[Feature Request]Fleet Management, Logistics and Map-based UI changes

[Manawydn]

Version - 1.1
Proof of Concept - Mods that already address some of the issues, and/or utilize mechanics in the same vain.
"Player Restock Subordinates"
"Civilian Fleets"
"Fleet Docking"

All Fleet related behaviours, rules, formations in one location. All information relative to fleets/subordinates in one location, or accessible from said location. A system that is easy to use, learn, and manipulate. A system that helps shorten some time-consuming actions (when attempted en masse) A system that implements some elements already available via mods.

Suggestion - Fleet Management "Templates" that allow you to sort ships in to roles (subordinates, attack/intercept/defend, alpha,beta,gamma)
-Automates the sorting of selected ships in to respective subordinates, and groups (alpha,beta,gamma etc)
-Allows for "layering" of subordinates (Subordinate-inception)
-Saves the player about an hour of play-time in sorting and building a large fleet.
~~~~~~Currently it takes about an hour to sort a fleet of 400 in to a "large, complex fleet" The fleet in this case consists of 300 S, 100 M, 80 L, 20 XL.
^^^^^I have done this multiple times in a modded game, and it takes about an hour to sort 400 ships in to a single "large, complex fleet"
^^^^^500 is about the maximum my cpu can handle in a sector, so that is why the number is so high. I min/maxed intentionally to discover the soft-limits of the UI+time+cpu load. (8-core Ryzen cpu)

Subordinates+layering - Right now, one of the most time-consuming issues with creating a fleet, assuming all ships have already been constructed and are local - is dropping everyone in to their proper "roles" as a subordinate. This process can be automated via a "template" which can be saved. The template can simply sort the fleet in to a top-down pyramid with the Fleet Leader at the top, sorting everything else in to pre-defined rules.

^^^^^Example - Player creates a template consisting of 1 XL Carrier as the Fleet Leader, 2 L ships in "Attack Alpha", 2 L ships in "Defense Gamma", 1 Aux ship in "Supply Fleet Iota" and 100 S ships in "Intercept Epsilon" The player names the template "T-XX"
^^^^^The player then selects 1 XL Carrier, 3/4 L ships, 1 Aux ship, and only 50/100 S ships, and selects the option "sort in to template "T-XX"
^^^^^The script sorts your selected ships as "intelligently" as possible. Or, perhaps, as evenly as possible. It doesn't really matter. What matters is that it does it's best to re-create the template given for the fleet, whether or not it has enough ships.
^*^*^*^*^ The example above is simple enough, and doesn't need a template do create the fleet efficiently. However, if you want 1 XL with 1 L subordinate with 2 L subordinates, each with 2 L subordinates, each with 5 M subordinates, each with 10 S subordinates, you can see how attempting to do so manually quickly stacks in a linear fashion, especially when dealing with fleets of 100+ ships.

<Intended Result> - Streamline some of the UI elements in "MENUS" and reduce the amount of "mouse clicks" it takes to perform an action to it's lowest common denominator. Give the "freedom to choose" to the player, and allow them to essentially create a template once, and fill it as many times as is necessary (determined by player).
^^^^^In other words, "collapse" this set of actions in to a simple "template" which you can click and allow the cpu to sort for you. This UI addition/integration is intended to fix this type of issue.

New "Rule" - Engagement Range

This simple rule allows the player to choose whether or not subordinates operate within the entire sector, or a pre-defined set of ranges. For simplicity sake, I will label ranges as "Close" "Medium" "Far/Unlimited"

<Intended Result> Again, "freedom to choose" for the player. Simply put, it allows the player to decide whether or not their fleet splits up, or sticks together when moving around and/or engaging in combat. Currently, I see no option to do so without some heavy micro-management.
^^^^^For Example, right now if you have a fleet huddled together on one side of the sector/region, and issue an attack command against a station on the other side of the sector/region, your "attack" ships will leave the fleet's vicinity and make a bee-line toward the station. This results in unnecessary casualties. The only work-around that I know of is very micro-intensive. The workaround being that you would need to issue a "Move/travel" command to the fleet, wait for any stragglers to catch up, and then issue the attack command once the fleet is positioned nearby.
^^^^^Giving the player the option to set a pre-defined engagement range "collapses" the need for micro-management of the fleet in this example, so that they all move, attack, and intercept within range of each other, or go wild and split up. Player's choice. The idea is that different people want to manage their fleets in different ways, for different purposes. Likewise, the tools available are inadequate to get the job done, but could easily be integrated in to a sort of "template" as various options become available with crew level-up.



<<Overall (Intended) Result>> The player can more easily manage their fleets in the heat of battle, and thus, has more time to watch, participate, and enjoy content that may be more engaging to the player, without eliminating map-based gameplay mechanics.
^^^^^Streamline, improve, and integrate existing User-Interface in to a new "template" system, which allows the player to customize their User Interface to their liking, effectively adapting the User-Interface to the player's wants/needs/desires rather than coercing the player to curate their wants/needs/desires around the amount of time it takes to complete a task in the map/menus interface.
^^^^^Allow those of us who have Uber-Computers to min/max in a more timely manner.
^^^^^Allow for more real-time-strategy playstyles to develop in the game.

<EDIT/ADDITION>
Distinct "Build" "Sort" mechanics. "Build" will allow you to create a fleet right out of the box, and will automatically sort the ships in to their proper subordinate groups upon completion. You can always cancel this process if you want to stop, or do something different.
"Sort" will attempt to sort selected-units in to the template you desire. It will prioritize as follows - Exact Ship+Loadout -> Same Ship, different loadout -> Different ship, same type of ship (Dragon vs Nemesis for example) Anything that does not fit in to that convention can remain unassigned (Would need to manually be sorted if you want it in the fleet)

A system that, by design, is easy to change, and manipulate from both the developers (hopefully) and consumer's points of view. What do you think?

[Manawydn]

Full "Carrier" functionality with any ship that has a dock on it. Not sure how else to phrase it.
^^^^^L and M ships would keep the majority of their attack/intercept/defend subordinates docked (if possible) so long as they are not in combat.
^^^^^Any ship that has a S/M dock can "get supplies". Ships with docks would be able to open up trade offers, so that they wouldn't need to rely solely on getting the wares via stations.

M-ships with docks can grab supplies from a fellow AUX or Carrier (if nearby/same fleet/applicable etc)
M-ships with docks, due to limited storage capacity would only grab hull parts, e-cells, smart chips, missile components. Maybe drone components as well.

Currently the player can manually do this. This would just be automation of the same process.

L and M ships would keep the majority of their attack/intercept/defend subordinates docked (if possible) so long as they are not in combat.

<Example> Take a Split Cobra for instance. An M-class frigate with a single small dock. You give it some S-class fighter-subordinates and one S-class trade-subordinate. The trader would be set to "trade" via the commands "Supply Fleet" or a new dedicated "Trade" command. The trader does it's thing. Any S-class fighter that can dock will dock so long as we are not engaged in combat. Usually these kinds of M-class frigates can only hold 2 ships. one in storage, and one on the dock. The Fleet Leader (Cobra) can issue an order for the S-class fighter(s) to undock and make space for the trade-ship if it is attempting to exchange it's wares with the Cobra.

[z1ppeh]

And how would your fleet setup be worked? Limited to ships of the EXACT same design for it to be auto assigned? Flaw. Auto assigning ships of a particular size? even though you may not want them in that particular position? Flaw. Having commands auto assigned to ships that you would then have to go through and reset yourself? Flaw. Want those turrets setup a particular way so that particular ship can be dedicated to fighter decimation as your going up against the split which are faster and need a few more cattle prods? Not your way!

One of the reasons behind fleeting on this scale being so micro managey is the simple fact that it gives the user greater control and less chance of **** (IF you know what you are doing in the first place). I would much prefer to spend an hour fleeting up properly, considering you do it in small stages anyway rather than building everything and slapping it all together, so I KNOW it is 100% working the way I want it to. What is the point in having an auto fleeting mechanic that you would have to check and fix every time? And if you play exactly the same way every time then that surely gets a bit boring.

I would much rather time be invested on fixing the current fleeting issues rather than creating something like this, which could only be implemented on a very unique basis. Not every fleet setup is the same, and rightly so! If your working to the AIs standards, your ships are EXACTLY the same every time and pulled from a pool of shiptypes. You HAVE seen how the AI loses against the player right? I presume you don't want that.... And something like this would need its own god damn AI to figure out what the player wants it to do anyway.... thats where the xenon came from!

[Manawydn]

~EDIT~ After going through your feedback, it is clear to me that a "Build" template and a "Sort" template needs to be implemented as two distinct pathways within the overall idea. This way, you can click something akin to "Build and Sort in to fleet" -Which can build your fleet from any wharf and/or shipyard that is capable, and automatically place the ship in it's proper "Attack, Intercept, Defend" subordinate group. There may even be a "use player wharf/shipyard only" button if you wish to go that route. It can also have an "Update Template" and "Save as Template" button, in case you wish to update, or create a new template out of that particular setup. It is similar to the existing mechanics of saving a station+loadout, or saving a ship+loadout.
"Sort" is an easy/automated/imperfect means of quickly sorting existing ships in to a template, as best as the ai can do so given the discrepancies of different ships, or loadouts. As I mentioned below, you can always change it manually if you'd like. Going through 100 ships individually and changing their turret settings, for example, takes the same amount of time whether the ships are unassigned, or in a fleet, so this mechanic does not create a longer time-frame for those who wish to do so manually. It just gives us the option to quickly sort, so that we can move on and do something else. As mentioned below, it would follow this convention ~~~ Exact ships first. If the "sort" template is still missing ships, it moves on to then sort by same ships with different loadouts, and if the "sort" template is still missing ships after that, then same ship archetype. Please keep in mind that the player still needs to have everything selected in order for the mechanic to "know" which ships to sort, and which ships get left alone. The design can not simply pull any "unassigned" ship to fit the bill. That would cause havok.

And how would your fleet setup be worked? Limited to ships of the EXACT same design for it to be auto assigned? Flaw. Auto assigning ships of a particular size? even though you may not want them in that particular position? Flaw. Having commands auto assigned to ships that you would then have to go through and reset yourself? Flaw. Want those turrets setup a particular way so that particular ship can be dedicated to fighter decimation as your going up against the split which are faster and need a few more cattle prods? Not your way!

One of the reasons behind fleeting on this scale being so micro managey is the simple fact that it gives the user greater control and less chance of **** (IF you know what you are doing in the first place). I would much prefer to spend an hour fleeting up properly, considering you do it in small stages anyway rather than building everything and slapping it all together, so I KNOW it is 100% working the way I want it to. What is the point in having an auto fleeting mechanic that you would have to check and fix every time? And if you play exactly the same way every time then that surely gets a bit boring.

I would much rather time be invested on fixing the current fleeting issues rather than creating something like this, which could only be implemented on a very unique basis. Not every fleet setup is the same, and rightly so! If your working to the AIs standards, your ships are EXACTLY the same every time and pulled from a pool of shiptypes. You HAVE seen how the AI loses against the player right? I presume you don't want that.... And something like this would need its own god damn AI to figure out what the player wants it to do anyway.... thats where the xenon came from!

Thanks for pointing this out. The "Template" design is there to allow the user to make these kinds of changes within the template it's self, and then hit a button like "build" and/or "sort". If you want to change something, you can do so either through the template, or through means that already exist in the game "ie-manually"
The point of this design archetype is that it is just that. An archetype, a template. If you want 100 of the same Dragon Raiders, with 6 different weapons, all on their own fire-groups, with both turrets set to something different, the template would simply make the process of building 100 quicker and easier. Currently you would need to go through each ship and change it's turret settings manually. I'd rather be able to have them set how I want upon creation. (You can always change it once the ship is built/moved to a different fleet etc) It is not intended to replace existing mechanics, only to make mass-producing a quicker process.

Ships would be assigned based on their overall layout. A Dragon Raider with 6 different weapons, on 6 different fire-groups would be treated as a different "ship" then, say, a Dragon Raider with "High Preset" and will be prioritized based on how exact, or different the loadout is (addressed above in the EDIT, and below)

This is mostly to stream-line and integrate already existing mechanics. If you want to do it manually, you still can. If you could not, then I would agree that the idea has too many flaws to be implemented in it's current format. -In other words, if it makes things more difficult, there is no reason to implement it, as higher difficulty, more micromanagement, and greater time consumption goes against the design-philosophy. The point is to make some things easier, without removing existing mechanics.

"Not every setup is the same"
^^^^^You can always save and load-up more templates to be built.
^^^^^You can always change turret-settings etc once the fleet has been made, this does nothing to over-rule that.

"And how would your fleet setup be worked? Limited to ships of the EXACT same design for it to be auto assigned?"
^^^^^This is a tougher one. The template would prioritize like so. Exact ships -> Same ships with different loadouts -> Same ship archetype (Dragon, Dragon Raider, Nemesis etc. would fill the slot if the exact ship were a Corvette)
^^^^^There could also be a check-box "fill template with exact ships only"

Again, this is a mechanic that can turn manually building/sorting 20 fighters with this loadout, 20 fighters with that loadout, and 20 fighters with a third loadout in to a saveable "template" that you can then re-create at the click of a button, rather than going back in to the Wharf and building/sorting them manually. (which you can still do if you'd like)

"I would much rather time be invested on fixing the current fleeting issues"
^^^^^This template is designed to do just-that. I can't create "the perfect system" on my own, I need input and feedback like yours to iron out the details, and come up with a solid idea.

"If your working to the AIs standards, your ships are EXACTLY the same every time and pulled from a pool of shiptypes"
^^^^^Partially addressed above, but I will also add, If the AI CAN do this, then why CAN'T we?

"And how would your fleet setup be worked? Limited to ships of the EXACT same design for it to be auto assigned? Flaw. Auto assigning ships of a particular size? even though you may not want them in that particular position? Flaw. Having commands auto assigned to ships that you would then have to go through and reset yourself? Flaw. Want those turrets setup a particular way so that particular ship can be dedicated to fighter decimation as your going up against the split which are faster and need a few more cattle prods? Not your way!"
^^^^^These options would all be changed within the template, AND can be changed via existing means. If YOU want to go through and manually change everything, go for it. I do not. I want to be able to minimize map-based gameplay at certain periods of time, and get on with actually flying a ship etc. The template helps MACRO without eliminating MICRO. If one eliminates the other, then the design-idea is too flawed in it's current state to be implemented, and needs to be re-worked (Which is what this thread is for)

I hope this helps to answer your questions and feedback, if you can, please get back to me on this thread as I would like to work this out. Please keep picking this apart and help me work out any flaws, make changes, simplify etc.