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: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy

 
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: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/21/2010 10:54:59 AM   
thiosk


Posts: 150
Joined: 2/2/2010
Status: offline 		I still hold that colonization is way too fast and mineral demand is way too low. Thats why unrelenting expansion is so effective; we build colony ships much longer than the AI. I do NOT think that the AI colony-spamming is the answer-- I think it would be a major negative if they did.

One should be unable to colony spam; you should need the research/trading/industrial/mining/agricultural base to support expansion, and 10 pop colonies should be a net drain on all of those resources.

Since everyone throws out civ4 examples, if you over-expand in civ4, you bankrupt yourself. Despite fantastic resources, build those three extra cities before discovering currency and you will crash your economy.

It is a purely artificial limitation, but in DW, you are generating X amount of many different strategic resources. You should actually NEED large amounts of these resources to fund expansion, lest your colonies resort to cannibalism or descend to a feudal tribe.

< Message edited by thiosk -- 5/21/2010 10:57:42 AM >

(in reply to Keston)
Post #: 31
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/21/2010 12:27:18 PM   
Fishman

 

Posts: 795
Joined: 4/1/2010
Status: offline 		That's what the luxury resources used to do: Previously, spamming colonies without the resources to support them just got you 0 dev colonies that produce nothing. It is debatable whether tying to pop has improved or worsened it. On one hand, colonies now gain development even in the absence of resources, but on the other hand, the growth of colonies is now restricted by pop, and more resources are not enough.

(in reply to thiosk)
Post #: 32
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/21/2010 4:18:51 PM   
Astax

 

Posts: 126
Joined: 5/17/2010
Status: offline 		Sorry to nitpick thiosk but that civ4 reference is no longer true :) Many an hour have I spent playing civ4, and I got to a level where I learned to use various tricks to overexpand and not bankrupt myself. The limiting factor to civ4 is and remains land. The more land you have, the more power you have. And as such there is nothing more important than getting more land than your opponents. 

But do forgive me for going off-topic guys. Please continue, we need to find a cure for this disease :)

(in reply to Fishman)
Post #: 33
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/21/2010 5:14:32 PM   
taltamir

 

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

ORIGINAL: Keston

quote:

ORIGINAL: taltamir

As for tech brokering. It is indeed an issue... ALL brokering is.
the best way to address it I have seen is charge each race a cost to transfer the tech...
so if you give a tech worth 100,000 to another race, it costs you 50k to "get them up to speed"; that money doesn't go to the other player, it is destroyed... they then have to somehow make it worth your while... if they offer their own tech, then they also pay a sizable chunk.


Yes, tech transfer cost is a good idea - it should be more or less depending on how backward they are in that tech line.

It costs both giver and receiver to tech up the receiver.


Fair enough idea... both the giver and receiver must pay a certain amount of money into the private sector to "tech up".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bartje
That way; trading an outdated tech to a backwards empire is still rather cheap but giving them deathrays or uber-torpedoes becomes an expensive proposition!


Actually, that is another issue. you CAN'T trade an outdated tech, only the latest model that you have of a tech can be sold. I think that is a problem, especially for the AI. Lets say you or AI have tech 1 shields, and you are talking to someone with tech 10... they can sell you tech 10 (which includes tech 2 through 9).. they cannot sell you tech 3, 4, 5, etc.
the solution is to first go to someone with tech 5, but it from him... now its cheaper to buy tech 10 from first race. (because the COST to buy tech 10 is the sum of the cost of tech 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Bartje)
Post #: 34
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/21/2010 5:21:16 PM   
taltamir

 

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

ORIGINAL: thiosk

I still hold that colonization is way too fast and mineral demand is way too low. Thats why unrelenting expansion is so effective; we build colony ships much longer than the AI. I do NOT think that the AI colony-spamming is the answer-- I think it would be a major negative if they did.

One should be unable to colony spam; you should need the research/trading/industrial/mining/agricultural base to support expansion, and 10 pop colonies should be a net drain on all of those resources.

Since everyone throws out civ4 examples, if you over-expand in civ4, you bankrupt yourself. Despite fantastic resources, build those three extra cities before discovering currency and you will crash your economy.

It is a purely artificial limitation, but in DW, you are generating X amount of many different strategic resources. You should actually NEED large amounts of these resources to fund expansion, lest your colonies resort to cannibalism or descend to a feudal tribe.


none of these changed are needed.
the reason colony spam is so effective is because colony ships create their colonists out of thin air. if they took them from the home planet you would end up decreasing population from your well developed worlds to bring it over to the under developed worlds... this is a problem because tax income is population TIMES development... this means moving population from a developed planet to an undeveloped planets decreases your income.
On the other hand, creating new population out of thin air to send to the new planet is nothing but a net gain...

there should be SOME aspect of colony rushing... its fun to have a good colony rush... just have it at a much smaller scope then it is right now... which taking population off of a planet before colonization would take care of.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to thiosk)
Post #: 35
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/22/2010 1:23:00 AM   
Fishman

 

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

ORIGINAL: taltamir

the solution is to first go to someone with tech 5, but it from him... now its cheaper to buy tech 10 from first race. (because the COST to buy tech 10 is the sum of the cost of tech 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10)
But if this strict sum system is true, then ultimately you pay the same, except now you've paid race X the sum of costs 2-5, and race Y the sum of 6-10. It seems more to me that your goal has now become the avoidance of enriching one particular race too much, rather than how much you pay. That, and making sure race X has some money to pay you back with when you then immediately turn around and sell him tech 10.

In any case, as for the colony thing, the real issue is not that colonies can be spammed, but that colonies are essentially permanent: When a planet is colonized, it STAYS colonized for the rest of the game, because there is no practical way to UNCOLONIZE something. MOO2, for instance, I don't recall charging you for colony ship population either, so it was entirely possible to spam colonies there, too. But colonies weren't permanent fixtures: A spammed colony easily quickly became a noncolony. In DW, a planet that is colonized stays colonized forever.

< Message edited by Fishman -- 5/22/2010 1:26:12 AM >

(in reply to taltamir)
Post #: 36
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/22/2010 9:11:46 AM   
Yarasala

 

Posts: 185
Joined: 5/10/2010
Status: offline 		I like the idea that not only the highest tech can be traded but all lower techs as well. Would it be so difficult to just list them together with all current techs the empires trading which each other don't have yet?

I have another idea which I fear is much harder to implement but which models "real life" behaviour much better in my opinion: make it possible to trade *components* instead of the tech itself! How would it be to approach another empire and ask them: "Please give me 10 death ray cannons in exchange for x"? Those cannons would then have to be produced by the giving empire and actually shipped to the receiver's next starbase (and are prone to pirate attacks and whatever on the way ...).
The receiver could then use those components to build ships or bases, or he/she could decide to disassemble one or more of them to boost his/her own knowledge of that tech a bit (but not too much; I think, the more advanced the tech is the smaller the gain should be. Imagine you give a tank to a tribe of barbarians running around with bow and arrows, what could they do with it?).

What do you think?

(in reply to Fishman)
Post #: 37
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/22/2010 4:14:25 PM   
Shark7


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

ORIGINAL: Yarasala

I like the idea that not only the highest tech can be traded but all lower techs as well. Would it be so difficult to just list them together with all current techs the empires trading which each other don't have yet?

I have another idea which I fear is much harder to implement but which models "real life" behaviour much better in my opinion: make it possible to trade *components* instead of the tech itself! How would it be to approach another empire and ask them: "Please give me 10 death ray cannons in exchange for x"? Those cannons would then have to be produced by the giving empire and actually shipped to the receiver's next starbase (and are prone to pirate attacks and whatever on the way ...).
The receiver could then use those components to build ships or bases, or he/she could decide to disassemble one or more of them to boost his/her own knowledge of that tech a bit (but not too much; I think, the more advanced the tech is the smaller the gain should be. Imagine you give a tank to a tribe of barbarians running around with bow and arrows, what could they do with it?).

What do you think?


Then we can do like China and reverse engineer it.

The problem with that is that currently DW does not track individual componant production. What you are suggesting adds and entire new layer to the game...logistics.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Yarasala)
Post #: 38
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/22/2010 4:36:26 PM   
Bartje

 

Posts: 308
Joined: 4/27/2010
From: Netherlands
Status: offline 		It wuold be very neat if planets could have an inventory that affects their production levels, population support as well as development level and perhaps defense.


This could even be extrapolated into the abilty to use planetary shipyards instead of space based ?

Infrastructure for population cap raising

Labs for research

Ground based missiles

Ground based fighters

Factories

etc..


private sector freighters could then ferry buildings as well as components & resources to other locations and act as a supply & demand system.
 
 
 
neaaaaaaat.


(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 39
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/22/2010 4:37:28 PM   
Yarasala

 

Posts: 185
Joined: 5/10/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yarasala

I like the idea that not only the highest tech can be traded but all lower techs as well. Would it be so difficult to just list them together with all current techs the empires trading which each other don't have yet?

I have another idea which I fear is much harder to implement but which models "real life" behaviour much better in my opinion: make it possible to trade *components* instead of the tech itself! How would it be to approach another empire and ask them: "Please give me 10 death ray cannons in exchange for x"? Those cannons would then have to be produced by the giving empire and actually shipped to the receiver's next starbase (and are prone to pirate attacks and whatever on the way ...).
The receiver could then use those components to build ships or bases, or he/she could decide to disassemble one or more of them to boost his/her own knowledge of that tech a bit (but not too much; I think, the more advanced the tech is the smaller the gain should be. Imagine you give a tank to a tribe of barbarians running around with bow and arrows, what could they do with it?).

What do you think?


Then we can do like China and reverse engineer it.

The problem with that is that currently DW does not track individual componant production. What you are suggesting adds and entire new layer to the game...logistics.

What would not be the worst of things ...

I agree that it might be too complicated to implement, but I never know if I don't ask

But what brought me to that idea in the first place: The game already keeps track of resources *and* components (cargo of constructors and other building sites, probably resources in mining ships as well, although we cannot see that directly). So there might be a possiblilty that my idea is not so hard to implement as it first looks. We need the developer to answer this one.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 40
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/22/2010 4:39:44 PM   
Yarasala

 

Posts: 185
Joined: 5/10/2010
Status: offline
quote:



ORIGINAL: Bartje

It wuold be very neat if planets could have an inventory that affects their production levels, population support as well as development level and perhaps defense.


This could even be extrapolated into the abilty to use planetary shipyards instead of space based ?

Infrastructure for population cap raising

Labs for research

Ground based missiles

Ground based fighters

Factories

etc..


private sector freighters could then ferry buildings as well as components & resources to other locations and act as a supply & demand system.



neaaaaaaat.

Seconded

< Message edited by Yarasala -- 5/22/2010 4:41:42 PM >

(in reply to Bartje)
Post #: 41
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/23/2010 2:29:27 AM   
Munchies

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 4/21/2010
Status: offline 		Or just pull a page from the Hearts of Iron series where you trade for blue prints in the different techs.

You have lvl 1 shields and your neighbor has lvl 10. Well when you trade for the lvl 10 shield tech, you don't automatically get 2-9, but instead you get the tech 10 design that speeds up research on just that tech. When/if you ever get that far up in the tree.

Or anything along those lines..

And yeah, would require a bit of programming..

(in reply to Yarasala)
Post #: 42
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/23/2010 3:35:06 AM   
Dadekster

 

Posts: 141
Joined: 4/18/2010
Status: offline 		Fixing the tech brokering and slowing down colonizer spam would do a lot to help the AI out imo. I like the suggestion that a colony ship takes a bit out of your existing population. Frankly am surprised that's not how its done now. I also like the option to disable tech brokering but that is because I am on the side of the camp that likes each race to be a bit unique in regards to their tech. In other words, I like certain races to at least be better in certain fields as it adds to their flavor. This of course is along with how fast they make kids, what they like to build a house on and how mad their Berkley education should make them mad about wars your government is involved in.

(in reply to Munchies)
Post #: 43
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/23/2010 5:04:52 PM   
Barleyman

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dadekster

Fixing the tech brokering and slowing down colonizer spam would do a lot to help the AI out imo. I like the suggestion that a colony ship takes a bit out of your existing population. Frankly am surprised that's not how its done now.


I don't really see how making the 20mil colonists pulled out of the pop are going to seriously limit colony spam. Homeworld has billions of people, so.. Having to recruit the colonists out of population like the troops would seriously limit the ability to expand. Or you could just make fresh colonies big money sinks, now they're maintenance free pretty much. Colony ships are also kind of dirt cheap. It should be a big expensive project to make a fleet of ships capable of carrying 20min colonists + their equipment.

(in reply to Dadekster)
Post #: 44
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/23/2010 5:23:35 PM   
Yarasala

 

Posts: 185
Joined: 5/10/2010
Status: offline 		About colony spamming: I suggested in the wishlist thread to increase the distances between the systems or at least the fuel consumption. Right now the galaxy feels really small because you can travel from one end to the other pretty soon in a relatively short time. Apart from making the game feel bigger, more epic, greater distances (or strongly increased fuel consumption) could also help avoiding colony spamming, because when there are only a handful of colonies in range as opposed to now, when there are dozens and dozens, there would be nothing to spam to ...

Edit: even better: make fuel consumption an option so that every player can adjust that to his/her liking. That would be a very minor change in my opinion with the potential to vary the game tremendously. It would be a very big difference if distances take ten times as much time to cover than now, the game would develop much slower and in another way, also resupply ships would gain a lot of strategic importance. And again, make it an option with a slider where you can adjust fuel consumption for travel (not for weapon usage!) between 1 (the current consumption) and, say, 20 (use 20 times as much fuel).

Edit #2: Or make fuel consumption at least moddable!

< Message edited by Yarasala -- 5/23/2010 5:35:35 PM >

(in reply to Barleyman)
Post #: 45
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/23/2010 7:42:25 PM   
Munchies

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 4/21/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Barleyman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dadekster

Fixing the tech brokering and slowing down colonizer spam would do a lot to help the AI out imo. I like the suggestion that a colony ship takes a bit out of your existing population. Frankly am surprised that's not how its done now.


I don't really see how making the 20mil colonists pulled out of the pop are going to seriously limit colony spam. Homeworld has billions of people, so.. Having to recruit the colonists out of population like the troops would seriously limit the ability to expand. Or you could just make fresh colonies big money sinks, now they're maintenance free pretty much. Colony ships are also kind of dirt cheap. It should be a big expensive project to make a fleet of ships capable of carrying 20min colonists + their equipment.



Colony spamming from your homeworld is not the problem. Who cares if you spam colony ships that only colonize continental planets, because you won't find 50 of them in the first year (usually). Or, if you're insects and can spam colony ships for volcanic worlds, because their max pop is way lower than cont. planets.

The problem is when you find an aquatic and insectoid independent at the beginning giving you access to all the other planets.
You will not be spamming colony ships, as much, that can colonize those new worlds when you need to pull the colonists off your new planet. Especially if they start with minimal population.

That, and making colony ships cost more, would help greatly in slowing down the problem.


(in reply to Barleyman)
Post #: 46
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/23/2010 8:56:55 PM   
Shark7


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

ORIGINAL: Munchies


quote:

ORIGINAL: Barleyman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dadekster

Fixing the tech brokering and slowing down colonizer spam would do a lot to help the AI out imo. I like the suggestion that a colony ship takes a bit out of your existing population. Frankly am surprised that's not how its done now.


I don't really see how making the 20mil colonists pulled out of the pop are going to seriously limit colony spam. Homeworld has billions of people, so.. Having to recruit the colonists out of population like the troops would seriously limit the ability to expand. Or you could just make fresh colonies big money sinks, now they're maintenance free pretty much. Colony ships are also kind of dirt cheap. It should be a big expensive project to make a fleet of ships capable of carrying 20min colonists + their equipment.



Colony spamming from your homeworld is not the problem. Who cares if you spam colony ships that only colonize continental planets, because you won't find 50 of them in the first year (usually). Or, if you're insects and can spam colony ships for volcanic worlds, because their max pop is way lower than cont. planets.

The problem is when you find an aquatic and insectoid independent at the beginning giving you access to all the other planets.
You will not be spamming colony ships, as much, that can colonize those new worlds when you need to pull the colonists off your new planet. Especially if they start with minimal population.

That, and making colony ships cost more, would help greatly in slowing down the problem.




I think just greatly increasing the costs of colony ships (by weighting the cost of the ship heavily using the cost of the Colonization component) would be the way to go. Colonizing is far to fast as it is. If each colony ship cost you 50k or 100k instead of 5k it would really slow the pace of the game. That is probably a good thing...it would also make the mining ships and stations that much more important.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Munchies)
Post #: 47
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/23/2010 9:29:40 PM   
Munchies

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 4/21/2010
Status: offline 		I agree

But using existing pop from the planets makes those races with higher reproduction worth taking over the others with lower %.
Maybe give people more of a reason to choose the not so popular races.

But grabbing population out of thin air practically takes away from those bonuses.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 48
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/24/2010 12:30:05 AM   
BoredGamer78

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 5/20/2010
Status: offline 		Seems this thread's expanded a little to cover colonization rates in general. In a way, I feel a little guilty seeing the thread name still up here since the creator(s) worked hard and made a nice product. Unfortunately, major changes are still needed to make the game AI competitive along the lines initially outlined and expanded upon by others here. Played another game with fewer, larger AI empires. All of the original problems listed are still problems in 1.049. Targetted colony expansion into enemy held systems in order to sell colonizes nets ~170,000 - 250,000 per colony in trade value immediately following colonization, and turn arounds can be fast enough to avoid relationship penalties. As others have stated, eliminating tech trading by any of a number of methods is still a huge issue for difficulty (as I and I'd imagine others have no real desire to show restraint ingame). I prefer enemy AIs trading with each other only because I've seen it work profoundly well before (though for the life of me I can't recall the game it happened in - AIs traded tech with each other almost as fast as I could, and I had to jealously guard new tech / trade it to multiple AIs immediately to get a return, and couldn't trade exchanged techs as a result as they'd already been shared long since with harder AI settings).

On the issue of colonization, I'd say the best serviceable example would be Stars! (circa 1995). Homeworld populations were minimal (say 1/10th of maximum planetary population starting out, with variance based on growth rate), and while some races could expand like a plague immediately, others had to choose their colonies carefully and move limited populations from the homeworld to colonies, which each often required several years (turns - maybe 7-10) of expansion before they were viable enough to send even a single colony ship of their own off, which would in turn require spreading a limited population. Starting population for a new colony in Distant Worlds is what, 10 million? Make each colonizer require 10 million people from planetary population then (you don't need to bother with the story fluff justification until the rule set's in place). Expansion from Homeworld can be addressed seperately if the rate's still too great (lower homeworld population caps while preserving income?), but this will at least slow down the hub and spoke effect to something the current AI can compete against, and shut down at least part of the indy. race colonization problem noted by others in this thread and elsewhere.

For making the AI truly aggressive, I'd expound first by guessing at limitations. If ships are treated individually, or only reluctantly grouped into fleets, I can see where true AI aggressiveness would be a system hog. Have the AI form fleets at the design stage instead with homogenous speeds and fuel constraints, with specific instructions for Troop Transport behavior so that they'll always be present and go for the throat the moment the coast is clear. For competing against human ship designs, there are only two real rules. If the AI has the tech, make AIs design ships to fight players that have greater range (assuming any kind of damage potential at range) and greater speed. If the AI doesn't have the tech, load down AIs with a greater ratio of short-range firepower + shields and greater speed than human ships, however many engines it takes. If necessary, balance changes can be made to let laser ships go faster than torp ships (less mass carried or somesuch fluff). Whatever the case, AI ship design should be based off of human ship designs at least with respect to firepower, durability, and speed, perhaps with a cost function for efficiency. Generics simply do not cut the mustard against human opponents unless the generics are very, very mean and efficient. In the event that an AI is hopelessly outclassed by human, or possibly even other AI opponents, consider giving them an option to surrender, or ally themselves to greater AIs in a vassal manner. If England invades, ally yourself with France.

(in reply to Munchies)
Post #: 49
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/24/2010 1:17:01 AM   
the1sean


Posts: 854
Joined: 5/11/2010
From: Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Munchies

Or just pull a page from the Hearts of Iron series where you trade for blue prints in the different techs.

You have lvl 1 shields and your neighbor has lvl 10. Well when you trade for the lvl 10 shield tech, you don't automatically get 2-9, but instead you get the tech 10 design that speeds up research on just that tech. When/if you ever get that far up in the tree.


I agree wholeheartedly! That way no tech is "free" just easier to research (in Hearts of Iron series it reduces tech time by 50% I think?). Conversely, I think that reverse engineering advanced components from acquired ships shouldnt just give "X" research points, but instead give a percentile boost to the appropriate tech fields for a certain amount of time, or until the final tech level is reached. A percentile based bonus system would require every tech to still be researched, and solve the tech brokering problem.

Also, I think that trade techs should only be tradeable if you have a trade treaty with that empire, and weapons/defense techs should only be tradeable if you have a defense or protectorate treaty. It would be nice to see research treaties that give a small boost to max tech percentage as well.

(in reply to Munchies)
Post #: 50
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/24/2010 1:26:42 AM   
taltamir

 

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

ORIGINAL: Munchies

I agree

But using existing pop from the planets makes those races with higher reproduction worth taking over the others with lower %.
Maybe give people more of a reason to choose the not so popular races.

But grabbing population out of thin air practically takes away from those bonuses.


but you would not lose anything from conquering low reproduction races... you still gain "free" population.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Munchies)
Post #: 51
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/24/2010 1:44:00 AM   
OberonDark

 

Posts: 64
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline 		I think the underlying problem is that all the resources in the game are far too plentiful to everyone. Strategic resources aren't strategic if they're available practically everywhere, or can be shipped across the galaxy within a real life minute or so. It would add a new layer of depth if you could strike at your enemy's largest steel producer, crippling his colony ship construction, etc. But steel is available on every other planet, and you can extract so much it isn't relevant anyway.

(in reply to taltamir)
Post #: 52
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/24/2010 2:01:40 AM   
taltamir

 

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

ORIGINAL: OberonDark

I think the underlying problem is that all the resources in the game are far too plentiful to everyone. Strategic resources aren't strategic if they're available practically everywhere, or can be shipped across the galaxy within a real life minute or so. It would add a new layer of depth if you could strike at your enemy's largest steel producer, crippling his colony ship construction, etc. But steel is available on every other planet, and you can extract so much it isn't relevant anyway.


It needs to be that way in order for the game to be playable by a human... there are far too many ships being build all the time. We are talking about more than 10 private ships per colonized planet (which need to be rebuilt often as they are weak and are destroyed often... and upgraded to newer designs). Since private ships use the same components and are of similar sizes...
Note that the situation you describe only occurs if you have races that can colonize all planet types, and colonize all planet types. Shortage is a real and serious danger to, say, a peaceful human empire that didn't conquer the right races (happened to me) and thus cannot colonize ice, ocean, and volcanic planets

However, a FEW specific resources can be made rare... I have noticed that as time progresses and the amount of colonies planets increases above ~500 in the entire galaxy, hydrogen fuel becomes extremely rare, because every COLONIZED planet is a mine, you cannot colonize gas planets... thus you must keep on building an ever increasing number of gas mining stations on those to supply the galaxy... this does not happen, and wars constantly destroy those and construction ships... Note that hydrogen IS used to construct some components... which means your ship construction is delayed due to hydrogen shortages.
As a result, a late game would have a huge hydrogen deficiency.. I have mitigated that by having certain ships designs use quantom reactors (the best calson consuming reactors)... but calson also comes from gas giants...

It would be possible to limit some critical resources to barren moons... barren moons cannot be colonies, you may only build a mining station there. Meaning that the same limitations on production (and shortages) occur as a result.
Recall, that planets once colonized remain colonized forever (unless nuked, but that is extremely rare).

Thus you would have 2 tiers of strategic resources:
1. Common resources on populated planets... those would only be an issue if you do not have a race capable of populating certain planet types (since they are limited to certain planet types)
2. Rare resources on populated planets... those are not that big of a deal as the game progresses, as enough of those are found randomly (and colonized) to provide the galaxy.
3. common/rare resources on impossible to populate planets. Those are the limiting resources, like hydrogen currently is.

The problem with such an approach is that is difficult to manage yourself and feels like a "bug", where the economy spontaneously collapses in later games due to lack of resources due to lack of automatic building of enough construction ships / mines. it will be too cumbersome to explain to everyone exactly what they need to do (build lots of constructors and then build lots of mines on those specific resources that are limited to non colonizable planets)...
Such a change would also have far reaching economical impact and require a total rebalance of the economy.

BTW, if you have had your colony ships price go over 100,000 (heck I have gone over 200,000) then you have experiences the gas collapse... its so expensive because it requires lots of hydrogen to build, and hydrogen price shot up from 1 credit a unit to a ridiculously high number due to shortage.

< Message edited by taltamir -- 5/24/2010 2:05:05 AM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to OberonDark)
Post #: 53
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/24/2010 2:45:44 AM   
BoredGamer78

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 5/20/2010
Status: offline 		Different types of resource access would be a neat idea. Maybe moddable?

Something I forgot to mention since I take it for granted. When tech brokering (or selling planets in hostile systems) you have near total control over AI relations with your empire. Perhaps the AI is capable of raiding and even attacking and taking over worlds when it's stronger than you are, but I've shorted out war attempts early on with a pitiful token offering of 150,000 creds to an empire with far more firepower than I had at the time. I mean, 15 minutes in my Galaxy Map goes for 200,000. Not only do you gain the benefits of free tech and free currency, you get positive relations with every single empire, and this is something even Civilization and GalCiv corrected at their worst (not completely, or well, but there was always that odd faction that would attack you under the right circumstances and not respond to diplomacy until they'd sacked you). Warlike AI factions that start out naturally disliking my race and desiring my colonies still love me overall because of petty tech trading.

(in reply to taltamir)
Post #: 54
RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy - 5/24/2010 6:58:52 AM   
jam3

 

Posts: 65
Joined: 11/9/2003
Status: offline 		Well one of the reasons I shelved it as well as it just being too easy was that there are no graphs or anything at the end so you can't even do the "play yourself" thing and try and max your stats. The victory screen is easily the most hollow part of the game.

The game would easily have legs with multiplayer.

< Message edited by jam3 -- 5/24/2010 7:00:04 AM >

(in reply to BoredGamer78)
Post #: 55
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> RE: Distant Worlds is Way Way Way Too Easy Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

2.266