First impression

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

First impression

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 >> First impression

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

First impression - 6/11/2011 1:28:09 PM

Nimaniel

Posts: 6
Joined: 6/8/2011
Status: offline

Finished my first playthrough. The following is my first impressions, and things that I think should be addressed.

The game is both innovative and has a lot of potential. Very enjoyable now, but it is the potential that is most exciting.

Here are some things I would like to see addressed (add them to the next wishlist poll if you like):

- Design UI needs filters for components.
I don't want to scroll around to find that fuel cell component again, just because I later in the design process found that I had space for one more. When I add a component, it should not make the component list jump. When I select a component from the list of components already in the design, highlight that component for me in the component list to quickly let me add more of that component. Allow me to filter out component types that I am not interested in (I don't want to see 20 different components that I would never consider putting on a ship of this type - allow me to see them if I want, but we really need a smart filter).

- Giving orders to ships and bases that require you to get the context menu from right clicking on itself should be MUCH easier when zoomed out. I know it is possible to do it if you can hit the tiny circle or diamond shape and right click it, but I don't want to play that minigame. If I already have it selected (from having used a hotkey for example), then let me simply right click the detail window to get the context menu.

- Ships and other objects that pile up on top of each other are annoying. Allow repair/build/refuel/dock etc. to be done at "adjacent" range. This way ships could surround a space port when refueling/restocking etc., and it would be much easier to select them using the mouse, without constantly having to see needless menus where you have to pick out the one you want to select.

- Opposing players (AI) can end wars with you without your explicit consent. That should definitely not be possible, and certainly not without making it abundantly clear that they have done so. Continue attacks on an opponent that has pulled off this trick will cause your reputation with ALL players to drop, and can basicly ruin the game completely.

- Troop/colony invasion warfare is MUCH too fast. It should take a long time to assault a planet with a ground invasion force, giving the defender a better chance to send relief or prepare a second line of defense, and stop aggressors from sprinting through planets, reusing the same troops.

- Fuel should be consumed as a function of ship size. While this is not realistic in a spaceship that travels in a straight line, it is needed for gameplay issues. Currently, large ships have a HUGE advantage over smaller ships. Give some incentive to use smaller ships more, and large ships less.

- Diplomatic negotiation (tech trade, etc) need to reflect the balance of the proposal and chance of the possible outcomes.

- Some techs seem FAR more valuable than others. Industrial and lab techs are split into 4 types each, and thus each area takes 4 times as long to advance one level as compared to getting the next level of blasters, which will give you a massive advantage over your opponents in a war.

- Desperately need more information about how certain things actually work. Why do default constructor ships have 1 of each plant, except industrial of which they have 3? How can we tell what is in the cargo bay of a ship? ..and a billion more questions that remain unanswered even after completing a game that took two days.

Hope someone who cares reads this. This could go from an interesting game to an awesome game!

Post #: 1

RE: First impression - 6/11/2011 1:51:49 PM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

Hi Nimaniel and welcome to the forum, we all agree that it has the potential to become awesome....and it's all done by Elliot, the one man team behind it.
Most of the things requested by you were requested previously but aside from the poll we also have a wishlist thread that is read by Elliot so better post this there too.
Have fun.

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Nimaniel)

Post #: 2

RE: First impression - 6/11/2011 9:46:45 PM

Igard

Posts: 2282
Joined: 3/29/2010
From: Scotland
Status: offline

Some really great points.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nimaniel

- Desperately need more information about how certain things actually work. Why do default constructor ships have 1 of each plant, except industrial of which they have 3? How can we tell what is in the cargo bay of a ship? ..and a billion more questions that remain unanswered even after completing a game that took two days.

I'm not entirely sure about this, I'd have to start the game up for the first time in a couple of months to check, but I think there are 3 types of manufacturer, energy, weapon, and high tech. The construction ship should only have 1 of each of these. Could be wrong though, you've maybe discovered something I haven't.

To find out the cargo of a ship, select the ship and double click on the info panel in the bottom left of the screen (just click somewhere on the background of the info panel). The screen that opens will have several tabs, cargo, components, weapons, troops etc.

I think that's how you do get it. Forgive me as I'm just working from memory. Need to get back to playing this soon. However long soon is on these forums.

_____________________________

The Picard Era for Distant Worlds

Igard's Romulan Stormbird

(in reply to Nimaniel)

Post #: 3

RE: First impression - 6/11/2011 10:03:50 PM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

Your memory is good enough, Igard....hope the same applies for me, I'm in the same situation as you.
As for your question, Nimaniel, the CS has three industrial manufacturers basically because Elliot decided so....I think mainly because industrial components are more often encountered than energy or high tech ones. This needs to be checked in the default designs as we make our own anyway.
Each manufacturer will produce one component at a time so having three industrial ones means you get three industrial components made for each high tech or energy ones; it could be a way to force the construction yard to assemble more industrial components before the other two...but this is again just speculation.

I might fire up a game to check this out, it should be fairly obvious once we look at how things actually work.

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Igard)

Post #: 4

RE: First impression - 6/17/2011 6:19:03 AM

Nimaniel

Posts: 6
Joined: 6/8/2011
Status: offline

Thanks for the replies. Appreciate them. But..

My point is that you can play the game for days and, neither know the answer to these questions, nor know even how to find the answer without coming to the forum. The questions were just examples to make this point, and not terribly good examples really. There are countless other unanswered questions, too many to list. The problem being that you can't play the game in a very informed way, if you don't even know how to find the answers.

We naturally assume that a construction ship will generally work faster with a 3-1 ratio of industrial plants over other plant types, but the basis for that assumption is paper thin, and very possibly wrong. So what should we do? Test it on a number of different construction projects, doing the math on the components required for each and measuring the time it takes for construction? Surely not.

I understand that the game has the.. maturity that it has, and that it will become even better and more mature given time. Just pointing out that the game would be more enjoyable, if the information to make some of the interesting decisions were available.

(in reply to Data)

Post #: 5

RE: First impression - 6/17/2011 8:15:16 AM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

I think it will be in time, until that time I'm happy to test and find out for myself. I mean even if a help file or a tutorial would tell me this I'd still test it to make sure it's wad.

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Nimaniel)

Post #: 6

RE: First impression - 6/17/2011 3:43:34 PM

cookie monster

Posts: 1693
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline

I disagree CodeForce do not have to supply information on why a CS Ships components are designed in a certain way.

They only have to say what a CS Ship is for.

No game designer has to write in the manual about design features and the internal workings of the combat mechanism.

I do not expect them to go into great length about how the trade model works either.

If you need more info then the only real option is to come to the forum.

(in reply to Data)

Post #: 7

RE: First impression - 6/17/2011 4:09:26 PM

Shark7

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: cookie monster

I disagree CodeForce do not have to supply information on why a CS Ships components are designed in a certain way.

They only have to say what a CS Ship is for.

No game designer has to write in the manual about design features and the internal workings of the combat mechanism.

I do not expect them to go into great length about how the trade model works either.

If you need more info then the only real option is to come to the forum.

At most a mention of 'constuctor components do not stack abilities' etc. But I tend to agree, you need only know what it is for, not the minutia of how it works.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to cookie monster)

Post #: 8

RE: First impression - 6/17/2011 4:14:16 PM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

old school games had this kind of detail and they had manuals so big that very few bothered to read. You have to strike a balance at some point, especially with the level of complexity in today's games.

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 9

RE: First impression - 6/17/2011 4:24:29 PM

cookie monster

Posts: 1693
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Data

old school games had this kind of detail and they had manuals so big that very few bothered to read. You have to strike a balance at some point, especially with the level of complexity in today's games.

You should try reading the War in the East and War in the Pacific Manuals, they're very detailed and very complex, made very technical for the grognard audience.

At least I could play and learn ROTS as I went without spending a day reading about how the game works.

For example just repairing a heavily damaged Pearl Harbor Battleship is an artform in itself, and she's still repairing 10 months later. Heavy Hull Flood Damage is a pain to repair until a very special floating dock ship arrives.

Some guys like something very technical, I would prefer different game modes, with different levels of complexity.

(in reply to Data)

Post #: 10

RE: First impression - 6/17/2011 4:26:21 PM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

Same here, I used to love high complexity (and I still do) but with age comes an increasing lack of time....and also an increasing need to actually play

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to cookie monster)

Post #: 11

RE: First impression - 6/17/2011 4:38:37 PM

Shark7

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: cookie monster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Data

old school games had this kind of detail and they had manuals so big that very few bothered to read. You have to strike a balance at some point, especially with the level of complexity in today's games.

You should try reading the War in the East and War in the Pacific Manuals, they're very detailed and very complex, made very technical for the grognard audience.

At least I could play and learn ROTS as I went without spending a day reading about how the game works.

For example just repairing a heavily damaged Pearl Harbor Battleship is an artform in itself, and she's still repairing 10 months later. Heavy Hull Flood Damage is a pain to repair until a very special floating dock ship arrives.

Some guys like something very technical, I would prefer different game modes, with different levels of complexity.

Good example there of how a game can be overly complicated.

Let's say a BB in WiTP: AE is damaged to 75% systems with 5% major, 45% flotation with 20% major, and 60% fires.

OK, before you can even start the repairs, the ship needs to be docked to port and the fires put out. This will take time and the system and flooding damage will increase as it does. Then you have to manually assign it to a repair type, either pierside, repair ship, or repair shipyard (if avaialble and the right size). This will take any number of days to complete, and the port in question may not be able to repair any of the damage or repair only some, so you have to move the ship (at risk of it sinking en route) to a port that can handle the repairs (IE the repair shipyard is big enough).

I much prefer the DW method of any starport, station or constructor with the shipyard component can repair a ship fully...much less micro-management involved.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to cookie monster)

Post #: 12