Updated changelog for 0.4.6 #957

Vezzra · 2016-09-07T19:55:52Z

No description provided.

Vezzra · 2016-09-07T20:14:48Z

I've made a PR out of the first draft of the changelog for 0.4.6 @geoffthemedio posted on the forum. As we traditionally commit changelog updates to the release branch and cherry-pick them into master after the release, I created this PR against the release branch.

I also created the changelog branch in the main repo, not my clone, so we can better collaborate on it.

I made some small changes to the text @geoffthemedio posted:

I reordered the items in the "Key Changes" section and extended the item about the GUI improvements.
Fixed a typo.
Moved the entry "In DesignWnd add ability to drag parts away from design" from the "Balance" section to the "Graphics/GUI" section, assuming that it somehow erroneously ended up in "Balance" (because IMO this hasn't anything to do with balance, but everything with the GUI).
Unless you had a specific reason to put it in "Balance" that I missed - @geoffthemedio?
Rearranged order of a few items.

@geoffthemedio, are these adjustments ok with you? Feel free to revert any of them you don't think fitting.

I have some further comments I will post below, partially as comments to specific lines. Everyone else, please also review the changelog and post your corrections, either here as comments or provide PRs.

geoffthemedio · 2016-09-07T20:25:51Z

tweak as you want, I'll complain if I don't like it and notice

geoffthemedio · 2016-09-07T20:28:54Z

ChangeLog.md

+- Various GUI improvements
+ - GUI responsiveness / FPS improvements
+ - Made GUI more configurable
+ - New/better graphics


this does not seem like a "key change"

LGM-Doyle · 2016-09-07T20:35:08Z

Look good to me.

An impressive amount of work.

Congrats.

Vezzra · 2016-09-07T20:35:19Z

ChangeLog.md

+system where a supply source planet is located
+- Made producing troop pods require a production location with troops,
+and made producing troop pods consume troops from the production
+location


Anyone please correct my if I'm wrong, but is that bit (about producing troop pods consuming troops from the production location) actually the case? In my recent test games I didn't notice that happening, and the relevant effects in the troop pod ship parts are commented out. Unless these effects have been added elsewhere?

IIRC that happened because with that change alone, producing enough troop ships became almost impossible, and we started a discussion about how to address the issue. As we didn't reach a general consensus yet, this feature has been disabled, at least that's how I remember it.

So that part needs to be taken out of the changelog, right?

Yes, and made producing troop pods consume troops from the production location must be removed.
I've just checked in-game, no troops are consumed when a ship with a Troop Pod part is built (only the minimum Troop meter value is required - 2 or 4 depending the Troop Pod class - basic or advanced)

Vezzra · 2016-09-07T20:42:49Z

I might have missed it when reading that massive list of changes, but I didn't find an entry that mentioned the following: all systems that are not deep space, black holes or neutron stars now should have at least one planet/asteroid belt (so there are no more systems with stars, but no planets).

If it's really missing, should be added.

geoffthemedio · 2016-09-07T20:49:15Z

Don't recall adding anything like that

Morlic-fo · 2016-09-07T20:59:02Z

ChangeLog.md

+- Made AI adjust priorities based on costs of ship parts and hulls
+- Adjusted AI priorities for research time
+- Adjusted AI industry modifiers
+- Adjusted AI weapon upgrade calculations


Except for the losing-fleet part, imo the rest of the AI changes are small and unspecific enough to be summarized as "Various adjustments to AI priorities".

Morlic-fo · 2016-09-07T21:03:31Z

ChangeLog.md

+around the map randomly during galaxy generation, and share vision
+between planets on which they are located
+- The Honeycomb special will now turn nearby planets into asteroids
+instead of destroying them


Maybe this could be rewritten from the actual player perspective, i.e. instead of no planets in 5(`?) jump radius, there may only be asteroids?

I wasn't familiar enough with the special to know that that wasn't from a player perspective. If it's just something that happens at game start and not during a game when a player can see it, that would be a reasonable change.

"At start of game, the Honeycomb will now turn all planets without specials or inhabitants within 5 jumps into Asteroids instead of destroying them—without renaming them"

It's user facing because the weirdly named asteroids and similar is a deliberate hint, and not destroying the planets ties in with the "all-stars-get-a-planet" change.

@MatGB has a point here I think, so I'll put in the text he suggested for now.

"New/better graphics" isn't really a key change (removal suggested by Geoff).

Morlic-fo · 2016-09-07T21:15:33Z

ChangeLog.md

+- Balanced BioAdaptive hull to work same as Nanorobotic
+- Tweaked numbers for Logistics Facilitator
+- Prevent Krakens Nests from spawning on Asteroid belts created by the
+Honeycomb special (and similar situations)


Considering that the Honeycomb special was reworked in this version to actually create those Asteroids, does this bugfix really belong into the changelog?

probably not

MatGB · 2016-09-08T00:05:43Z

The Drydock change needs to be up as a Key Change I think, they're a signficant part of the game. I would also consider putting the damage control changes, Basic is changed, Robotic hulls are the most used hulls and the robotic line in general is one of the most used.

"Ship Repair has been substantially reworked, Drydocks require a ship to be stationary and repair a proportion of ship structure, no damage control effects work on the turn a combat has taken place except for the Logistic Facilitator flagship, which is substantially reduced."

MatGB · 2016-09-08T02:23:52Z

The change to directory structure on storage is important to note (possibly as a separate line item below key changes), as it still confuses me on occasions and we know there are a fair few linux users that only get their copy of the game from the official repos. When they update to this their save files and config files will have moved unexpectedly.

If it's not mentioned, the change to the directory structure for scripting needs to be mentioned, there are enough amateur scripters and similar that might have their own hacks, etc.

geoffthemedio · 2016-09-08T06:34:33Z

Drydock/repair -> ok
Directory structure -> seems weird to mention as key, but if you insist, ok...

MatGB · 2016-09-08T09:49:32Z

Heh, I never understood why it was changed—it's some Linux standardisation thing, but given it really does affect you if you're on Linux and used to looking at config files for the game, etc, it needs to be clearly stated somewhere. I don't think it's a key change but I do think we're going to get some confused players.

geoffthemedio · 2016-09-08T10:05:15Z

Add a note in technical / other about directory changes? (if not already suggested...)

Vezzra · 2016-09-08T10:16:36Z

I think proper entries in technical for both the restructuring of the content scripts and this thing with the config files on Linux should be sufficient. If anyone of our English native speakers could come up with some properly phrased texts, I'd very much appreciate it (as a non-native speaker it's a bit more difficult for me... 😉).

Vezzra · 2016-09-08T10:23:09Z

Damage control techs that only affect a subset of ship types (robotic?) is probably a bit narrow for a key change

Only a sidenote: That revision does affect all ships, not only the robotic, those were just part of it because of their inherent self-repair capabilities.

Vezzra · 2016-09-08T11:28:08Z

ChangeLog.md

+- Reprioritised mine effects to always occur before repair effects
+- Balance pass on Robotic line and Damage Control techs
+- Balanced BioAdaptive hull to work same as Nanorobotic
+- Tweaked numbers for Logistics Facilitator


@MatGB: the above 4 entries ("Reprioritised mine effects to always occur before repair effects" to "Tweaked numbers for Logistics Facilitator") all seem to have to do/potentially have to do with the ship repair revision. Which of these should be grouped with the bigger entry dealing with that revision? Should they be rephrased/rearranged when doing this, if yes, any suggestions?

Maybe wait until I commit all the changes/adjustments suggested so far, then you can review the my draft of the ship repair revision entry and provide your input/feedback/adjustments.

dbenage-cx · 2016-09-08T11:45:19Z

- (*nix) Moved user config and data files to conform with XDG Base Directory Specification
- Reorganized content definitions into multiple files

*nix is a bit unspecific, but it gets the point across to Win/OSX not to worry about it, while letting the various distro users note it likely applies to them.

Vezzra · 2016-09-08T11:53:13Z

Thanks, looks good enough for me. 👍

* Added items that had been missed in the first draft * Removed items that, although being added since 0.4.5, have not been activated or commented out (for whatever reason) and are therefore not yet available in the game * Rephrased several items to be more clear * Rearranged/reordered/regrouped several items

Vezzra · 2016-09-08T11:59:51Z

@MatGB:

The Drydock change needs to be up as a Key Change I think, they're a signficant part of the game. I would also consider putting the damage control changes, Basic is changed, Robotic hulls are the most used hulls and the robotic line in general is one of the most used.

"Ship Repair has been substantially reworked, Drydocks require a ship to be stationary and repair a proportion of ship structure, no damage control effects work on the turn a combat has taken place except for the Logistic Facilitator flagship, which is substantially reduced."

I've added a line to the key changes, and tried to craft your paragraph into an entry+subentries in the "Balance" section for details. Please review.

Vezzra · 2016-09-08T12:10:24Z

ChangeLog.md

+- Reworked ship repair: Drydocks, Damage Control techs,
+Robotic hulls self repair (details below)
+- Substantial GUI improvements
+ - Substantial improvements to GUI responsiveness and FPS


@MatGB: do you think that's clear enough now...?

Yup, that's good.

I don't think we need "substantial" "GUI" and "improvements" in the main and sub-point

Ok, will remove it from the main point.

Vezzra · 2016-09-08T12:21:07Z

Alright, big update has been committed, I've tried to incorporate all suggestions where we've reached at least some kind of consensus. Thanks to everyone for their input! 😃

Haven't been sure on the best phrasing/summary of some things, may have missed/misunderstood others, and on some items the consensus wasn't, well, uncontested. 😉

So again, everyone please review the changes and give your feedback/corrections.

geoffthemedio · 2016-09-08T15:12:51Z

ChangeLog.md

@@ -250,6 +250,8 @@ build ships with Ground Troop pods
 artificial blackhole
 - Prevent Experimentor spawn location from sundering the galaxy
 - Balance Hyperspatial Dam
+- Made planets in systems which contains a Gateway to the Void building


systems that contain or a system that contains

Oops, thanks!

geoffthemedio · 2016-09-09T12:07:10Z

ChangeLog.md

+ - Made GUI more configurable
+- Many small additions/changes to GUI rendering, layout, functionality,
+customization options, and displayed information that collectively
+substantially improve usability, responsiveness, and system resource usage.


responsiveness again...?

Just use this point, not the parent or sibling

I don't quite understand what you mean? That line has been your suggestion...

I don't see the need for a point for "Substantial GUI improvements" with sub-points about "Substantial improvements to GUI" and "Made more configurable", and then a separate point for "Many small additions/changes to GUI ..." where the second point pretty much covers what the first one and its sub-points say...

Seems oddly repetitive...

@geoffthemedio, to save time (I'm deferring the RC1 builds here), just commit the corrections/adjustments as you see fit.

Ah, now I get it. Apparently I misunderstood what you meant when you originally suggested that line - I thought it should replace just the one sub-point, but you meant to replace the entire main+sub points. Ok, will make the requested changes.

geoffthemedio · 2016-09-09T12:49:12Z

I'm not somewhere where I can do that, I think...

Vezzra · 2016-09-09T12:54:15Z

No problem, I finally got what you meant and will remove the other point (the one with a main+subpoints).

Updated changelog for 0.4.6 (by Geoff)

45c3e2b

Vezzra added this to the Release v0.4.6 milestone Sep 7, 2016

Vezzra self-assigned this Sep 7, 2016

Removed duplicate entry

210de6e

geoffthemedio reviewed Sep 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

Vezzra reviewed Sep 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

Morlic-fo reviewed Sep 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

Fixed typos (by LGM-Doyle)

4ace2b5

Morlic-fo reviewed Sep 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

Removed item from "Key Changes" section

840c51e

"New/better graphics" isn't really a key change (removal suggested by Geoff).

Morlic-fo reviewed Sep 7, 2016
View reviewed changes

Added (cumulative) item to "Key Changes" section (suggested by Geoff)

95927eb

Vezzra reviewed Sep 8, 2016
View reviewed changes

Added entry about fix for Gateway to the Void

b0c1f4e

geoffthemedio reviewed Sep 8, 2016
View reviewed changes

Vezzra added 3 commits September 8, 2016 17:21

Fixed typo

e28a8d6

Removed duplicate entry

f5f17fd

Adjusted date in v0.4.6 header line

529b9d7

Vezzra removed the status:work in progress The PR contains some implementation but isn't ready for merging onto the main development branch. label Sep 9, 2016

Vezzra merged commit 7151e72 into release-v0.4.6 Sep 9, 2016

Vezzra added the status:merged All relevant commits of this PR were merged into the master development branch. label Sep 9, 2016

Vezzra deleted the compile-changelog branch September 9, 2016 11:58

geoffthemedio reviewed Sep 9, 2016
View reviewed changes

Updated changelog for 0.4.6 #957

Updated changelog for 0.4.6 #957

Conversation

Vezzra commented Sep 7, 2016

Vezzra commented Sep 7, 2016 • edited

geoffthemedio commented Sep 7, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

LGM-Doyle commented Sep 7, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Ouaz Sep 7, 2016 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Vezzra commented Sep 7, 2016

geoffthemedio commented Sep 7, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MatGB commented Sep 8, 2016

MatGB commented Sep 8, 2016

geoffthemedio commented Sep 8, 2016

MatGB commented Sep 8, 2016

geoffthemedio commented Sep 8, 2016

Vezzra commented Sep 8, 2016

Vezzra commented Sep 8, 2016 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dbenage-cx commented Sep 8, 2016

Vezzra commented Sep 8, 2016

Vezzra commented Sep 8, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Vezzra commented Sep 8, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

geoffthemedio Sep 9, 2016 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

geoffthemedio Sep 9, 2016 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

geoffthemedio commented Sep 9, 2016

Vezzra commented Sep 9, 2016

Vezzra commented Sep 7, 2016 •

edited

Ouaz Sep 7, 2016 •

edited

Vezzra commented Sep 8, 2016 •

edited

geoffthemedio Sep 9, 2016 •

edited

geoffthemedio Sep 9, 2016 •

edited