Ok this is a big one.

I made changes to the different ship computers that greatly affects the battle aesthetics in a positive way. However, a concession had to be made.

In vanilla, all the ships basically dogpiled on each other and the defensive computer would stand off and fire from a distance (in theory - I never actually played a vanilla battle because I was instantly appalled with the design).

In my mod, the formation ranges were increased vastly which causes each ship to maintain some distance from itself and its target (not in relation to the whole fleet). This is one of the defining changes in my mod and VASTLY improves the combat spacing and flow.

In order to differentiate the CPU computers as intended, the engagement ranges of aggressive are obviously much closer, while default is set to mid range and defensive is set to a longer range. Problems arised when I tried to maintain the defensive CPU's desire to stand off and fire from range without advancing.

The ship auto designer automatically selects defensive computers as the default computer when unlocked because it obviously provides a bonus over default computers. If someone were to make a ship with Defensive CPU or simply did not pay attention and prepopulated their ship with the auto function and then tweaked it, they could leave the defensive CPU installed and then add autocannons to all their S, M & L slots.

Problems arised when these (poorly designed ships IMO) were used against static objects such as mining stations or spaceports. They simply would not get close enough to engage them and would standoff without firing and nothing would happen. I got plenty of complaints when I tried to find the right sweet spot between weapon ranges, defensive CPUs and engagement ranges.

In order to leave defensive CPUs the way they are, I would have to decrease the defensive range so much (to allow for small ships with defensive CPU and all autocannons to function properly) that a proper design of say a Battleship with all large / medium weapons and fighters would get too close to their targets and people would also complain (and rightly so) that their "defensive ships" would get too close.

This is also the reason why weapon ranges were increased across the board (same value) while autocannons were given a slight additional increase to match ranges with lasers (the next shortest range weapon apart from PD).

So I changed a basic parameter of the CPUs in such a way that:::

Aggressive:::

Engagement / formation ranges = 8
Attack_pattern = charge
Passive_pattern = charge
(The most aggressive obviously)

Default

Engagement / formation ranges = 15
Attack_pattern = orbit
Passive_pattern = charge
(Standard with slightly more range)

Defensive

Engagement / formation ranges = 25
Attack_pattern = orbit (In vanilla this setting is "none" which causes alot of problems but makes them stand still when attacking = incompatible with certain ranges and stationary targets)
Passive_pattern = orbit (Original was follow and it would cause the ship to follow the target until within range and then switch to attack_pattern which was "none")

Its a small trade off to enable nice spacious, flowing battles that work from early game all the way into late game with ever increasing fleet sizes and chaos involved.

I could alter values in such a way that Defensive behaved like vanilla ships but then the engagement ranges would be so much smaller (for it to work properly with all the different types of ship configurations and weapon ranges) that late game fleet engagements would be extremely cluttered with odd ship behavior when they get blocked by other ships and alot more clipping and general ugliness.

And that my friends is why I chose to go with BEAUTIFUL BATTLES over tight, clustered, buggy, jittery, horrible looking battles.

It's not as simple as changing one variable and calling it a day. Alot of trial and error, testing and experimentation went into determining sweet spots for the configuration of values so that battles look good and flow well. It would require too much work for too little payout and would most definately affect the spacing and flow of battles in the process if I tried to respect the default design for Defensive CPUs.

That is why weapon ranges were also increased (they add alot more leeway and allow for more spacing during a fight thanks to the different CPUs and their behaviors). Also makes it easier to determine the proper engagement ranges for the 3 CPUs involved and all possible weapon combos versus all type of targets (moving or static.)

If you do notice a defensive CPU ship closing in too much while an aggressive ship seems to move away from the brawl that is because of the target they chose. Like I said, their engagement range and orbitting is based on their position in relation to their personal target (with little relation to fleet position). Unfortunately targetting is somewhat random and some ships target enemies in the back, others target enemies on the flank and others target enemies in the front.

Please try to understand all of this when I refuse to revert weapon ranges or restore Defensive CPUs to their vanilla behavior. It is not because of some whim of mine or artistic arrogance. It is wholly in order to make battles look as good as possible. Eventually modding will be more compatible as the modding community advances and gains knowledge and Paradox will possibly lend a hand.

Until then I will leave my design as is.