Hotfix Please!

[Vedric]

1. The natural state of weaponized mining stations and resort bases needs to be "attack enemy targets" NOT "attack when attacked"

2. The natural state of any ship or base with fighters on board should be to "launch all" when an enemy is in the same system. If this can't be done, an alternative would be to "launch all" when not in hyperspace.

3. Automated defensive fleets need "move to home base" order after any automated action takes place. Example: Set home base, defensive, system targets, execute "move to" order. Everything is fine if the fleet jumps away to protect something because it will jump back to home base. The problem is after fighting near home base or refueling, the fleet will now just sit in space as it's home base drifts away. When an attack comes they are out of position, worse yet, they might be too close to home base for a hyper jump but too far to help.

Edit: I need to add another.

4. When an individual ship within a fleet is given a repair or refuel order it needs to ignore fleet orders until this task is finished. After completion it should rejoin the fleet, much like a new ship will fly to whatever fleet it has been assigned to.

Have you ever driven a VW Beetle with a Ferrari V12 engine? This is what it feels like to play Distant Worlds at times. Please fix this guys!

[elanaagain]

Agree very strongly with above. Especially mining/bases. It bites to build a defended mning base, and have the enemy waltz in, and close to short range, fire at will. Whats the point of longer range weapons if they aren't used?

[Vedric]

I figured out a semi-workaround for my mining station issues and fighters. Simply don't use the mining or gas mining role for mining bases. Instead use the defensive base role. This gives you the "manage fighters and bombers" UI element in the selection panel. It also solves the problem with mining bases not firing main weapons until fired upon. However, the base still will not auto-launch fighters and bombers. That is still a problem in my opinion. Also, after redesigning all my mining bases (8 different types) to use the defensive base role I now get a warning screen "you do not have any non obsolete designs for the following civilian ship types" warning screen because I am no longer using the mining station role. Not a problem for me using manual constructors. In the long run I'm unsure of how using too many of these will hamper my State economy because defensive bases won't privatize like mining stations will.

Solutions.

1. Simply give mining bases the same AI logic as defensive bases.
2. Simply give mining bases the "manage fighters and bombers" UI element so we can more easily manually launch them.
3. If time permits, Have fighters and bombers auto-launch when an enemy is in the same system.

[JCVocke]

We have engagement stances, that we can specify for every ship design, we should have Fighter Stances too.

[Vedric]

Ok I've done some more tests and need to revise my solutions above. Carriers wonderfully auto-launch and auto-retrieve their fighters and bombers. Defensive bases seem to not launch fighters in some situations. I didn't test star bases and we already know the problem with mining and resort bases.

Solutions.

1. Mining stations, resort bases and research stations need the same engagement rules as ports and defensive bases. This should be a copy\paste fix right?

2. ALL base and station roles need the same fighter\bomber launch logic that carriers use. Another copy\paste fix? With this you practically wouldn't need the "manage fighters and bombers" UI element. Although it's nice to have.

This solves my original #1 and #2.

ORIGINAL: JCVocke

We have engagement stances, that we can specify for every ship design, we should have Fighter Stances too.

I'm not sure this would be needed. They are just a weapon and should follow the stance of the ship or fleet they are on. In that sense you already can set their stances. I've just recently began playing with fighters so I could be wrong in thinking this is how they act.

[Falokis]

Good list. 100% agree.

[Simulation01]

I agree.

[elanaagain]

agreed +1

[hewwo]

ORIGINAL: Vedric


4. When an individual ship within a fleet is given a repair or refuel order it needs to ignore fleet orders until this task is finished. After completion it should rejoin the fleet, much like a new ship will fly to whatever fleet it has been assigned to.

This, +1+1. It's something that I regularly wish for while playing!

[mbar]

Has anyone had a fleet where one ship needs fuel, you order the whole fleet to refuel, but that ONE ship never seems to get refueled before the fleet decides to warp somewhere?

[elanaagain]

yes, the little slowpoke ship..lol

[Vedric]

I encountered a horrible bug related to this which I will post in the techsup forum. I wanted to mention it here because it would likely be fixed if:

2. ALL base and station roles need the same fighter\bomber launch logic that carriers use. Another copy\paste fix? With this you practically wouldn't need the "manage fighters and bombers" UI element. Although it's nice to have.

The bug is with star bases. They somehow get stuck in permanently launching all fighters mode. Using the manage fighters and bombers UI doesn't fix it. Needless to say this makes it impossible to upgrade fighters and bombers. They should return automatically but they don't when this happens. I'm now deleting bases and replacing them with the editor as this happens. I'm unsure if carriers or other base types have the same issue. If carriers do not (haven't experienced it yet), then this is one more reason for replacing the launch/return logic of all buildable things with the carrier logic.

[MisadventuresVG]

And here was me thinking I was the only one wondering that EXACT same thing.

The sheer frustration of watching a heavily armed mining station sitting like a lemon with missile range of 520 getting butt ****ed by a short range pirate ship is beyond words.

[Starke]

+1 to all these suggestions. They would be great quality-of-life improvements to the game.