It would just be (P). Sometimes you make a lot of prototypes for a single new class and I see (RP) as being a quick way to make sure you’ve set all of them to research protos.
I was giving this some more thought earlier, after looking at the screen shots there and some similar tools on Discord.
I don’t have have any issue with the idea of (for example) icons in treeview nodes, so you can have different symbols for different fleet types, or ground unit icons. I’ve never used them but I can see the benefit in having them so I will look into that.
However, in terms of general principles my own preference is (for want of a better term) density of information. For example, here is a screenshot from a tool on Discord.
It has nice colours, a sci-fi-style font, a few items of similar information grouped within bold-headed, coloured boxes, graphic bars instead of numbers, etc.
So you could look at that and think that is spaced-out information, with charts and bars to aid understanding, different colours and headings to separate the UI elements into different sections to improve readability, etc. and generally a much more aesthetically-pleasing way to view information.
However, I look at it and think that approach is using a lot of space to convey a very limited amount of information. Without all the graphical fluff, fancy fonts and blank spaces, I can present a lot more information, with much more context and a lot of ways to interact with the data. For example.
Now the type of person who might produce the first screen would probably look at the System View and think “WTF, that looks terrible, how can anyone understand that?” 
However, as I said in an earlier response, I absorb information via text and numbers, not via images, so Aurora has ended up being reflective of that ‘information-dense’ approach. Note that a lot of the UI suggestions that get implemented are usually based on getting more information into the interface
I suspect perhaps that many people attracted to Aurora also don’t mind information density because it is a game that attracts a certain type of person. For those that prefer lower density information with a more ‘standard’ UI and presented in a more aesthetically-pleasing way, there are a few different ‘viewer programs’ available.
I’ve also tried replacing the fleet ‘dots’ with standard NATO icons, like harpoon, or planet dots with planet images. I’ve even messed around with a 3D galactic map. Every time I go back to how it looks now because the attempt to make it look ‘prettier’ always results in confusing the map and making it harder to understand what is happening.
In terms of pictures of ships, ground units, components, installations, etc. I tend to stay away from that beyond the basic ship icons because Aurora is very imagination-led. It is deliberately ambiguous regarding appearance so that players can fill those gaps with their own preferred view of their Empire, or generate their own images to illustrate the story they want to create. Aurora is like a book, rather than a film.
Having said all that, I am more than happy to hear UI suggestions, just like mechanics improvements, but they need to be specific changes, rather than general suggestions about making it a ‘better’ UI, and then need to take into account that desire to maintain ‘information density’
8 Likes
Small QOL change to colony flags: set a minimum population for ‘Source of Colonists‘.
It doesn’t happen every game, but sometimes I end up with civilian colony ships massing into a fleet that ends up completely depopulating an otherwise mature colony in one swoop. Forcing them to leave at least enough to operate the local mines and factories would be nice.
1 Like
Steve, sometimes I feel like the UI is not information-dense enough, there is too much fiddly whitespace and scrolling involved. 
So I relate to and appreciate your design aesthetic.
But then again, I also have a demonstrated track record of making my own graphics, so I’m probably not the target audience for these fancy graphics people like.
3 Likes
If that is happening in v2.7.1, it is a bug. The shipping lines changes in v2.6, specifically the colonisation pressure mechanic, were designed to prevent that happening.
Can you confirm you have seen this behaviour in the latest version?
The complete depletion of any non-CMC colony’s resources causes an interrupt event.
I believe this will significantly increase the convenience of mine management - the depletion of one resource does not cause an Interrupt, and the mines continue to operate, but when the last resource runs out, you’ll want to move the mines right away, and to do this, you’ll don’t have to keep in mind or check how many types of resources are still left.
SJW: Added for v2.8
3 Likes
I had actually missed that change entirely. Makes sense then that I hadn’t seen it in a while, so no I haven’t had this occur in 2.7.1
It would be nice if dragging a fleet in the Naval Organization windows would scroll through the fleet list. For example, say I want to merge that “Stabilizer Tug I” with something that is on the top of the list, it’s not possible unless I can get them to show both at the same time.
Can always do it with movement orders but the process is more time consuming if I want to do this for a lot of ships
1 Like
In the Naval Organization screen, sometimes I want to grab a certain number of ships for a specific task, like bringing Mines to a certain colony, and I calculate I need 20 of these freighters for example. It would be really helpful if, while I’m selecting ships, it would tell me how many I have selected. Maybe where it says 10x FT Haul I-A and 38x Ft Haul I it could say:
”(Selected: 20x Ft Haul I) 10x FT Haul I-A and 38x Ft Haul I”
If it could also say whats the Cargo Capacity (and potentially other stuff for other use cases) for the ships selected that would even simplify some calculations when figuring out how many ships are needed. For example if I calculate I need 1,200,000 cargo capacity for some task I just need to keep selecting ships until I have reached the amount.
Edit: Also being able to drag ships from the Ship List to merge with a fleet on the left side panel would also save some clicks, instead of having to Detach into a new fleet and then dragging to merge.
SJW: I’ve added the total for ships selected in v2.8
Dragging from lists to treeviews isn’t supported by the respective Microsoft controls.
1 Like
Colony Max Population in the “Governor / Misc” tab.
Sometimes I don’t want to create large colonies to don’t rise “Resistance” and ”Protection Required”, don’t create too large signature or for some RP purposes.
The “Max Population” value will be used instead of the “Population Capacity” of the planet if [Max < Capacity]. The basic value [Max = Capacity].
It seems to me that it will be quite simple to implement by adding something like “min(Capacity, MaxPopulation)” in several formulas.
1 Like
You can open two Naval Organization windows and drag between them. Use shift-click on the toolbar button. You can do this with other windows too, like ground forces.
6 Likes
“Assemble components” in the Class Design window.
The function will consist of a list of colonies, a quantity input field, and a “Assemble components" button.
When you click on the button, all ship components * [quantity] are added to the construction queue of the selected colony, with a Cap % 100 each. Of course, does not assemble prototypes and armor.
Simply put, it is a “Construct Organization" for ships.
It will probably be in the “Components” tab or “Priorities/ Misc” tab.
More STO range multipliers.
Currently STO DFC Range have only x1, x2, x3 and x4 multipliers. At low tech it’s fine. But at higher tech you can create something like a 10cm railgun with Range 10k and DFC Range 375k. 95% of STO cost would be a DFC cost, even without ECCM. Not fine.
(Why do you need that railgun in STO is another question.)
May STO have more multipliers, like we have on DFC projects? So Gausses will not have a 375k km DFC Range and cheap plasma STO may be… cheap.
Also.
STO designed range.
Designed range selected during unit creation, so it can’t be changed.
I want to create something like a slow and cheap high-caliber plasma, that would cut down enemy dropships instead of dealing miss at 1m km range and 1 damage at 150k km range.
So, STO will use [min(Designed, Maximum)] range as it it’s maximum weapon range and ignores enemies outside of this range.
This will allow to create a more powerful and cheaper close-range STO than some tiny plasma.
(Why do you need to use so close-range STO is another question.)
Also you can use some slow high-caliber laser at 400k km instead of maximum range miss. Or design your 60k range Gausses to point blank at 10k km.
I know that beams and lances can use different ranges, but sometimes I want to use another weapon types. 
Few quick suggestions :
- SinkEx like fleet training where you can actually fire the missiles you have on one of your own mothballed/obsolete ships to test them - could be useful.
- Actual [species] pirates - spoiler race, low tech, low numbers, able to pop up anywhere with small planetary garrisons as its bases. Perfect for that low level, low number ship/ground action.
- More civilian traffic would be cool too, especially from neutral nations.
SJW:
- is already in the game
- For reasons already specified earlier in this thread I won’t implement that.
- Neutral NPRs already have civilian traffic
Have “construct with components” on by default.
If you have components at a population with shipyards it is likelier that they are there to be used than not. So that optiin should be the default.
3 Likes
Please do not.
I usually prebuild components to be used for a specific class of high priority, but I am usually building other classes that share those components. I would not want the default behavior to be the one that could immediately cause an irreversible mistake.
3 Likes
Quick suggestion:
I find myself giving the same orders over and over again during beam combat. Follow contact at x kilometers.
Is it possible to allow the player to define a default set of distances for the follow order that are then displayed in the orders list? Like an order template, but with the ability to target it freely?
This could also be applied to order delays, minimum and maximum amounts, etc.
Maybe this isn’t a quick suggestion after all.
2 Likes
As it stands, one ‘unit’ of minerals is two ‘tons’ of shipping. I suggest you redefine a ‘unit’ of minerals to be one ton of shipping’s worth.
Two options to implement:
- Minerals become twice as easy or efficient to transport OR
- The mineral cost of everything is doubled, all sources of minerals are also doubled. This retains the previous balance wrt mineral shipping
SJW: What is the intended benefit of this change?
1 Like
Suggestion: Add an “Interrupt on Retirement” flag for commanders that would trigger a new turn-interrupting event when that characters dies or retires. This would be great for important characters that you don’t want to stay alive forever with the “Story Character” flag, but which you also don’t want to accidentally miss losing or which you want to address immediately. For example, I often like to retain a history of my empire’s top-level admirals, and while you can just make sure to check the death list before exiting, this would help avoid easy accidents.
Edit: This would be especially good IMO for recurring characters in AARs and commanders who are more important in the story than their in-game effect, like a general who is also the leader of your empire.
3 Likes
