Remote Mining

[DirkHowitzer]

Thanks, Tenryu, I'll give them a shot.

------------------



He's dead, Jim.-- Leonard "Bones" McCoy

[nweaver]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tenryu:
Here's some stuff you might add to your data files that might make remote mining easier. Right now I'd also set the resource depletion field in Setting.txt for remote mining to false.

---

I'm not sure exactly about this, I'm leery of produce-everything modifications.

But it looks like a start. I like the prospector, except that the hull for that would become a common pocket carrier/sat tender, because of the very low manitinece cost.

Perhaps just keep the mining components as is, but reduce them in size to 70, would have the biggest effect, because that would allow mining sattelites to be construced, layed, and forgotten.

Also, if depletion is off and you want to do remote mining, don't do ships, do bases which are built in place, the 1/2 maintenence makes them worthwhile.

[Tenryu]

[quote]Originally posted by nweaver:
Yes, Nweaver, your comments are basically correct.
Just trying to work with what I have. Like some here not using mines, I don't use these hulls for anything but mining.

For what it's worth, what I really wish we had were a few other ' REQUIREMENTS'. Like: The ability to INCLUDE or EXCLUDE only certain components on a hull AND better deal with maintenance issues. Such as;
1.Requirement Pct (ANY COMPONENT or GENERAL GROUP). Where, :=0, you cann't put any aboard and no comment means you can load up as many as you want aboard.
2.Requirement No and Requirement Must Have(Any component or general group), 'nough said.
3. A line for every component, facility, mount or vehicle that would let you set a Specific maintenance cost % of materials used to construct the item rather then the general everything costs x% and some things nothing. In this manner the maintenance cost of a unit would be the sum of the costs of all its bits and pieces.

OH yeah! And I want to drop Ground troops and engage in tactical planetary combat too.
On land, sea, and air, underwater and underground.
Oh well, others have covered many other similar wishes and wants so I'll shut up now.

[Emperor Zodd]

Maintanence costs should be lowered and price of ships not units should be raised.

[This message has been edited by Emperor Zodd (edited 07 January 2001).]

[Jubala]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emperor Zodd:
Maintanence costs should be lowered and price of ships and units should be raised.

---

Why?

[Emperor Zodd]

If maintainence costs were lower it would be economical to robo-mine,and to offset the lower maintainence cost, ships (not units or facilities) would need to cost more.

[SirDarwin]

Yes of course if you raised ship costs too much it would just have the same effect.