Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

Well, if it coudl be done in SE4/Gold, I'd love it BUT ... let's not push our luck, hmm?

The concept is this: change the Buidl Queue UI to match that or the Research Project and Intelligence Project UI's.

This would make it easier to divide build capacity evenly between two or more projects, as well as making all three "queue" type UI's the same.

So ... would you like to see this sort of change, or no? Once the poll is closed, I can email MM with the results ... consider thsi sort of a petition, with signatures and COUNTEr-seignatures all at once.

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

why are you keeping the results secert ??

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Only until the results are in. Consdier it a sort of secret ballot; everyone will be able to view the results once it closes. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Also, this's the first poll I've put up here, so ... I was kinda playin' around with the options ... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

I'd rather see just the reverse myself. If we could 'link up' multiple shipyards to work on a single project life would be much easier in the late game when you want to build starbases on warp points.

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well IMO that would be a seperate issue. I -do- think it woudl be nice for, at least with space-based yards (ship or base alike) ... the *fleet* should have the queue, not each individual ship (if you want that,split 'em off into other fleets and/or solo).

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Be careful what you wish for. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Wouldn't this make building ringworlds and sphereworlds easier? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Seriously, I think the whole reason we can't combine the output of multiple shipyards (unmodded game) is because the game designer's concept of shipbuilding didn't consider modular components that could be built at multiple yards. But, since I'm not a mindreader, this is just a guess. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

[quote]Originally posted by Nodachi:

Quote:

Seriously, I think the whole reason we can't combine the output of multiple shipyards (unmodded game) is because the game designer's concept of shipbuilding didn't consider modular components that could be built at multiple yards. But, since I'm not a mindreader, this is just a guess. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I would doubt this was any lack of understanding of shipbuilding techniques. It is quite obvious he intentionally is putting absolute limits on the space yard rate. This was a concious game play decision. Note the restriction against multiple space yards on a planet, the restriction against multiple space yards on a ship, and the steep penalties agasint using the emergency build option.

The manufacture of prefabricated modular components is not addressed, for the same reason that the transfer of resources from planet to planet is not addressed. It's considerd to be an invisible part of the game. It's assumed to be their, but for game play reasons it's ignored.

Geoschmo

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

Yeah, I think it was a game play decision. But even so there are situations where it's a problem. Maybe a 'special tech' option to link shipyards in the same sector would be effective since only certain races would have it. This would be much more worth 1000 racial points than the current 'Hardy Industrialists' ability, which is a crock.

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

What would be nice is, if the final outpur of combined spaceyards was equal to the SLOWEST space yard's rate, time sthe square root of the number of spaceyards present.

Law of diminishing returns and all. To double, triple, or quadruple output, you would need 4, 9, even 16 SYS's -- the maintenance fees on which would eventually get prohibitive, indeed!

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

I personally liked the way spaceyards worked in SEIII. (I hope I remember this correctly) you could buy as many ships as you wanted in one location in a turn, but they had to be repaired by your spaceyards. They would start out as empty hulls with 100% damage, repairing them could take a lot of time. When your spaceyard was attacked you could try and defend it with your half-finished ships, in the SEIV system you'll have to wait until your ship is completed before you can use it..

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

it think they shoul add it as an option. so Users can choose how they perceive the workings of spaceyards. nearly everything else is modable, why not this?

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, I liked this system as well. Although I never had SEIII, I downloaded it but didn't play it much, since I downloaded demo to SEIV at same time. But it was the same system as SEII had. But a ship and next turn you had a hull with 100% damage. Then it slowly repaired itself depending on how many ship yard componants you had at the planets. I'd like to see this sytem again in SEV.

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

I considered at one point doing a mod to bring this SEIII kind of Space Yard queue back in. Pretty much all you need is to remove the +50% retrofit restrictions. You can do this in the settings.txt file by greatly increasing it. Not sure the highest it will take, maybe 999%. That should do it. Then you have your base hull with just the bridge/lifesupport/crew quarters, and then on the next turn you retrofit it to whatever design you want. It would take two steps instead of one, but it wouldn't be all that bad.

Geoschmo

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">that wouldn't be completely fair, cos the expensive stellar components would be build in two turns then, instead of 10.

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

that wouldn't be completely fair, cos the expensive stellar components would be build in two turns then, instead of 10.

IF you had 50K-80K of each resource available at once, then yes. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Or, make it so that you can't retrofit to them, by setting the max retrofit setting so that it is under their build cost.

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, that may be, but that's how the SEIII construction queue worked. the goal wouldn't be to make it fair, but to make it like SEIII. Besides, how could it be unfair if it was the same for everyone. I guess it would be unfair to the AI, cause they couldn't possible be made to take advantage of it, but everyone knows my take on that already. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Geoschmo

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

(bump)

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, I thought this was much more realistic. You could attack a ship-building center and destroy ships before they were completed. Now they just magically 'pop into existence' when they are paid for. Weird...

But at least they don't vanish when they are mothballed. You can destroy mothballed ships very easily. Hmm, I wonder if ECM is active on a mothballed ship?

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

SEIII's system worked because both repairs and damage were measured in components. SEIV's current system is a bit in-between; we repair per component, but build and destroy by kt. If the build system was changed to repair purchased ships instead of building, you'd have the problems with instant stellar manip comps.

If you changed the repair to kt, and then repaired ships you had purchased, the system would work more appropriately. Emergency build would speed up repair times, which would then drop to lower repair rates. It might even be better not to pay up front, but to pay for components on the turn on which they're completed.

Being able to destroy ships-in-progress also added some suspense to attacking planets--are those 35 dreadnaughts functional, or empty shells? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ July 17, 2002, 04:49: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

I think we should leave it the same as before, however with the addition of multiple queues on one ship, like a starbase with 5 SYs... IIRC SEIII had that where you had many yards available to build from even if you only had one base. Reworking the whole architecture is too hard and IMHO not worth it, it works good now and makes sense.

[ July 17, 2002, 21:01: Message edited by: Skulky ]

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

Skulky, I was not suggesting the mod as an alternative to the multiple queue idea. I was merely thrwoing that out as a posibility for those that like the SEIII system. I was thinking of it as a mod, not as the standard way of doing things.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't get what you are saying. How is the instant stellar manip comp any differant with the SEIII system or my hypothetical SEIV "SEIII Mod" modified build system.

Unless you are saying that in SEIV multiple repair comps or construction queues can cooperate to repair the components on the ship after being refit. While in SEIII one yard worked on one ship, although you could have more than one yard on one space Yard ship, each yard could only build or repair one ship at a time. Is that your complaint? Cause if that's not it I don't see much effective difference between the two.

EDIT: An actually, IIRC wasn't SEIII build and repair not by component, but by "spaces"? And damage was calculated by some "hitpoint" formula, where different components had different number of hitpoints before being destroyed. Sounds like tonnage and structure with the current system. Same kind of calculation, just different nubmers. But what is very different is repair. Because in SEIV that is by component, regardless of relative size of the componsents.

Ok, I see what you mean now. You mispoke, but what you were trying to say is correct. Because a component in SEIII that was several "spaces", would be evivalent to one in SEIV that was more tonnage. While SEIII repaired a space at a time, SEIV repairs a 100 ton comp at the same speed at a 10 ton comp.

In effect, the SEIV system is not "in between" but the exact opposite of the SEIII system. If one treats "spaces" the same way you treat "Tonnage". Which in effect they are the same. They are both units of relative mass, just different units. While comparing Spaces/Tonnage to Components is apples to oranges because there you are trying to compare size to number. It doesn't work.

Geoschmo

[ July 17, 2002, 21:28: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

(bump)

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

No... ships were built by component. Damage was done by component. One point of damage destroyed one component. The number of components was based on "spaces". A ship with smaller components could take more damage than a ship with larger components.

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

Really? I don't remember it that way, but honestly it's been a long time since I played SEIII. That was pretty aweful compared to the current system don't you think? Or am I missing something.

Geoschmo

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

[bump]

Re: Feature request: Build queue change for SE5
 

RESULTS IN.

80% (20 votes) in favor.
20% (5 votes) against.