Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Ban flag for weapons,hulls and fighters for fleet doctrine  (Read 2668 times)

Morrokain

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
  • Megalith Dreadnought - Archean Order
    • View Profile
Re: Ban flag for weapons,hulls and fighters for fleet doctrine
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2020, 05:25:39 PM »

Then there's the edge case of banning every hulls belonging to a role and there's no fallback anymore...

Definitely a valid edge case. But what if the logic just checked the Frequency array/map/w.e for non-zero values and kept an active count in memory per each ship role? That way whenever the "disable" button is pressed it can assess whether this would violate the "count must be greater than 0" rule and deny the hull from being disabled if so? Unless the iterations would cause noticeable lag between click and action that could work.

*Player presses disable on the hull*

Pseudo code:

Object emptyRole = noRolesEmpty(hullId);
if (frequencyMap.get(hullId) != 0 && emptyRole.validateNoEmptyRoles() {
          allowHullDisabled(hullId);
} else if (frequencyMap.get(hullId) == 0) {
          displayMessageHullAlreadyDisabled(hullId);
} else {
          displayMessageEmptyRoleViolation(emptyRole.getEmptyRoleString());
}

Of course, that would mean more UI work and eventually there would be some desire for role status to be explicitly shown in the UI so the player can keep track of how many potential hulls are in each particular role.


Alternatively, an intel report could be generated only if a role is empty and a fleet would have otherwise spawned one but doesn't have a fallback. That would probably be easier to do with the existing code base since intel reports are already a thing and the additional logic would just have to check that the role in question has a non-zero value in the map during fleet creation or it spawns a report for that role.

The way to remove the report would be to activate a hull in the corresponding role. To prevent UI work to show role-hull candidacy in the management screen, the report could list all the available hulls for the empty role so the player knows what their options are.

To prevent spam, reports aren't duplicated. As long as a report exists for that role, no new reports are generated until the player resolves the first one by enabling a valid hull.

Idk, just some random brainstorming. I agree that more player faction fleet management would be really nice.
Logged

Scorpixel

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile
Re: Ban flag for weapons,hulls and fighters for fleet doctrine
« Reply #16 on: December 04, 2020, 06:43:07 PM »

As a player who want to rely on faction fleets more during battle this would be the most desired option.
Not even asking for ship/fleet templates, just this option would help to keep production clearer.
For the window to list what roles each ship can fill so that it can be known which combat hauler or battlecarrier count as what would be desirable.

Guess more personalised options would be considered too strong in the hands of the player, however such an option may hopefully be available in the future, meaning i'll finally be able to fulfil my dream of Xyphos only battlecarriers and full ion/pd artillery overtaking the sector by having the enemy die of old age.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8518
    • View Profile
Re: Ban flag for weapons,hulls and fighters for fleet doctrine
« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2020, 07:22:13 AM »

As a player who want to rely on faction fleets more during battle this would be the most desired option.
Not even asking for ship/fleet templates, just this option would help to keep production clearer.
For the window to list what roles each ship can fill so that it can be known which combat hauler or battlecarrier count as what would be desirable.

Guess more personalised options would be considered too strong in the hands of the player, however such an option may hopefully be available in the future, meaning i'll finally be able to fulfil my dream of Xyphos only battlecarriers and full ion/pd artillery overtaking the sector by having the enemy die of old age.
This is for your NPC fleets, against other NPC fleets.  Those fights are usually auto-resolved and loadout does not matter too much.

Player can sort of know what roles the ships are by using the filters, and knowing what ships fleets tend to use.  It gets problematic for few ships that qualify for multiple roles, like Gemini.  (Gemini qualifies as freighter and carrier.  I would like Gemini as a freighter, but I do not want my war fleets to use Gemini.)

The current priority system is usable, but hideously arcane and user-unfriendly.  A blacklist or ban flag would be useful.

Also, it would be nice if priorities can be separated between battlestations and ships.  (Outfitting a battlestation like a ship would be even better, but that is wishful thinking.)  There are weapons I want on the battlestation that I would not want on ships.  Thus, I set weapon priorities to what I want my battlestations to use because I rely on battlestations in a fight more often than random patrol fleet #N.  However, it is nice to loot free weapons from your dead fleets that bravely fought off enemy raids.
Logged

Scorpixel

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile
Re: Ban flag for weapons,hulls and fighters for fleet doctrine
« Reply #18 on: December 05, 2020, 08:37:54 AM »

Player can sort of know what roles the ships are by using the filters, and knowing what ships fleets tend to use.  It gets problematic for few ships that qualify for multiple roles, like Gemini.  (Gemini qualifies as freighter and carrier.  I would like Gemini as a freighter, but I do not want my war fleets to use Gemini.)

The current priority system is usable, but hideously arcane and user-unfriendly.  A blacklist or ban flag would be useful.

Also, it would be nice if priorities can be separated between battlestations and ships.  (Outfitting a battlestation like a ship would be even better, but that is wishful thinking.)  There are weapons I want on the battlestation that I would not want on ships.  Thus, I set weapon priorities to what I want my battlestations to use because I rely on battlestations in a fight more often than random patrol fleet #N.  However, it is nice to loot free weapons from your dead fleets that bravely fought off enemy raids.
Agreeing with all of your points.
It is true that faction fleets aren't exactly useful, which is why my wish is to have more global control on them, be it customisation or strategic orders, maybe even a defence budget to compensate the greater utility.

It is more of an issue of either this is considered as too much 4X oriented rather than M&B-like rpg that the dev team strive to reach. It's unsettling that SC is promising better in both domains than dedicated titles from established licenses. Don't know if it says more about the team's dedication or the stale situation in those two niches.
Logged

Twilight Sentinel

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: Ban flag for weapons,hulls and fighters for fleet doctrine
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2020, 10:08:38 AM »

Better organization on the doctrine screen would help with avoiding issues like disabling all ships of a given role.  Since obviously the spawned fleets need certain groups of ships to fill given roles, showing those groups to the player in some way and telling them that a minimum of one ship from each group must be available for their settings to have any effect would avoid that problem.
Logged

Helldiver

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Ban flag for weapons,hulls and fighters for fleet doctrine
« Reply #20 on: January 14, 2021, 03:38:28 AM »

Better organization on the doctrine screen would help with avoiding issues like disabling all ships of a given role.  Since obviously the spawned fleets need certain groups of ships to fill given roles, showing those groups to the player in some way and telling them that a minimum of one ship from each group must be available for their settings to have any effect would avoid that problem.

More info and options for doctrine would be fantastic, it pretty barebones right now.
Logged
Torpedo cruiser enthusiast.
Pages: 1 [2]