Community DLC Suggestion Poll: Week of 2/7

[MaxAstro]

Not to overly complicate things, but is there a way to make "disabled" AIs still manually selectable?  For example, I don't want to be randomly put up against a One Way Doormaster most games, but if I decide I want a specific sort of game, it would be nice to be able to manually select a One Way Doormaster without having to edit the blacklist.

[Kjara]

Nod, I have to agree that the blacklist should only apply to any of the random selection options if possible.  That would get rid of the problem of the host and the other players having different options show up in the lobby as well(since it wouldn't need to remove any options).

Edit: example:  You have only one way doormaster in your blacklist.  If you choose random easy the game first checks the blacklist, sees that only one way doormaster is there out of the easy ai's, then makes a random selection out of what is left over out of the easy list.

[keith.lamothe]

The AI-type-blacklist can be made less blanket, and will eventually be a UI thing anyway instead of a .txt file, this was just the get-it-done-really-fast-for-people-who-really-want-the-feature-right-now solution.

In a similar vein, for 3.035:

-Added "Don't Overwrite Previous Autosaves" checkbox to Settings -> Game menu.  With this option checked, autosave file names will use the format Autosave_YYYY_MM_DD_hh_mm_ss.sav and thus will not overwrite each other (unless you somehow trigger multiple autosaves in the same second).

So it's not quite the requested feature of "retain X autosaves" because it's much easier to just give them all unique filenames and afterwards treat them exactly like every other save file rather than implement some kind of automatically-delete-all-but-X-files-that-start-with-the-string-"Autosave" thing.  That's quite possible, but I wonder how much you'd really want it since the file system usually makes that operation fairly easy if you want to clean stuff out.

[HellishFiend]

If possible, can we get a feasibility response on the following items?

Feature - AI Fleet Tactics    14 (14.7%)
Rebalance - MRS Overhaul    13 (13.7%)
Feature - AI Command station hacking    9 (9.5%)

[x4000]

If possible, can we get a feasibility response on the following items?

Feature - AI Fleet Tactics    14 (14.7%)
Rebalance - MRS Overhaul    13 (13.7%)
Feature - AI Command station hacking    9 (9.5%)

Sure thing.  The AI Fleet Tactics thing is something that I 100% intend to look at, but not in the next couple of months.  That's going to require a lot of thought and concentration from me, and while it will be a great improvement I'm sure, it's not something that I have anywhere close to time for at the moment.  Here I'm speaking from memory, basically referring to the topic about the AI ships adding in some dynamic flocking behavior about the starships.  My thoughts on this were in a different thread than was actually linked, apparently.

For the MRS overhaul, aspects of that are simple, and other aspects of it are not so.  Keith will be the one to tackle this, it would be in the next few weeks but not this week, as right now we're in a bugfixes-only mode in preparation of doing an official release.  I don't think we'll do everything on that list, but looking at making the MRS more usable along those lines seems like a good thing to me.  Keith: let's make this something to talk about in the week after the upcoming official release.

For the AI Command Station hacking, I think that that idea is not ready to go from a design sense.  There are a variety of ideas there, but none of them strike me as being quite the right one yet.  A lot of those are fairly exploitable, allowing dedicated players to simply dodge AI Progress (which I'm not going to do, I've spent a lot of time ensuring the opposite), or to allow them to unlock extra ship classes (again, not something I'm interested in doing, as that devalues the ARS and also causes balance problems in general).  So while the general concept of having a hacking drone and hacking command stations is interesting, I don't think that anything has yet been proposed that would be feasible from a design standpoint.

[HellishFiend]

Thanks! I updated the results topic.