Suggest - Features and Improvements

[zolobolo]

Can we please have a numeric indication of shield strength in the tactical view?
It makes for a lot of clicking to check how much pounding the own and enemy ship can take - it is necessary to check it as the visual representation of the shield only shows a relative value meaning: if tells you if the shield is full strength but not if it is 80 units strong or 240.

This goes for all Armour and integrity as well, but is most important for shields as they block boarding and other weapons

Please also indicate the ship type and name in the tactical combat when the ship is selected as there can be many variants of a ship with the same hull, and seeing the designation/name helps a lot if many ships are in the combat

For shuttles: They cannot be launched outside of their effective range. Is this intended? As they are basically small craft I would expect them to fly to their target even if they cannot board it within a single turn. If the player wishes to risk them being shut down that is...
Currently they cannot be engaged by fighters as they always launch within range - the above would make more use of fighter craft as these would be optimal to counter shuttles - fighter escorts can be used in this scenario as well to counter the fighters sent against shuttles ...

On firing arcs: are you planning to expand upon these so that broadsides can be used and more maneuvering is done in battle?
Lowering the side and rear shields would also go a long way to encourage positioning though I understand the AI would have that much harder a job working wit that. Still the effort might be worth it, as else the ships tend to face off one another even in bug fleets and only pounding their front sides until the shields are depleted. It is specifically not recommended currently to go hit an enemy ship from several sides at once. If you do not plan on implementing the above, would it make sense to get rid of the 4 different sides of the shields and having only a single shield value

Please make the logo of the empires/raiders a hyperlink leading from the galactic map to the diplomacy screen with them, so ease communication when there are a lot of races (and they will be similar on large maps especially the marauders)

[bjg]

I think it was possible before to "drop" "parts" from the right of the ship designer to the whole rectangle representing a particular mount. Now you can "drop" them to a square with a "rune", but not to a "text" area. That limitation feels illogical and very inconvenient. Is there a reason it was changed that way?

[Arioch]

I believe it was always that way, but I agree that I do sometimes find it irritating.

[nweismuller]

Once Marauder tribute arrangements are fixed so that they actually impact their finances (or at least report this impact accurately), I suggest that you write up events where Marauders can periodically demand additional tribute for their continued forbearance. The fact that all you need to do to not deal with their threat is pay them off once doesn't seem quite right. (And then you can crush them at your leisure when you are ready.)

[nweismuller]

Current AI player decision-making does not appear to actively manage morale and increase of trade capacity, resulting in heavy protestor populations wherever they have non-native populations present. I suggest that there should be some weight put into AI in establishing at least one market per planet, especially if non-native populations are present; Gremak AI should also actively enslave protesting populations, which it does not currently seem to do (perhaps Gremak AI should skimp on markets relative to other AIs based on its ability to enslave).

On a semi-related note, regarding slavery- AI players appear to always go to war with Marauder enclaves, without regard for whether they can protect their neighboring colony populations- even as the Gremak. Gremak AI should probably be inclined to establish friendly relations with Marauder enclaves and purchase their 'products', setting up the situation as described in the lore where Marauder groups are pipelines of slaves to the Empire.

[spitfire_ch]

I don't seem to find any tech to upgrade mines. All other "resource buildings" (farms, labs, factories and markets) can be upgraded, but not the mines? Is this a balancing issue? If not, I would very much like to see a tech tree branch to upgrade mines, too.

[nweismuller]

I don't seem to find any tech to upgrade mines. All other "resource buildings" (farms, labs, factories and markets) can be upgraded, but not the mines? Is this a balancing issue? If not, I would very much like to see a tech tree branch to upgrade mines, too.

There's one technology to upgrade mines, Industrial Automation, but, as far as I can tell, no technology to upgrade them to a third level.

[spitfire_ch]

I don't seem to find any tech to upgrade mines. All other "resource buildings" (farms, labs, factories and markets) can be upgraded, but not the mines? Is this a balancing issue? If not, I would very much like to see a tech tree branch to upgrade mines, too.

There's one technology to upgrade mines, Industrial Automation, but, as far as I can tell, no technology to upgrade them to a third level.

Thanks very much, I was looking for a wrench icon, but it comes with a chip icon, now I've found it

[spitfire_ch]

Mass refit is a great addition - if you have the resources

Could you also add it to the refit option from the planetary build menu, so that the queue would automatically be filled with ships of the same source and target design? It would much reduce micro managing (and be affordable most of the time). Alternatively and/or additionally, you could add a similar option to the ships menu. As of now, it is slightly confusing that you have to ways to refit ships (from the planetary and from the ships menu), but they work slightly differently (one allows mass refit and the other does not).

Thx very much

[Arioch]

Could you also add it to the refit option from the planetary build menu, so that the queue would automatically be filled with ships of the same source and target design?

Yes, a mockup for this is on my list of things to do.

[bjg]

I don't think it's necessary to show a "banner" every time some resource is found (even if the planet is already occupied), specially since we can read about them under "Resources" in the planet info.

[Arioch]

We show notifications only the first time each planetary special is discovered in a playthrough. If players find these repetitive, we could adds them to the settings toggle that disables "tutorial" notifications.

[bjg]

We show notifications only the first time each planetary special is discovered in a playthrough. If players find these repetitive, we could adds them to the settings toggle that disables "tutorial" notifications.

I see them pretty much every turn (or at least it feels like it).

[spitfire_ch]

We show notifications only the first time each planetary special is discovered in a playthrough. If players find these repetitive, we could adds them to the settings toggle that disables "tutorial" notifications.

I see them pretty much every turn (or at least it feels like it).

Yes, feels the same to me.

[SirBlackmane]

Hello, new to the game and the forum, so I'm unsure if this has been asked before, but whenis the randomization determined for events? Or is it predetermined based on certain factors? In several situations I attempt to save/load for a better result but get the exact same result every time. Best example = 84% chance of invading a colony results in a failure every time when loading from the same save file. Got the same thing when attempting (and failing) to recover tech from a seized enemy ship on a 40% chance. Curious how the mechanics work on this.