Poll: Should the Civil and non-Combat Ships loose all or most of their weapon slots?

[zgrssd]

So i'm confused. Now you're not happy with the DW2 ship design system?

I am confused about your confusion.
I very clearly and umabigiously said it is not perfect and needs improovements in details.

Details like these.

[zgrssd]

I'll see if I can mod this in. If you wish to keep PD, what I'll do is simply change the size of all the weapon bays on civilian ships to be maximum 19, that way they should be able to fit themselves with any choice of PD.

I have been thinking about it, and maybe go lower then 19?
19 is only usefull for PD Missiles. Which are a not a good weapon to stop boarding pods or most missiles. They are anti-fighter with some uses as standoff weapons.

Of course the main issue is creating the modified file from the current gamefile in a mostly automated fashion.
I have a idea how to make a programm that understand enough of the XML to load it and cut parts of it and write the modded file - but I asume someone else did that work already.

[Anthropoid]

Honestly, it sounds like tweaking the algorithms that lead auto civilian ship design are what is needed more than taking away weapon slots.

Maybe I'd like to have a "Q Ship" in my navy? The game is better if it facilitates that, though admittedly this might create problems (as described in OP). The solution though seems to be to fix the mechanisms by which the auto-ship designer creates "bad" civilian ship designs, not to remove options for players to create a greater variety of designs.

[zgrssd]

Honestly, it sounds like tweaking the algorithms that lead auto civilian ship design are what is needed more than taking away weapon slots.

Maybe I'd like to have a "Q Ship" in my navy? The game is better if it facilitates that, though admittedly this might create problems (as described in OP). The solution though seems to be to fix the mechanisms by which the auto-ship designer creates "bad" civilian ship designs, not to remove options for players to create a greater variety of designs.

As I said before, "Fixing" a complex system like the ship designer is a lot of work, that can easily break with future updates.
Just remove the slots that cause all current and future issues will give us quick and lasting results.

As for the Idea of a Q-Ship? It does not work in the game we have. Ships need a ridiculous superiority to defeat or disabled a pirate ship in a 1v1 before it can run.
So it would not actually deter any pirate.

Plus, the whole idea was questionable to begin with even in both Worlds Wars where both were used. Civil hulls just do not make good combat ships.

[Anthropoid]

Honestly, it sounds like tweaking the algorithms that lead auto civilian ship design are what is needed more than taking away weapon slots.

Maybe I'd like to have a "Q Ship" in my navy? The game is better if it facilitates that, though admittedly this might create problems (as described in OP). The solution though seems to be to fix the mechanisms by which the auto-ship designer creates "bad" civilian ship designs, not to remove options for players to create a greater variety of designs.

As I said before, "Fixing" a complex system like the ship designer is a lot of work, that can easily break with future updates.
Just remove the slots that cause all current and future issues will give us quick and lasting results.

As for the Idea of a Q-Ship? It does not work in the game we have. Ships need a ridiculous superiority to defeat or disabled a pirate ship in a 1v1 before it can run.
So it would not actually deter any pirate.

Plus, the whole idea was questionable to begin with even in both Worlds Wars where both were used. Civil hulls just do not make good combat ships.

Sounds like you've got it pretty much all figured out then!

[tekel]

Honestly, I would rather keep the options and be able to control how AI designed a specific class, state OR civilian. Until then, I am ok with manually upgrading and approving a build, especially civilian which are upgraded way too often anyway.

[SamuraiProgrmmr]

As I said before, "Fixing" a complex system like the ship designer is a lot of work, that can easily break with future updates.

zgrssd, I appreciate your sharing of knowledge in this and other forums.

I do wish, however, that you would elaborate on this. You have made the statement multiple times as it were common knowledge (like the effect of gravity) but I don't understand your logic.

Personally, I don't use the automatic ship design because I like fiddling with the designs. I have read posts where people say that the designer will design ships that cannot function properly. I don't know the details and haven't seen it myself but I do know two things...

1) I sometimes press the 'upgrade' button to see what the AI will do and have seen designs that I felt were less than optimal. Mostly, they just have a component mix that doesn't fit my ideas of how I want them used.

2) I sometimes wonder if I would enjoy the game more if I didn't feel a need to micromanage the designs for all roles. With some of the reports of dysfunctional designs, I am not ready to turn the designer loose just yet.

But back to my point..

Any future update can break anything. It is one of the important goals of an update to fix without breaking.

It almost sounds like you are saying 'live with it broken because if they fix it, it might break later'. If it's broken already (which seems to be a point you have acknowledged), why does it matter that it might break again in the future?

Seriously, could you give some more details as to the logical path that supports your statement? Or is your argument based on a wish to have the programming resources spent in another direction?

[Anthropoid]

As I said before, "Fixing" a complex system like the ship designer is a lot of work, that can easily break with future updates.

zgrssd, I appreciate your sharing of knowledge in this and other forums.

I do wish, however, that you would elaborate on this. You have made the statement multiple times as it were common knowledge (like the effect of gravity) but I don't understand your logic.

Personally, I don't use the automatic ship design because I like fiddling with the designs. I have read posts where people say that the designer will design ships that cannot function properly. I don't know the details and haven't seen it myself but I do know two things...

1) I sometimes press the 'upgrade' button to see what the AI will do and have seen designs that I felt were less than optimal. Mostly, they just have a component mix that doesn't fit my ideas of how I want them used.

2) I sometimes wonder if I would enjoy the game more if I didn't feel a need to micromanage the designs for all roles. With some of the reports of dysfunctional designs, I am not ready to turn the designer loose just yet.

But back to my point..

Any future update can break anything. It is one of the important goals of an update to fix without breaking.

It almost sounds like you are saying 'live with it broken because if they fix it, it might break later'. If it's broken already (which seems to be a point you have acknowledged), why does it matter that it might break again in the future?

Seriously, could you give some more details as to the logical path that supports your statement? Or is your argument based on a wish to have the programming resources spent in another direction?

I really hate that all these old school boards have ditched the upvote / downvote mechanisms. This woulda got my upvote!

[OloroMemez]

Have created a mod that changes all weapon slots on civ and non-combat ships to size 13. It had to be <19 to prevent them equipping missiles, and <14 to prevent them equipping crummy projectile weapons.
So this will prevent them from using defender missiles and blocking field generators.

Full disclosure, civ ships may still auto-design to have weapons, with weapons such as the laser cannon etc. being size 12. But if I were to make the slots below 12 size, the civ ships wouldn't be able to equip most forms of point defense, so this is a bit of a tradeoff in its current iteration.

Give it a try and tell me what you think, as if no weapons whatsoever is desired, I'd have to slightly boost the size of every possible weapon they could equip. That would have a slight knock on effect when equipping small military ships, where 1 or 2 size can make the difference.

Can grab a copy of the mod and test it out here: https://github.com/rc0004/Civilian-PD-O ... tag/v1.0.0

[SirHoraceHarkness]

Civilian ships first line of defense has always been to eat any damage on their shields as they warp away. I don't really see any need for any type of weapon or point defense at all. Hell I custom design my colony ships with nothing but the bare minimum to get to the planet its going to colonize stripping out all sensors and defenses etc. I'll give the mod a try and see how it impacts the economy since each ship is going to be a bit cheaper to build and operate.

[zgrssd]

As I said before, "Fixing" a complex system like the ship designer is a lot of work, that can easily break with future updates.

zgrssd, I appreciate your sharing of knowledge in this and other forums.

I do wish, however, that you would elaborate on this. You have made the statement multiple times as it were common knowledge (like the effect of gravity) but I don't understand your logic.

I realy do not know how to better describe it.
You would have to add a whole logic section of the Ship Designer code that avoids intalling big weapons. Then you have to add a tag like "civil ship", so that logic section knows to have effet.

But then every single change to the ship designer has the chance of completely invalidating that check. Resulting in no ship having only PD weapons. Or all Ships having only PD weapons.

Meanwhile if they just have Slots of Size 13, the ability of hte Ship Designer to mess up is very small.

Have created a mod that changes all weapon slots on civ and non-combat ships to size 13. It had to be <19 to prevent them equipping missiles, and <14 to prevent them equipping crummy projectile weapons.
So this will prevent them from using defender missiles and blocking field generators.

Full disclosure, civ ships may still auto-design to have weapons, with weapons such as the laser cannon etc. being size 12. But if I were to make the slots below 12 size, the civ ships wouldn't be able to equip most forms of point defense, so this is a bit of a tradeoff in its current iteration.

Give it a try and tell me what you think, as if no weapons whatsoever is desired, I'd have to slightly boost the size of every possible weapon they could equip. That would have a slight knock on effect when equipping small military ships, where 1 or 2 size can make the difference.

Can grab a copy of the mod and test it out here: https://github.com/rc0004/Civilian-PD-O ... tag/v1.0.0

I think you have to specify the exact version this modified file was created from.
The current beta 1.0.3.5:

- Ship hull fixes for certain freighters and transports
- Fixes to component data typos and some tweaks some of which affect the permissible slot sizes for certain late game weapons

So the vanilla file for slots has changed. And propably will change every version.
If I install a file that forked off a 1.0.3.3 installation, I would re-introduce every slot bug fixed in .3.4 and .3.5
That is why I think we need more a process to semi-automatically generate the files from the ingame ones.

Thanks for the work either way

[OloroMemez]

I think you have to specify the exact version this modified file was created from.
The current beta 1.0.3.5:

That's not how this mod works. It's not just copy pasting an XML file that becomes invalidated every patch. It uses the mod loader to find the file it needs to apply patches to, and makes them. So if there's changes to the file introduced by a more recent game version, unless the mod and game version are changing the exact same value, e.g. slot size of weapon slot, then the game version won't matter.

[SamuraiProgrmmr]

zgrssd,

(quotes from your post above)

You would have to add a whole logic section of the Ship Designer code that avoids intalling big weapons. Then you have to add a tag like "civil ship", so that logic section knows to have effet.

I don't see this as an insurmountable problem. Yes, it requires more than a cursory change to some XML, but in the scheme of things (considering the complexity of the game) it just doesn't seem to me to be 'over the top' difficult.

But then every single change to the ship designer has the chance of completely invalidating that check. Resulting in no ship having only PD weapons. Or all Ships having only PD weapons.

EVERY change to the ship designer has the chance of invalidating EVERY check/decision. This is the nature of computer programming. This part of your argument, IMO, is invalid.

Meanwhile if they just have Slots of Size 13, the ability of the Ship Designer to mess up is very small.

Yes, I can agree with that. However, it will limit players who DO want to have bigger weapons on these ships.

To me, it is only an issue of principle. I design certain ships (explorers, freighters, mining ships, and constructor ships) without ANY weapons at all. I tell them to retreat if the enemy is near to compensate for that. This gives me room for other things on the design (like recreation to reduce maintenance, more fuel, etc.). The downside is that a constructor might get interrupted while building a base or a freighter might not make some of its deliveries. Again, it is a choice. There are other choices that may be just as (or even more) valid to others.

But the principle is important. The Devs have stated that they want to make the game so the user can play the way they want to. This particular issue doesn't matter to me that much. But the next issue might break how I want to play the game.

Fixing" a complex system like the ship designer is a lot of work

Sure it is. So is writing a computer game. I bet the devs are doing it because they love it. Yes, there will always be a balancing act between difficulty and utility when choosing how to implement a change. If the devs tell me that it is too difficult, that's one thing. I just don't think you are in a position to be the authority on a) how difficult it is and b) what the true balance between difficulty and utility is.

Lastly, if you like the idea of limiting the slots in question to size 13, use a mod. In the scheme of things it is easy to mod, IMO. To justify that statement, I would say compare this problem to modding (or even extracting programmatically) the firing arcs which is (IMO) two orders of magnitude higher in difficulty.

Just My Opinion

[zgrssd]

Okay, final tally is: 47 Votes
Remove all Slots: 15%
Limit to PD sizes only: 55%*
Keep Current Slots: 30%

*@OloroMemes has already made a mod for this. It requires a Modload programm, but in turn the modifications should not interfere with or break on any gamepatches:
https://github.com/rc0004/Civilian-PD-O ... tag/v1.0.0

[OloroMemez]

New release

Further reduces slot size to 11 and also changes the weapon size of basic point defence options to be able to fit in this smaller size. This will prevent even small weapons like ion weapons and pulse lasers (size 12) from being equipped on civilian ships.

https://github.com/rc0004/Civilian-PD-O ... tag/v1.0.5

[rxnnxs]

New release

Further reduces slot size to 11 and also changes the weapon size of basic point defence options to be able to fit in this smaller size. This will prevent even small weapons like ion weapons and pulse lasers (size 12) from being equipped on civilian ships.

https://github.com/rc0004/Civilian-PD-O ... tag/v1.0.5

Thank you! Awesome work, especially because it streams into new patches. Also a good tutorial project for more other mods to come.

Okay, final tally is: 47 Votes
Remove all Slots: 15%
Limit to PD sizes only: 55%*
Keep Current Slots: 30%

*@OloroMemes has already made a mod for this. It requires a Modload programm, but in turn the modifications should not interfere with or break on any gamepatches:
https://github.com/rc0004/Civilian-PD-O ... tag/v1.0.0

Ok, I did not vote. I want the designers/programmers to do so as they feel fit.
And sometimes later, I would vote then, if there is not still such a switch:
A switch saying "Weapons on civilian Ships" enabled/disabled.
Just besides much other options that are switchable.

[MxM111]

Keep it as it is in terms of slots. Here is why:

Make automatic designer not to use these slots (or use PD at best). This addresses most of people concerns.

But there should be a way to civilian ships to protect station to which it tries to dock. Just imagine how many civilian ships fly near space station - it can be noticeable contribution to the station firepower.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Keep it as it is in terms of slots. Here is why:

Make automatic designer not to use these slots (or use PD at best). This addresses most of people concerns.

But there should be a way to civilian ships to protect station to which it tries to dock. Just imagine how many civilian ships fly near space station - it can be noticeable contribution to the station firepower.

While they could contribute ala Star Wars, where civilian ships actually can be pretty potent even in combat, from a resource perspective it makes very little sense for how often they actually get to use it... they also will flee as soon as a fight breaks out anyway.

It would be much better if the AI actually was trained to build more competent ship designs, their freighters is extremely bad with very few cargo holds instead they are loaded with defences and weapons they will rarely if ever get to use.

Leave the weapons slots as they can be useful to fit PD weapons for extra defence, but only when the more mission critical components of the ships have been added first.

Civilian ships don't need sensors nor weapons and even shields and armour can be sacrificed to optimise their mission modules first. Once the general slots are filled with optimised mission slots, then engines... then defences, then PD weapons and lastly a sensor if they have space over for it. A freighter is better to fit another cargo hold before defences, weapons and sensors.

I just recently played an AI run, mainly to check some modding... after about seventy years in I decided to just redesign the freighters and see what result that would have. After just a few years the flowing of goods was improved many times over... all of the starports reported more or less full capacity on every construction resource. The development of the worlds also had, in general, increased to a noticeable degree as well as did the overall income.

[AKicebear]

Thanks for confirming that @Jorgen. I suspect once modding is better supported (multiple mods loading, mod sharing via steam workshop) that balance passes and AI improvements will make major gains. Those mods made a huge difference with DWU and I suspect the same will happen here too (and hopefully a half decade or so earlier!).