Status of systems not presently seen

[DavidG]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

Originally posted by DavidG:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Asmala:
nformation you need for a planet:
resource values 3 bytes
population 2 bytes
coordinates 1 byte
owner 1 byte
total 7 bytes

I think you need to shrink your estimate a bit. Surely the resource values are already stored in the game file and are visible if you have explored a system. (coordinates too).

---

Nope. What if they change? Should you have changing logs then?

---

Now you're just confusing me. So what if they do change? so you see the changed values. Isn't that the way the game works right now?

[Fyron]

The proposal was to get an accurate picture of the system from the Last time you saw it. If data keeps getting updated in that system where you have no presence, it fails to be an accurate picture of how the system was the Last time you visited it. This is why stuff like planet names, ship names, planet values, etc. must be stored separately for each system's "Last seen" status, in case the actual values on the objects change at a date later than you Last visited that system.

[Karibu]

We would need to have estimation of it from Malfador. Otherwise thi is only speculation at best. Does anyone has any connection there?

[DavidG]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
The proposal was to get an accurate picture of the system from the Last time you saw it. If data keeps getting updated in that system where you have no presence, it fails to be an accurate picture of how the system was the Last time you visited it. This is why stuff like planet names, ship names, planet values, etc. must be stored separately for each system's "Last seen" status, in case the actual values on the objects change at a date later than you Last visited that system.

Since in the current game you can see the current planet names and the resources values of the planets in all systems you have explored I see no reason to change this. Sure it would be nice but one thing at a time.
It might be more productive if you spent more time thinking of ways to make this work instead of finding reason why it can't every post.
Even storing just the planet ownership would be very helpfull. Saving all the old turns and opening them to find this info is very cumbersome.

Please show me where I ever said it was a bad idea or that I did not like the idea

Try looking in the same thread were I said you did say these things.

[Asmala]

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.

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.

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.

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"?

[Fyron]

It might be more productive if you spent more time thinking of ways to make this work instead of finding reason why it can't every post.

Obviously you missed the point entirely... I never said it could not work, nor that it would not work. I only ever said that it would increase the size of savegames significantly, and that is why it was not done in the first place in SE4.

Even storing just the planet ownership would be very helpfull.

Yes it would.

Saving all the old turns and opening them to find this info is very cumbersome.

Funny that I used the same exact thing as an argument against some of what Asmala said.

Try looking in the same thread were I said you did say these things.

But I never said them... see response to first quote in this post.

[Fyron]

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. The scrap window should have organization options rather than just order built, which will eliminate that problem nicely.

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.

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? ).

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.

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.

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. 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.

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. 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.