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: Master Wishlist Thread

 
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: Master Wishlist Thread Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/19/2010 5:06:52 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishman

There's no such thing as a "chassis" in DW. Ships are all built free-form, and the only thing that differentiates ships from each other is defined roles which carry mandatory equipment requirements needed to fulfill that role, and whatever else you care to staple onto it. Of course, allowing a player to define his own "free-form" roles by typing a new role name into a box would be nice. But all that other stuff is too SE-like and not really DW's style. A ship is defined by its parts and its role, not by some arbitrary chassis rules.


Well some of us would like the option to define it by chassis. I also like the idea of needing to build a certain size chassis for the firepower, plus getting the costs in line. This is a wish list thread, and this is one of my wishes. May never get it, but I'll never know if I don't discuss it.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Fishman)
Post #: 421
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/19/2010 5:13:45 PM   
Geroj

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 4/5/2010
Status: offline
From my point of view it will be sufficient if ships categories are limited only by numbers of reactors.
Escort, Colony ship, Exploration ship max 1 reactor
Frigate, Troop transport max 2 reactors
Destroyer max 3 reactors
Cruiser max 4 reactors
Capital ship, Resuply ship max 5 reactors
Bases are stationary and can collect power from stars all the time so there is no need for reactor restrictions

(in reply to Fishman)
Post #: 422
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/19/2010 5:17:12 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Geroj

From my point of view it will be sufficient if ships categories are limited only by numbers of reactors.
Escort, Colony ship, Exploration ship max 1 reactor
Frigate, Troop transport max 2 reactors
Destroyer max 3 reactors
Cruiser max 4 reactors
Capital ship, Resuply ship max 5 reactors
Bases are stationary and can collect power from stars all the time so there is no need for reactor restrictions



That would certainly work. I'd just like to see a reason to build the bigger 'chassis' due to a limitation on the smaller ones.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Geroj)
Post #: 423
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/19/2010 5:45:50 PM   
Gerth

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 4/6/2010
Status: offline
Count me as a yea vote for chassis templating.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 424
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 1:44:35 AM   
Fishman

 

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

ORIGINAL: Geroj

Escort, Colony ship, Exploration ship max 1 reactor
Are you joking? You can't even operate a hyperdrive on one reactor sometimes. The starting reactor is incapable of operating many starting hyperdrives and you NEED two reactors. Even in the end game, two reactors are needed just to operate the weapons!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Geroj

Capital ship, Resuply ship max 5 reactors
You jest, right? Even the smallest capital cruiser has at least 6 reactors just to power its weapons! Have you ever actually BUILT any of these ships?

(in reply to Geroj)
Post #: 425
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 2:00:26 AM   
OberonDark

 

Posts: 64
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline
Interesting's 1.04 economy thread inspired this idea.

You'll find a LOT of commerce in NYC and other big cities as compared to smaller cities. However, in DW, planets (cities) can eventually all grow to a massive size and then bring in that income. You don't see every small town turning into an NYC. The world would be insane. And it wouldn't be the positive money-flow you see in the game.

I propose that there should be advantages and disadvantages to large/urban and small/rural colonies.

I think there should be a food production value, and this could be turned into its own research area (farming/genetic plant modification)

As a basic framework, a planet's food production is inversely proportional to size/population. You would be able to "designate" food production planets (slower population growth/impose a limit/less immigration?) If you want to get deeper, designate a percentage of Urban and Rural area. Urban areas could still produce food (indoor greenhouses, etc. - Coruscant in Star Wars didn't import EVERYTHING, but most)

This would also add a strategic value. Do you attack an opponent's center of commerce and technology, or destroy his farming worlds? A comparison would be - Do you bomb Wall Street, or do you set fire to the country's farms?

Oh, and crime should be a seperate corruption value for individual planets. I don't know how that would work, but I think it would be interesting and could be used for different things.

Large/Urban
+ Centers of Commerce
+ Established Defenses (More Troops, etc.)
+ Technology Centers (Where ships are mainly produced, etc.)
- Crime Value (Mini-corruption on a planetary basis)
- Would require a lot of food

Small/Rural
+ Powerful food producers
+ Guerilla Warfare (Ground battles take far longer to resolve, takes longer to bombard)
+ Less Crime (People know each other)
+ Self Sufficient
- Much less tax income
- Does not have the population required to produce large ships

Anyone can feel free to adjust these ideas or lists.

(in reply to Fishman)
Post #: 426
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 12:21:08 PM   
Fishman

 

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline
The way the Research bonus works for governments and races should be changed from being applied before the cap (worthless) to being applied after the cap, in the same way the Ruins bonus is applied (awesome). As it stands right now, all the research races, particularly the Quamenos, are basically shafted, as the Quamenos have absolutely no other real selling points beyond their massive research boost...which is entirely worthless since they cap the same as anyone else.

(in reply to OberonDark)
Post #: 427
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 12:26:32 PM   
Drusek

 

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

ORIGINAL: Fishman

The way the Research bonus works for governments and races should be changed from being applied before the cap (worthless) to being applied after the cap, in the same way the Ruins bonus is applied (awesome). As it stands right now, all the research races, particularly the Quamenos, are basically shafted, as the Quamenos have absolutely no other real selling points beyond their massive research boost...which is entirely worthless since they cap the same as anyone else.

Also those racial bonuses are also worthless compared to +600% from black hole...

(in reply to Fishman)
Post #: 428
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 12:36:04 PM   
Geroj

 

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



quote:

ORIGINAL: Geroj

Escort, Colony ship, Exploration ship max 1 reactor

Are you joking? You can't even operate a hyperdrive on one reactor sometimes. The starting reactor is incapable of operating many starting hyperdrives and you NEED two reactors. Even in the end game, two reactors are needed just to operate the weapons!

Calm down man its just a suggestion and can be altered. I know that lowest tech hyperdrive cant go at max speed with just one lowest tech ractor. But it can do the job, just not at full warp speed. Sollution is to develop better reactor. But i dont know if the one best ractor can adequaly supply best hyperdrive at max speed because i was never so far in research. Colony and exploration ships doesnt need weapons... and escort well, its just escort and not main core batleship
P.S.: In WW2 they first develop .50 Browning AN/M2 and then they have desingned plane for effective use of it

quote:



quote:

ORIGINAL: Geroj

Capital ship, Resuply ship max 5 reactors

You jest, right? Even the smallest capital cruiser has at least 6 reactors just to power its weapons! Have you ever actually BUILT any of these ships?

As i mentioned above they can be also 6 or 7 but i am not the one to make decisions. Only developers can do it because they know how it will balance or imbalance the game. My point is that reactor limitations can force you to make fast and less powerfull ships or slow but very powerfull ships. I know that you dont want class limits by size or bonuses in material usage by creating certain class or attack/deffense bonuses for certain ship/bases like in SE V. This game i more strategicaly based and SE V is more tacticaly based where you can with right design and little practice win with one ship against ten or more if you dont run out of amunition . And i never build any capital ship because my destroyers/cruisers were powerfull as any other AI capital ship.

(in reply to Fishman)
Post #: 429
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 1:50:03 PM   
SiempreCiego

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 4/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OberonDark

Interesting's 1.04 economy thread inspired this idea.

You'll find a LOT of commerce in NYC and other big cities as compared to smaller cities. However, in DW, planets (cities) can eventually all grow to a massive size and then bring in that income. You don't see every small town turning into an NYC. The world would be insane. And it wouldn't be the positive money-flow you see in the game.

I propose that there should be advantages and disadvantages to large/urban and small/rural colonies.

I think there should be a food production value, and this could be turned into its own research area (farming/genetic plant modification)

As a basic framework, a planet's food production is inversely proportional to size/population. You would be able to "designate" food production planets (slower population growth/impose a limit/less immigration?) If you want to get deeper, designate a percentage of Urban and Rural area. Urban areas could still produce food (indoor greenhouses, etc. - Coruscant in Star Wars didn't import EVERYTHING, but most)

This would also add a strategic value. Do you attack an opponent's center of commerce and technology, or destroy his farming worlds? A comparison would be - Do you bomb Wall Street, or do you set fire to the country's farms?

Oh, and crime should be a seperate corruption value for individual planets. I don't know how that would work, but I think it would be interesting and could be used for different things.

Large/Urban
+ Centers of Commerce
+ Established Defenses (More Troops, etc.)
+ Technology Centers (Where ships are mainly produced, etc.)
- Crime Value (Mini-corruption on a planetary basis)
- Would require a lot of food

Small/Rural
+ Powerful food producers
+ Guerilla Warfare (Ground battles take far longer to resolve, takes longer to bombard)
+ Less Crime (People know each other)
+ Self Sufficient
- Much less tax income
- Does not have the population required to produce large ships

Anyone can feel free to adjust these ideas or lists.



although i see where your going with this, I personally don't like the idea. You can't compare a planet to a city. Each world would want to develop/grow as much as possible. Also there is no reason why high pop worlds could not be food exporters.

Interestingly to give a real world example:

The Dutch rank third worldwide in value of agricultural exports, behind the United States and France, with exports earning $55 billion annually. A significant portion of Dutch agricultural exports are derived from fresh-cut plants, flowers, and bulbs, with the Netherlands exporting two-thirds of the world's total. The Netherlands also exports a quarter of all world tomatoes, and one-third of the world's exports of chilis and cucumbers.

The Netherlands is the 25th most densely populated country in the world, with 395 inhabitants per square kilometre (1,023 sq mi)—or 484 people per square kilometre (1,254/sq mi) if only the land area is counted.


(in reply to OberonDark)
Post #: 430
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 3:04:17 PM   
jscott991


Posts: 530
Joined: 4/23/2009
Status: offline
The game needs to run faster.

It needs to initially load faster.

Menus need to pop up quicker.

I'm running this on an extremely high end machine and it's performance is simply unacceptable. I'm using an i7 920 (2.66 Mhz) processor, NVidia 295, and have 12 GB of RAM, and the game is still slow. I frankly don't understand how most people are playing it.

And on my laptop (i7 720 QM, 1.6 Mhz, 8 GB of RAM, ATI Mobile 5870), it is even slower, taking 2-3 minutes just to initially load (perhaps longer).

(in reply to SiempreCiego)
Post #: 431
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 5:52:02 PM   
Sliverine

 

Posts: 155
Joined: 4/15/2010
Status: offline
u should overclock your processor. The base i7 920 is slow and the dynamic turbo-boosting doesnt seem to add much. I overclock my 920 to run at 4ghz at all times and i have almost similar stats to your machine and the only time i have ever experienced any sort of lag was when i was playing a 1000 star system game and almost the entire galaxy was revealed to me by that point of time. The amt of ships flying all over the screen was horrendous and by that time, i had so many ships that simply opening the ships & bases screen took me 2 seconds where it once opened instantly. For a high end machine to have a 2 sec lag wld mean a lag of over 10 secs on a lower end machine

(in reply to jscott991)
Post #: 432
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 6:07:54 PM   
Druthlen

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 4/4/2010
Status: offline
Wow this post is getting huge. Can we delete it and recreate it with a new condensed master wish list in one post with bullet points for easy reading.

(in reply to Sliverine)
Post #: 433
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 6:12:37 PM   
jscott991


Posts: 530
Joined: 4/23/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sliverine

u should overclock your processor. The base i7 920 is slow and the dynamic turbo-boosting doesnt seem to add much. I overclock my 920 to run at 4ghz at all times and i have almost similar stats to your machine and the only time i have ever experienced any sort of lag was when i was playing a 1000 star system game and almost the entire galaxy was revealed to me by that point of time. The amt of ships flying all over the screen was horrendous and by that time, i had so many ships that simply opening the ships & bases screen took me 2 seconds where it once opened instantly. For a high end machine to have a 2 sec lag wld mean a lag of over 10 secs on a lower end machine


The base i7 is much faster than older processors. You shouldn't have to overclock an i7 machine to run a game like this.

(in reply to Sliverine)
Post #: 434
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 7:48:57 PM   
SiempreCiego

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 4/8/2010
Status: offline
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2440439

(in reply to Druthlen)
Post #: 435
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/20/2010 10:10:46 PM   
Rhade18

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 4/20/2010
Status: offline
I have problems with diplomacy and i dont really know how to resolve it:)) Sometimes i find my ships in a system that belongs to an empire that isnt very friendly and who decides to attack my ships. Usually i avoid this type of conflicts and run away but now i see that they attack me even in my solar systems or systems that i share with other empires. I cant avoid conflicts there and they keep comming and comming. The game needs some changes at reputation..like if they attack me first i shouldnt get hated if i destroy the ship.
+ it would be great if the game could have the option to put restrictions on certain solar systems so the players ships cant go there if they are on automate.

(in reply to SiempreCiego)
Post #: 436
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 1:12:59 AM   
jscott991


Posts: 530
Joined: 4/23/2009
Status: offline
Oh, one more thing.

Please give the option to NOT start with your homeworld as a moon.

I've started four straight games now and ended up as a moon every time.

I'm not sure whether this has any actual effect on my starting position, but it's quite annoying to me.

(in reply to Rhade18)
Post #: 437
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 1:22:06 AM   
Igard


Posts: 2282
Joined: 3/29/2010
From: Scotland
Status: offline
@jscott991 Moons are superb starting positions when it orbits a gas giant with plenty resources.

One tiny suggestion. When in the expansion planner, After selecting a colony/construction ship to go to a selected planet, the menu scroll bar jumps back to the top. Could we have this stay where the last selected planet is? It just makes it easier when looking for another colony/resource to exploit.


(in reply to jscott991)
Post #: 438
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 1:29:47 AM   
Matman

 

Posts: 17
Joined: 4/15/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Druthlen

Wow this post is getting huge. Can we delete it and recreate it with a new condensed master wish list in one post with bullet points for easy reading.


How about creating a new topic so that we can can make a single suggestion/idea as a thread which can be discussed and once that idea/suggestion has been added to the game (or not) then the admin can lock the thread.

< Message edited by Matman -- 4/21/2010 1:39:25 AM >

(in reply to Druthlen)
Post #: 439
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 11:50:00 AM   
Sliverine

 

Posts: 155
Joined: 4/15/2010
Status: offline
there is already a condensed wishlist which i put up. I wouldnt dare say it is very in-depth or that it encompasses everyone's wish in it but i believe i caught most of the more important points floating about :)

(in reply to Matman)
Post #: 440
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 12:21:44 PM   
taltamir

 

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline
I wish I could select my race's ship look "theme" (for some reason human ships have a very "bug like" look)
I wish all ships had a numerical designation...
right now things like constructors are LSP-## <codename>. This should be the case for ALL ships... so I could look at raven, devastator, and helio and tell that they are all capital ships designs 3, 7, and 11 respectively. (or whatever they are).

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Sliverine)
Post #: 441
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 1:02:33 PM   
Drusek

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 4/14/2010
Status: offline
"DELETE all obsolete unused (with 0 build) designs" button
At the end-game there can be hundreds or even thousand obsolete designs that just slow down loading of designs window (yes, w/o showing those designs)


(in reply to taltamir)
Post #: 442
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 1:32:59 PM   
Fishman

 

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

ORIGINAL: Drusek
Also those racial bonuses are also worthless compared to +600% from black hole...
I believe those stack, so, not worthless if implemented as I suggested, but at the moment, wholly irrelevant with or without the black hole thing. The point is that +100% research should be a MAJOR tech advantage to compensate for the fact that everything else about the Quamenos ranges from lackluster to suck, but instead, it is absolutely worthless.

(in reply to Drusek)
Post #: 443
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 7:04:14 PM   
taltamir

 

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline
load troops at nearest planet command for fleets.

load troops at nearest planet command should skip planets with no troops (or rather, not enough troops)

Troopships should be more aggressive about loading troops.

newly conquered planets should be more resistant to rebellion, especially due to "we are in awe of other planets in the system.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Fishman)
Post #: 444
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 7:05:03 PM   
taltamir

 

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

ORIGINAL: Drusek

"DELETE all obsolete unused (with 0 build) designs" button
At the end-game there can be hundreds or even thousand obsolete designs that just slow down loading of designs window (yes, w/o showing those designs)




I have already made a request for there to be a checkbox that does that automatically... whenever an obsolete design hits 0 ships in active duty it should be deleted (if you enable that option, some said they don't like the idea so make it optional).

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Drusek)
Post #: 445
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 7:06:44 PM   
taltamir

 

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline
oooh... an opt in "share your options settings with us anonymously so we can better configure the defaults"... if 90% of people switch a certain option from the default state, then maybe the default should be changed.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to taltamir)
Post #: 446
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 7:20:46 PM   
taltamir

 

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

ORIGINAL: Shark7

A branch of research for the chassis that gives you say a Corvette, PG, Escort to start with and goes up from there, in the following order. This would also be highly beneficial to differentiate the various chasses as each chasses type could have a componant cap based on space available:

PG - Patrol Gunboat. Smallest ship capable of performing the system patrol mission. 100 Componant Space -20% cost
FFL- Corvette. Slightly larger than the PG, Able to perform a similar mission for a higher cost. 150 Componant Space. -10% cost
FF - Frigate. Standard Frigate, 200 Componant Space. Base Cost
DE - Destroyer Escort. Fills the escort roles of the fleet. 250 Component Space. +10% Cost
DD - Destroyer. 300 Component space. +20% cost
CL - Light Cruiser. 350 Component space. +30% Cost
CA - Heavy Cruiser. 400 Component space. + 40% cost
CB - Large Cruiser. 450 Component Space. + 50% cost
BC - Battle Cruiser. 500 Component Space. + 60 % cost
BB - Battleship. 550 Component Space. + 70% cost
BBB- Super Battleship. 600+ Component Space. +80% cost

Obviously, the larger it is, the more expensive it is. And not just from components added...there should be a modifier for price on each chasses type that makes building all Super Battleships next to impossiblt. I'd say make the frigate the base at 0% modifier with the FFL being a -10% and PG being -20%, and starting at DE up, 10% incrase each level. This cost modifier applies ot the base costs and component costs, reducing or increasing the overall cost...Basically, a BBB with the exact same components as a FF will cost 80% more.

You could also introduce a fighter class with a series of Carrier Classes. this would probably require some new components as well.

Carrier types:

CVE - Escort Carrier. Light Carrier, small number of fighters.
CVL - Light Carrier. ~33% larger than CVE.
CVA - Attack Carrier. ~66% larger than CVE.
CV - Fleet Carrier. ~99% larger than CVE.
CVB - Large Fleet Carrier ~133% larger than CVE.
[/code]



I completely agree that we should have more defined chassis sizes.
however, that branch of research already EXISTS... its called construction. Bigger construction yards increase the max size you can build.
I do think that designs should conform to the above limits more closely
I am not so sure about the way you increase costs though.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 447
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 8:14:16 PM   
Ranbir


Posts: 142
Joined: 3/28/2010
Status: offline
A checkbox in options to turn off intro/logo videos.

Like Spaaaaace Rangers 2.

_____________________________

"The imaginary number is a fine and wonderful resource of the human spirit, almost an amphibian between being and not being." - Gottfried Leibniz

(in reply to taltamir)
Post #: 448
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/21/2010 9:26:14 PM   
HsojVvad

 

Posts: 1036
Joined: 3/24/2010
Status: offline
Not shure if this was mentioned before. I would like to know why races hate me. By that I mean, I have a bad memory, so if I attacked someone or did something, most likely I forgot why. I like to play with max races, and since there is too many of the same race, say 5 humans, I forget what I did to who. Maybe if we hover over the mouse as to why they like us or not, green or red, then an explanation can be broken down into actually why they don't like us, be it because they caught my spies, or I attacked so and so, or I went to war with them.

(in reply to Ranbir)
Post #: 449
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 4/22/2010 2:49:29 AM   
taltamir

 

Posts: 1290
Joined: 4/2/2010
Status: offline
batch delete of ship deigns.

batch select planet for colonization from empire planner.

setting colonization targets should not queue up extra colonizers at planets. It should go to a "master queue" that will queue it when a suitable planet has a free spot for building one.

cancel colonization command from within expansion planner.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to HsojVvad)
Post #: 450
Page:   <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> RE: Master Wishlist Thread Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.094