not take that much more space. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif 19 more bytes per planet, to tell whether each other empire can see the flag or not. Unless, of course, you want to keep more accurate views of the planet values and names. Why can you scan a system that you have visited at some point, but can see no data at all on planets in systems you have been to? Some scanning would be necessary to justify seeing changes in name and values. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Quote:

This is offtopic but was MM informed that long range scanned ships doesn't come to "enemy ships designs"?

No idea. I believe they did back in SE3, but that ability was lost in SE4. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I am sure someone has mentioned it in all this time. But, sending it to MM will make him aware that it is an issue to more players. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Quote:

That would be your opinion then, which is not shared by a large percentage of the player base. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif The scrap window should have organization options rather than just order built, which will eliminate that problem nicely.

It would indeed be great if ships were ordered by class in the scrap window, but luckily ship classes are under ship names so it's not a big deal to select ships. Unless there are hundreds of ships, but these situations are fortunately rare. When I see a fleet of 100 ships I don't know which one is which class, all their name are same very old desing. Now if I'd like to know how many sweepers, what kind sensors or what is the supply situation of the fleet I'd have to click through every ship. And that's annoying.

Quote:

Perhaps. Then, I would suggest that that data be stored somewhere with a date marker until the next time you scan the ships, even if they are in the same system as your ships still.

That would be a good idea but actually the discussion here concerns the status of systems not presently seen. Storing the condition of all scanned ships is more space consuming than storing just what you have seen.

Is there any mods which use a lot of long range scanners? I think it should be improved a lot, for example scanning automatically all nearby ships and storing scanned designs.

It wouldn't be a problem to save all information about scanned ships. If you have 200 ships in your scanner range, are you really going to click them all through? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif Thus the amount of space needed for scanned ships is directly proportional the number of ships scanned (=clicked) and I believe even 100 would be a lot then.

Quote:

In stock... do not forget about mods, which are what make this game great to a large percentage of its players (dare I say a majority? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).

There's no repair components in some mods?

Quote:

Umm... yeah. A bool for whether it is damaged or not is the best method. An array of damaged indices is not that good of a solution.

Err... nope. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif The best method would be combined. First a bool if a ship is damaged at all. If no obviously there's no need for further data about components. If a ship has a few destroyed components, the index of each component are given. If many components are destroyed, then a bool for every component if it's broken or not.

Quote:

Unless the name changes. Or the damage changes. So, you would have to store that info more than once for each ship when you see them in mutliple systems.

I dare to say this is quite unusual situation. Think about it, you're chased by a fleet of 1000s of ships, the name of every ship is changed every turn, all of those ships took damage every turn, you have scanners present and manually click through all ships every turn. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif If all conditions aren't met then the required space for data isn't very big.

Quote:

No, planet data would not take that much more space. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif 19 more bytes per planet, to tell whether each other empire can see the flag or not. Unless, of course, you want to keep more accurate views of the planet values and names. Why can you scan a system that you have visited at some point, but can see no data at all on planets in systems you have been to? Some scanning would be necessary to justify seeing changes in name and values. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

19 bytes to tell which empires see the planet? Now I don't wonder why you think there's going to be such a big increase in savegame files. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I think 2.5 bytes would be enough.

But your approach to this savegame issue is different than mine Fyron. Have you all the time thought I mean there is one planet data and then flags for empires who see it. It's not practical and it won't work because all empires have a different view about that planet depending when they have left from the system. I mean every empire has its own data for every system the empire doesn't presently see.

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Hmm, I think that was my longest post ever http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Why does "repeat build" only repeat the first thing on the list? I'd like to set up 5 or 6 things to build and set it to repeat. But it only repeats the first item on the list.

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Quote:

Is there any mods which use a lot of long range scanners? I think it should be improved a lot, for example scanning automatically all nearby ships and storing scanned designs.

Adamant, for example, removes the Scattering Armor and makes Scanner Jammers 50 kT. Want to be paranoid and protect all ships from scanners? Gonna cost you a lot of space and you don't get ECM out of it even. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

It wouldn't be a problem to save all information about scanned ships. If you have 200 ships in your scanner range, are you really going to click them all through?

I might want to (or someone else might want to). So it has to be stored.

Quote:

Thus the amount of space needed for scanned ships is directly proportional the number of ships scanned (=clicked) and I believe even 100 would be a lot then.

What if I want to see a different ship's damage on a later turn than I viewed originally?

Quote:

There's no repair components in some mods?

No... some mods are designed to end battles with a huge number of damaged components (specifically, 1 kT armor components). P&N, B5 Mod, Adamant, etc. Repairing a bunch of such damaged ships takes a while, unless you go overboard on the repair ships in your fleets. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

I dare to say this is quite unusual situation. Think about it, you're chased by a fleet of 1000s of ships, the name of every ship is changed every turn, all of those ships took damage every turn, you have scanners present and manually click through all ships every turn. If all conditions aren't met then the required space for data isn't very big.

Quote:

19 bytes to tell which empires see the planet? Now I don't wonder why you think there's going to be such a big increase in savegame files. I think 2.5 bytes would be enough.

You need a bool for each other empire... 1 byte per bool, 19 bools, 19 bytes. Unless you are writing your own programming language and can make custom sized variables... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

But your approach to this savegame issue is different than mine Fyron.

I don't know about that.... well, other than you keep wanting to drop necessary data that must be stored. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

Have you all the time thought I mean there is one planet data and then flags for empires who see it.

No. That was started in response to a very specific suggestion, actually made by DavidG. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

It's not practical and it won't work because all empires have a different view about that planet depending when they have left from the system. I mean every empire has its own data for every system the empire doesn't presently see.

That is what I have been saying... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ December 03, 2003, 18:03: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Quote:

Originally posted by Argitoth:
Why does "repeat build" only repeat the first thing on the list? I'd like to set up 5 or 6 things to build and set it to repeat. But it only repeats the first item on the list.

Because that is how it works. It repeats the first item, not the whole queue. A new "repeat queue" order should be added.

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Quote:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />It wouldn't be a problem to save all information about scanned ships. If you have 200 ships in your scanner range, are you really going to click them all through?

I might want to (or someone else might want to). So it has to be stored.<hr /></blockquote>He who wants to click through 200 ships to scan them all please raise your hand. What? I see no hands. But it's my greatest pleasure to click through all 200 ships every time I see them. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Quote:

What if I want to see a different ship's damage on a later turn than I viewed originally?

You haven't clicked the ship, you haven't scanned the ship, you can't have the ship's information. That's the way long range scanners work now http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Quote:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I dare to say this is quite unusual situation. Think about it, you're chased by a fleet of 1000s of ships, the name of every ship is changed every turn, all of those ships took damage every turn, you have scanners present and manually click through all ships every turn. If all conditions aren't met then the required space for data isn't very big.

The fact that all of those could happen means that it has to be taken into account. Optimizations should be used, of course. Frequent name changes are not common. But frequent changes in damaged status can very will be (especially in some mods http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).<hr /></blockquote>Fyron, you can't be serious. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif You mean you think seriously that someone clicks through 1000 ships each turn to get a information about possible damage changes, and over 1% of ships has different damage status than earlier. That's like you'd make the game to use 32-bits integer numbers for number of components in case someone like to add that many components http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

You need a bool for each other empire... 1 byte per bool, 19 bools, 19 bytes. Unless you are writing your own programming language and can make custom sized variables... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I thought there goes 8 bools in a byte...

Quote:

I don't know about that.... well, other than you keep wanting to drop necessary data that must be stored. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Yep. It seems we have a different definition for "necessary" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Quote:

He who wants to click through 200 ships to scan them all please raise your hand. What? I see no hands. But it's my greatest pleasure to click through all 200 ships every time I see them.

You would be surprised...

Quote:

You haven't clicked the ship, you haven't scanned the ship, you can't have the ship's information. That's the way long range scanners work now

Either way, that data needs to be stored in the Last system seen info stuff.

Quote:

Fyron, you can't be serious. You mean you think seriously that someone clicks through 1000 ships each turn to get a information about possible damage changes, and over 1% of ships has different damage status than earlier.

You would be surprised. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

That's like you'd make the game to use 32-bits integer numbers for number of components in case someone like to add that many components

That is just silly. You use a vector so it doesn't matter and there is no limit to the number of comps that can be added to a ship. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Quote:

I thought there goes 8 bools in a byte...

I guess it depends on the programming language. C++ bools are 1 byte. 0 is false, any other value is true (and those values can be lots of things other than just 1 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ). MM uses Delphi, which IIRC is similar to C++.

Quote:

Yep. It seems we have a different definition for "necessary"

Yeah, you regard necessary information as unnecessary. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif The thing is, people do make use of this questioned information, so it has to be stored. Otherwise, you would tick off a portion of the fan base.

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Not displaying ship names removes some of the RP aspects of the game, so removing them would be a bad idea. They need to be kept.

They can be kept then. If you have 1000 ships which are named like Devastator 0001, Devastator 0002 etc. it's very easy to compress those names quite effectively. Personaly I don't need the names and it's annoying to see the ship's name instead of class when you click a sector containing enemy ships. If ships are retrofitted you have to click each one to know its class.

Quote:

Not displaying the damage of ships for these overviews is also a bad idea because that is criticial information. If you saw that ships were damaged, why should you have to forget it? That makes no sense. It is extremely useful information when you have it. Unfortunately in stock SE4, the long range scanners are not very useful. But, there are mods that change that.

I don't understand this. You can't see the damage of ships if they move out of scanner range so why you have to see it when you move out of the system? Besides the damage is useful only 2-3 turns because then the ships are repaired.

Quote:

The data for ships would be much, much larger than 2 bytes. Quite a few for the name, and then 1 for every single component on the ships, to tell if it is damaged or not.

There's no point to store the status of each component, 99% of components aren't broken so it's better to list only broken components.

Quote:

Also, do not forget the fact that it is entirely possible to see the same ship in a whole bunch of systems as your Last visit, especially if you are being followed by them. Do not forget about the worst case scenarios... they make a huge difference.

If it's the same ships you can just add second coordinates to ships' data, which means only one byte more.

If ship data is too much what about planet data. Even Fyron have to admit that storing planets' data can't take much space. Ships are moving quite a lot so that's not very useful information.

This is offtopic but was MM informed that long range scanned ships doesn't come to "enemy ships designs"?

Re: Status of systems not presently seen

Quote:

Either way, that data needs to be stored in the Last system seen info stuff.

Why? If you don't have the data why it needs to be stored? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Quote:

I guess it depends on the programming language. C++ bools are 1 byte. 0 is false, any other value is true (and those values can be lots of things other than just 1 ). MM uses Delphi, which IIRC is similar to C++.

It it indeed depends on the programming language. C++ bools are 1 byte, but it's not difficult to make a new class which stores 8 bools to one char. I have never programmed with Delphi, but I believe it's possible to make bools of one bit if necessary.

Quote:

Yeah, you regard necessary information as unnecessary. The thing is, people do make use of this questioned information, so it has to be stored. Otherwise, you would tick off a portion of the fan base.

You mean if MM makes a new addition so an empire can see systems like they were when the empire Last saw them, but the ship names and damage isn't included, it would tick off a portion of the fan base? You have a funny way to draw conclusions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif