We were talking about this a couple weeks ago, and people were talking about it last night too. So lets start a new thread for this.
See also: (Idea thread) Formal War Declaration

I was playing with the idea of instead of declaring war on an empire, since empires are a weird and easily exploitable entity. And cities can be deleted or rebuilt in an instant, such as bulldozing capitol and building a new one. Maybe it would make more sense if you had to declare war on a solar system rather than an empire or city.
A solar system is a place that contains stuff and and it can't be changed (aside from its name). The owner of stuff in the solar system can change at the drop of a hat via surrender mechanics or be bulldozed. But most of the value is the solar system itself.

Also at the same time to slow down the amount of damage a single attacker can do in just a few hours, it would also be beneficial if the attacker had to leave warships in a solar system for an extended period of time to not make all attacks end within the same hour of the attacker entering the solar system.
This would also slow down wars a lot, making for a more relaxed and strategic movement of ships and frontlines.

Example for thought:

An attacker goes to the solar system they want to capture or destroy. They can freely attack all military targets in the solar system, such as; spacecraft, space stations, and military buildings. But they would not be able to harm civilian buildings right away.

In order to target or capture civilian targets, the attacker would have to contest/siege the solar system by removing defender's military presence. Then the spacecraft would have to remain in the solar system for an extended period of time, broadcasting propaganda and such on the hail channel so the inhabitants knows about it. Could even be a whole week for the capital solar system of an empire.

The defender can then try to stop the siege, or even broker peace with the attacker. Even if the defender is totally unable to do anything to defend themselves and no peace can be found, they will have time to request help from others. When the siege completes the attacker can destroy or capture any city, building, or world in the solar system.

In the end, this would mean that civilian targets can't simply be destroyed over night. The attacker would have to leave at least one spacecraft in the solar system, preventing them from destroying a whole empire with just one spacecraft over night.

Ok, let whatever else brainstorming begin!

I created and deleted several avatars for try and "Entering Hazeron" button works rarely. Haxus can you fix that?

Hi

System scanning fill the system map tab with all informations, planets, quality of each ressources, but in the star map all theses systems are considered as unexplored or visited systems.

Refreshed map and even systems scanned 2-3 days ago are still unexplored, even if i'm in.


>dean inb4 but... but xantheose you have to give me your location, system name, ship name and id, also provide a link to the .SoH

No. Haxus will pm if he need that. But it's not necessary since it is very easy to reproduce, just have to scan a system in a new sector.

In normal times I wouldn't ask this question ..I would simply be patient. But things being as they are I can't help but hope that he's alright and it's the game bugs that have silenced him ..not the covid bug.

The AI pilot decision process seems to have difficulties determining the proper landing when city names are similar.    100% reproducible (so far)  

Scenario:  
City number 1 with airport in Zone 1 - Lets call it "Maga City1"
City number 2 with airport in Zone 2 - Lets call it "Mega City2"

Instruct AI to orbit over "Maga City1"  
Instruct AI to land at airport "Maga City1 Airport Terminal"  

The AI almost always lands at "Maga City2 Airport Terminal"    


Seems like there is some landing logic overriding the command as this is the second planet with this issue.   

WORKAROUND =  renaming at least one city without the space corrects the issue.   I.e rename "Maga City2" to "MagaCity2".   Just strange that there seems to be unique IDs for many things in SoH, yet the cities and airports don't have a unique ID or the landing logic is not using the unique ID?  

Refitted vessel with a Warp 2 FTL drive. Started flying away from station at warp speed. Realized I needed to refit with more capacitor to actually use Warp 2. Ordered a return to the station. Manually engaged Warp 1 to try and get there faster. Avatar went into limbo and client crashed. Logged into avatar. Ship is back at station with its old wormhole drive. Not sure what happened here and I doubt I could reproduce it, but something's wacky.

Currently, players are able to accumulate levels when performing tasks, however these levels don't seem to do anything besides quantify accomplishment. I think it would fit in with the idea of avatars as higher beings if levels applied modifiers to the task at hand. This would work rather nicely for things like construction, manufacture, and trade - although not for more abstract things like space exploration. A positive quality of this suggestion is that it would discourage spurious alts, and encourage players to strategically use what characters they have.

Apologies if this has been suggested before; I couldn't find anything with search here or on the wiki.

Been have lots of trouble warping crossing sectors when changing servers. Ship will get sent to some place in same sector is in or get sent 3 sectors away. I have 2 avatars stuck 4 sectors away from where they should be and it took me 2 hours today to go 10 pc from city in 1 sector to a city in next sector. This seems to happen when changing Servers with all warp travel and sometimes when entering a solar system.

Approaching a planetoid is a bit frightful as once in range, your ship is seemingly gripped by the gravity and thrown along a tumbling trajectory (which also strikes me as inaccurate since Shell Theorem implies the planetoid's rotation wouldn't make a difference unless there was frame dragging, although I guess this is to simplify player movement on their surface) even when still fairly distant. It might be worthwhile to apply some exponential factor to it to mediate between the two modalities.

I put this in Arena of Ideas since it arguably isn't a bug per-se, just a surprising game mechanic.

It seems on at least small planetoids that, if you walk far enough, your player can be parallel with the ground - making movement anywhere but 'downhill' very difficult. Curiously this does not seem to apply for the jump trajectory/gravity calculation, although the direction of the jump follows the player orientation. Logging in or exiting a vehicle aligns you to its orientation (and not the planetoid's gravity). Sorry if this was reported before; it seems simple enough someone must have encountered it before, but I couldn't find anything via search.

Addendum: swapping avatars results in the swapped-to avatar having the orientation of the swapped-from avatar - either that, or it's random/just horizontal.