RE: Latest Update Plans

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Latest Update Plans

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> RE: Latest Update Plans

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/13/2010 4:26:51 PM

kafka

Posts: 159
Joined: 6/11/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Somewhat less of both, as part of both rebalancing the economy and improving performance and memory usage, as we found that once the economy was working perfectly the game started to exceed our expectations in terms of how much "stuff" was being created.

If this means there will be less colonizable planets, I do not think that it is the right approach. I think that galaxies are already filled with emtpy stars or ones containing only planets of no use to you. One of the design problems of the game is that though it offers hundreds of stars with potentially thousands of objects most of them are effectively of no use to the player. So reducing the number of useful objects is not the way to go, in my eyes, and would only add to the frustration factor, especially in the exploring phase which is so far the most enjoyable part of the game.

(in reply to JonathanStrange)

Post #: 61

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/13/2010 6:21:37 PM

Malevolence

Posts: 1781
Joined: 4/3/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kafka
... I think that galaxies are already filled with emtpy stars or ones containing only planets of no use to you. One of the design problems of the game is that though it offers hundreds of stars with potentially thousands of objects most of them are effectively of no use to the player...

You can build mining bases on top of every planetoid object to get many of the same benefits of a colony. You can also add construction yards, fuel depots, etc. to planets and anywhere in space as well.

_____________________________

Nicht kleckern, sondern klotzen!

*Please remember all posts are made by a malevolent, autocratic despot whose rule is marked by unjust severity and arbitrary behavior. Your experiences may vary.

(in reply to kafka)

Post #: 62

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/13/2010 6:50:46 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

quote:

What is "reasonable" and "defensive weapons"?

Basically, one defensive weapon per civilian ship is considered "ok" by the AI.

Heh, so I guess nothing changes, because one weapon per ship is useful for only the FIRST design, after which the number of weapons starts to rapidly increase as the arms race between marauders and merchantmen takes off. It's gotten bad to the point where I have freighters packing 10-20 torpedo launchers for self-defense. ONE weapon isn't a threat to anything, let alone a suddenly hostile spaceport.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Beyond that, they will consider it less of a civilian ship and more of a privateer of some kind.

Will they actually say that? When can we actually HAVE privateers? Because I *WANT* to flood the galaxy in heavily armed, privately-owned warships. That would be AWESOME. Why should pirates have all the fun?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I hear you on the rest. Over time as we make further improvements to diplomacy, I think the limits here may become more flexible again. For now, we wanted to allow players to give civilian ships a limited defense without bothering the AI.

A limited defense against what, though? One gun isn't a threat to even the smallest pirate ship at the beginning of the game, unless by "one gun", you mean something like a Death Ray. This seems somewhat backwards, that the AI will complain when you merely build armed merchantmen packing appropriate torpedo broadsides, but doesn't blink when you install a Death Star Gun on one.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 63

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/13/2010 8:32:28 PM

Resan

Posts: 98
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

Well a freighter isn't supposed to be a threat to anyone. And in no way to any base of any kind.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 64

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 1:33:55 AM

HsojVvad

Posts: 1036
Joined: 3/24/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Resan

Well a freighter isn't supposed to be a threat to anyone. And in no way to any base of any kind.

Tell that to Han Solo

Well yeah they shouldn't be a threat but should be able to out run it, if the ship is made for that. Then again that would only be for the small freighters and not the big bulk freighters. Those should be protected by bigger military ships.

(in reply to Resan)

Post #: 65

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 1:47:07 AM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Resan

Well a freighter isn't supposed to be a threat to anyone. And in no way to any base of any kind.

Tell that to the East Indiamen. Those were merchant craft armed as heavily as a ship of the line. The way I design a merchant cruiser is that I start with a regular cruiser or destroyer, strip the shields and armor down to the level of an Escort, remove troop pods and secondary weapons, and throw in cargo bays. Remember: Because of how Pirates imitate designs, the typical opponent your freighters are going to encounter is going to be your own frigates, and they need to be able to win that confrontation.

< Message edited by Fishman -- 4/14/2010 1:48:06 AM >

(in reply to Resan)

Post #: 66

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 2:09:45 AM

Gerth

Posts: 42
Joined: 4/6/2010
Status: offline

And East Inda is a relic of history, replaced by modern merchant fleets that while still facing piracy, do not in fact carry guns. Modern nations do not permit the equivalent of East India ships of the line to operate in their waters.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 67

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 2:57:04 AM

Journier

Posts: 349
Joined: 3/28/2010
Status: offline

a more loose ship size limit would make me happier.

Through history our ships have grown in size.

In the 1800's a Battleship was the size of a modern destroyer.

Ships grow in size until they hit a limiting factor... such as the Panama Canal, then they all grew to the very largest they could be.

And there are very few limiting factors to ship size in space. So why limit us?

(in reply to Gerth)

Post #: 68

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 3:04:10 AM

Malevolence

Posts: 1781
Joined: 4/3/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerth

And East Inda is a relic of history, replaced by modern merchant fleets that while still facing piracy, do not in fact carry guns. Modern nations do not permit the equivalent of East India ships of the line to operate in their waters.

Because modern navies control the seas--well at least everywhere but the Somali coast. This space is lawless. And if you think merchantmen aren't arming themselves around Somalia think again. Some private security contractors on a freighter actually riddled a pirate skiff with bullets until a Spanish warship arrived to save them -- happened at the end of last month.

< Message edited by Malevolence -- 4/14/2010 3:06:33 AM >

_____________________________

Nicht kleckern, sondern klotzen!

*Please remember all posts are made by a malevolent, autocratic despot whose rule is marked by unjust severity and arbitrary behavior. Your experiences may vary.

(in reply to Gerth)

Post #: 69

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 3:51:28 AM

Gerth

Posts: 42
Joined: 4/6/2010
Status: offline

Private security contractors with small arms, not cannons. Freighters armed like warships are not sailing into sovereign waters.

(in reply to Malevolence)

Post #: 70

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 4:56:41 AM

jam3

Posts: 65
Joined: 11/9/2003
Status: offline

Well alot of them are in fact using less lethal weaponry for instance sonic weaponry which you can point at a threat and basically make them wish they were anywhere but where they were since their eardrums are about to explode. Piracy is actually growing more rampant not just off the east african coast but indonesia has been pretty bad for some time now. Dangerous waters is an excellent show and I think History channel is still running it the basic premise is that lack of large navies breeds pirates and history has shown this again and again. It also goes into local police and customs official corruption and kidnapping. The incidents in indonesia where the police come and the boat owners get scared about identifying some of the police as the same pirates who hijacked them are pretty interesting.

All I am saying is that when large navies, in modern times the cold war navies of the ussr/america, diminish then piracy grows and the next effect is that the merchant fleet will begin to take measures to provide for its own security.

http://www.modernpiracy.com/home.htm

(in reply to Gerth)

Post #: 71

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 6:20:01 AM

2ndACR

Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline

Careful, straying into dangerous waters here......close to politics.

(in reply to jam3)

Post #: 72

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 6:37:29 AM

Sigh

Posts: 74
Joined: 4/12/2010
Status: offline

quote:

NEW FEATURES

* Add auto-refuel option for all ships, even when manually-controlled
* Manually-controlled military ships automatically engage enemies, no need to manually select targets
* Add mass-retrofit option from Ships and Bases screen

Oh man if u pull this off i will stop my overdone complaining and resort to only complaining in a semi-hostile fashion ;)

(in reply to nammafia)

Post #: 73

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 7:07:09 AM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerth

And East Inda is a relic of history, replaced by modern merchant fleets that while still facing piracy, do not in fact carry guns. Modern nations do not permit the equivalent of East India ships of the line to operate in their waters.

There are several reasons behind that: First, piracy today is largely a local problem, confined to a single geographical area. The modern sea, as a whole, is not a particularly lawless place filled with heavily armed pirates and warships of hostile powers. Secondly, it's not true. Ships transporting nuclear fuel actually are armed with 30mm autocannons. Thirdly, as recently as WW2, nations on all sides armed merchantmen to protect them from attack by from the other side. Given that the universe of Distant Worlds is a galaxy which is frequently at war, lawless, and filled with rampaging pirates and horrible space monsters that can eat your ship alive, being armed, often quite heavily, is the only sensible move. While in the real world, pirates only frequent certain geographical localities and when you are not in one of those places, you are just hauling around an armed ship and crew for no reason, in DW, space is ugly EVERYWHERE. Hell, I've had my freaking CAPITAL turn into a war zone, and that's in the middle of my empire! You'd better believe people would start arming merchant ships if, say, Chinese naval raids became routine events.

As for whether or not something like this should be permitted, why not make it part of the diplomacy system, and have those ships which are NOT permitted simply NOT GO THERE? I, for one, am perfectly happy not to see my freighters traipsing the space of potentially hostile and unfriendly neighbors, away from where I can keep them safe by arming them heavily.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerth

Private security contractors with small arms, not cannons. Freighters armed like warships are not sailing into sovereign waters.

That's a simple matter of scale. The freighters are only using small arms because the PIRATES are only using small arms. If you had pirates that started attacking merchant shipping using cannons, I guarantee you someone, probably the Israelis, would start installing their own cannons in short order.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Journier

a more loose ship size limit would make me happier.

Through history our ships have grown in size.

Already happens in the game. There is nothing that prevents you from building a 450-size ship and deciding that this is a "Frigate", even though it is now bigger than a capital ship of the beginning the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Journier
In the 1800's a Battleship was the size of a modern destroyer.

You know, there's a reason why this happens, and it's mostly political. Everyone knows "destroyers" are smaller than "battleships". If you want to build a new ship, you tell them that you're building a new "destroyer", and you are far more likely to get your budget approved than if you tell them that you are building a "battleship", because everyone knows "battleships" are hella-huge and ridiculously expensive, and "destroyers" are small and cheap.

< Message edited by Fishman -- 4/14/2010 7:09:55 AM >

(in reply to Gerth)

Post #: 74

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 10:31:40 AM

Gerth

Posts: 42
Joined: 4/6/2010
Status: offline

Fishman, I could quibble with your points, but given the game mechanics, they're persuasive. From a gaming stance, I don't want a merchant fleet to obsolete the need for a standing navy, but a more robust diplomatic ai routine might be a solution.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 75

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 12:08:03 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerth

Fishman, I could quibble with your points, but given the game mechanics, they're persuasive. From a gaming stance, I don't want a merchant fleet to obsolete the need for a standing navy, but a more robust diplomatic ai routine might be a solution.

Won't ever happen. Merchant fleets only defend themselves when they are attacked, they don't hunt your foes for you, and I have noticed that the AI does apparently learn not to pester or provoke them at all, causing them not to contribute to an ongoing battle.

(in reply to Gerth)

Post #: 76

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 4:28:31 PM

Drusek

Posts: 13
Joined: 4/14/2010
Status: offline

About private ships - they actually don't need any weapons - just give them good speed and they will simply run away from anything. I'm using that tactic (good speed, no weapons, a bit of shields and armor) and it's working.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 77

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 5:51:46 PM

Cheet4h

Posts: 59
Joined: 3/20/2010
Status: offline

copy that. All of my private vessels get extra shields and armor at the beginning of the game. So they can even run away from monsters.

(in reply to Drusek)

Post #: 78

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 6:06:40 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drusek

About private ships - they actually don't need any weapons - just give them good speed and they will simply run away from anything. I'm using that tactic (good speed, no weapons, a bit of shields and armor) and it's working.

This works, assuming your concern is keeping them alive, but the mission in question still fails and the problem is left unresolved. This results in a system deadlock as more ships are dispatched to attempt to complete the failed mission, only to also fail because the problem remains unresolved. Additionally, shields are far bulkier and more expensive than weapons! A merchant cruiser with 2 shields and 10 guns succeeds where a ship with 12 shields and no guns fails.

Doing it MY way, the problem solves itself the first time: The offending pirate or annoying Kaltor is turned into space dust and the delivery is completed without incident.

Plus, I don't really care if they SURVIVE or not, what I want is that whatever it is they are supposed to be doing be DONE, or that they DIE TRYING. Since the AI is so lazy about upgrading and will leave garbage scows in service after they are obsolete for 4 generations, I find this attritional process offers a natural survival-of-the-fittest selective pressure to retain only modern craft.

< Message edited by Fishman -- 4/14/2010 6:07:16 PM >

(in reply to Drusek)

Post #: 79

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 7:04:39 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishman
This works, assuming your concern is keeping them alive, but the mission in question still fails and the problem is left unresolved. This results in a system deadlock as more ships are dispatched to attempt to complete the failed mission, only to also fail because the problem remains unresolved. Additionally, shields are far bulkier and more expensive than weapons! A merchant cruiser with 2 shields and 10 guns succeeds where a ship with 12 shields and no guns fails.

It's not a static system though. Monsters and pirates tend to roam a bit, so a trade route can be "closed" for a while and then reopen. Saving the ships while getting the "under attack" messages also gives the player a chance to route a response force over there to clear out the threat without losing freighters.

quote:

Plus, I don't really care if they SURVIVE or not, what I want is that whatever it is they are supposed to be doing be DONE, or that they DIE TRYING. Since the AI is so lazy about upgrading and will leave garbage scows in service after they are obsolete for 4 generations, I find this attritional process offers a natural survival-of-the-fittest selective pressure to retain only modern craft.

I'm glad I'm not in your merchant marine! Point noted though - the AI does upgrade, but it can take time. Priority wise though, it's more important to keep trade flowing. Having the "latest" merchant design is not always that important compared to warships.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Fishman)

Post #: 80

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 9:08:57 PM

madpainter

Posts: 70
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

IMO I really don't understand what the problem is with the AI getting peed off when my heavily armed "warship with cargospace" wants to stroll through their space. After all, they are looking after their assets, its a wonder that they allow my ships in at all.

The only problem I had is that I didn't know it caused friction, now I know it does.....problem solved.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 81

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 9:41:36 PM

Fishman

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I'm glad I'm not in your merchant marine!

What are you talking about? Anyone would give their LEFT ARM to be in my merchant marine. We put the MARINE back in merchant marine! Why would you NOT want to be in my merchant marine? We'll give you a FREAKING BATTLECRUISER. It is NOT MY FAULT if you can't be bothered to keep it in good working order with the latest updates! Ask yourself: Do you want to fly for MY merchant marine, or one of those OTHER merchant marines, the ones who ships are constantly being EATEN because they don't have BIG FREAKING CANNONS and HUGE ENGINES?

So maybe I sound a bit callous, but that's because ANYONE WHO MANAGES TO DIE DESERVED IT.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 82

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 10:20:59 PM

Engerya

Posts: 10
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline

how about making the private trade ships neutral unless an Enemy empire declares a trade sanction or chooses to blockage a planet i think in times of bad relations we need the option of restricting raids to mining bases and singled out enemy military ships (if possible)

i would like to see more types of planets but more refined, Terran (continental, Marsh/Swamp, Jungle, Ocean), Ice (could also be a terran planet expericing an ice age), Barren (these planets are richest in resources due to low/no water, these types of planets could call for trading water with them), Toxic ( planets like Venus and neptune, their atmospheres contain heavy metals and acids), Volcanic, Gas, Habbital Gas giant(like Bespin from star wars in theory its possible to create a floating city/'s). i write all of the cause reducing the types of planets will make the game more of a race to see who can build the most colony ships the fastest.

(in reply to madpainter)

Post #: 83

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 10:38:40 PM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

Engerya,

You should add those suggestions to our wish list.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Engerya)

Post #: 84

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 10:56:37 PM

taltamir

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline

has anyone tried armed colony ships? and change their AI from escape to engage?

_____________________________

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 85

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 11:34:02 PM

Malevolence

Posts: 1781
Joined: 4/3/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

has anyone tried armed colony ships? and change their AI from escape to engage?

My colony ships are lightly armed, but have extensive shield/armor. I also make them FAST. I notice that many times it's a race as to whose colony ship gets to the planet/moon first. They don't engage per se, but they never run.

I have sometimes thought that the AI tracks my colony ships and tries to beat them to the planet on purpose.

_____________________________

Nicht kleckern, sondern klotzen!

*Please remember all posts are made by a malevolent, autocratic despot whose rule is marked by unjust severity and arbitrary behavior. Your experiences may vary.

(in reply to taltamir)

Post #: 86

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/14/2010 11:50:20 PM

taltamir

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline

reason i asked is because colony ships will encounter a space bug or something, and then run away / get destroyed... i don't notice though because the galaxy is huge and i disabled warning about engagements (because i have several per second)... I or the AI end up sending more and more colony ships to said planet who all perish... i thought to try to make heavily armed colony ships and make the not run away... so they plough through... they might also actually reach the planet before being destroyed if fighting a superior enemy and just colonize it before dying. (I hope)

_____________________________

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman.

(in reply to Malevolence)

Post #: 87

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/15/2010 1:12:26 AM

JosEPhII

Posts: 173
Joined: 1/17/2010
From: Cornfields of Western IL. USA
Status: offline

I have started to arm all of my Colony ships. Especially when the Advisor constantly "suggests" Planet X345, were I've already lost 2 colony ships to Local Pirates! Or Moon BK37 were the Independent colony resides and the "local" Pirates have destroyed the last 3 attempts.

To watch the unarmed version trundle slowly towards the planet and all the while being pummeled by AI ships only to blow up is frustrating. So Yes I'm now arming/armouring/shielding/make go faster me colony ships.

JosEPh

_____________________________

"old and slow.....Watch out!"

(in reply to taltamir)

Post #: 88

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/15/2010 1:37:47 AM

taltamir

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JosEPh_II

I have started to arm all of my Colony ships. Especially when the Advisor constantly "suggests" Planet X345, were I've already lost 2 colony ships to Local Pirates! Or Moon BK37 were the Independent colony resides and the "local" Pirates have destroyed the last 3 attempts.

To watch the unarmed version trundle slowly towards the planet and all the while being pummeled by AI ships only to blow up is frustrating. So Yes I'm now arming/armouring/shielding/make go faster me colony ships.

JosEPh

in those cases, its cheaper and easier to just pay the pirates for protection. when pirates start shooting on a colony ship i pause the game, pay them off while paused, order it to colonize again (since it switched to run away) and then unpause and watch as they blast anyone else trying to move in on my planet while letting me by :P

But yes, a lot of time you don't notice and that is just a PITA... plus i prefer killing pirates to paying them off

_____________________________

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman.

(in reply to JosEPhII)

Post #: 89

RE: Latest Update Plans - 4/15/2010 6:04:54 AM

jam3

Posts: 65
Joined: 11/9/2003
Status: offline

Please please please make the name changing on update stop in the ship designer. Easily the single most frustrating part of the game at the moment. Also make the number following the name dependant on the current number at the end of the string because for some reason it can jump from ms-1 to ms-5 for no apparent reason. Heck I will write the function for you in C++ or whatever language your using its that painful.

Also please put in an option to start from scratch no bases, no ships, and no tech. It is incredibly frustrating to have to reconfigure all your starting ship designs to whichever level of tech you randomly get. In other words the "save designs" feature is great but having to redo them because starting techs are different is a real pain.

Also a retrofit button on the ship screen that accepted single and multi-select would be really nice instead of having to put ships into a fleet just to give them the command, or go to them individually.

< Message edited by jam3 -- 4/15/2010 6:07:11 AM >

(in reply to taltamir)

Post #: 90