FreeOrion

You can access the IDs of the selected system and fleet, like used in the objects list distance to columns : thank you! it looks these are available :mrgreen: (with implementations in UI/MapWnd.cpp delegated via client/human/GGHumanClientApp.cpp) std::make_unique<ValueRef::Variable<int>>(ValueRef::...

Thus kind of simulating that "more" hits "hit home", or explosions caused by hits cause damage to nearby ships caught in the blast radius or something along these lines. simulating chance-to-(meaningful)-hit by amount-of-damage is definitely possible with the current backend etc...

I would do this for most effects gated by stability. Minimum stability for the effect to kick in should be 0 or 5 by default (or the baseline stability value). I would use higher minimum values only for policies with effects not compatible with the scaling or policies strong enough and with a fluff...

I believe that Ophiuchus said that you were always supposed to have Supply over your own planet. I think what I tried to say is zero supply planets also supply the containing system. So if nobody else supplies the system and you have a planet with zero supply and your ship is not supplied that is c...

however it does play havoc with the pedia. i think you can specify how many digits are shown (in order to get rid of the 0.00). but the text is misleading/wrong/does not fit the implementation. the bonus multiplied are: -10 if stability is 0. -5 if stability is 5. 0 if stability is 10. +10 if stabi...

Charging IP dependent on where a ship is sounds like a nightmare to me. The IP cost is going to constantly change, that's a management headache. How much IP do you need? You suddenly don't know. Note: Any solution has to also work for the AI. Teaching it how to layout its ships to handle IP costs e...

edit: Note like the other solutions, this also has the issue of unfair(?) low upkeep when combining fleets of different empires against a common enemy Then consider also those ships. As already written I think that is unsolvable to do 100% right. If you have empires A,B,C,D ; A and C are at war, A ...

I was talking about ship upkeep (in IP). A base upkeep per ship would be increased based on the number of other ships at no more than X hops, to discourage concentration of forces (stacking). Ok, got it, IP upkeep per fleet/ship (and not per system) and the amount depends on other owned ships in vi...

another idea: how about allowing only two different types of ship part?

Or just use distance: any owned (armed or not, for chaff) ship at less than 1 turn (or 2) of distance is counted for the upkeep in that system (and in other systems as well...). Would that mean I have to keep upkeep in every system in 1 (or 2) turns distance of one of my ships? Sorry, I don't' unde...

Oberlus wrote: ↑Sat Apr 06, 2024 10:34 am Or just use distance: any owned (armed or not, for chaff) ship at less than 1 turn (or 2) of distance is counted for the upkeep in that system (and in other systems as well...).

Would that mean I have to keep upkeep in every system in 1 (or 2) turns distance of one of my ships?

Yes, the fluff would be something about it being more difficult to maintain a bigger fleet in a single place (they need better logistics, drawing resources for more planets from further away). This opens up options for policies about - Greater base ship upkeep but less extra-upkeep from stacking (b...

note for fluff that sending a big amounts of fleet into a system does not necessarily equate "concentration of forces". e.g. a smaller enemy might only encounter a part of the big fleet and score an easy win against that. What I mostly fear with a stack limit is queues of ships at choke po...

My point is not that making concentrating forces useless is good (to the contrary), but that making it difficult is indeed good for the game, as many small fleet allow a way bigger strategic diversity. my point is that having a direct setting for the efficiency of death stacking would allow for muc...

last weeks news: channels: v0.5.0/stable: v0.5-rc3-38-g59084dbca 2024-03-20 (431) 215MB - latest/edge: 2024-03-15.b3de0942d 2024-03-20 (432) 366MB - this weeks news (beta unsmoked): Track Arch Channel Version Revision Progress Expires at latest amd64 stable v0.5-rc3-38-g59084dbca 431 - - beta 2024-0...