RE: MOO3 sitrep (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series



Message

x2yzh9 -> RE: MOO3 sitrep (5/28/2011 3:19:07 AM)

8x speed.



Pipewrench -> RE: MOO3 sitrep (5/30/2011 11:54:40 PM)

lets create a game within a game,

trigger mini story lines that fire when specific actions are taken but will never fire if missed. Make these very hard to trigger and race specific so the replay value is increased.

when story lines are triggered a database is updated with the player saying that objective was completed.
keep the database vague forcing players to compete to unlock secrets that are within the game.

hold a contest every month with a update that drops in a secret puzzle/storyline to unlock?

we are all sc-fi nuts so why not create a quest within a game?




Data -> RE: MOO3 sitrep (5/31/2011 6:20:50 AM)

i'm all for that so I vote for it with both hands.



Shuul -> RE: MOO3 sitrep (5/31/2011 8:49:41 AM)

Please make a button "Disband fleet" that releases all ships from this fleet when you dont need it anymore, its very annoying to do this to every ship separate.



Data -> RE: MOO3 sitrep (5/31/2011 9:31:38 AM)

I haven't played in a while so I'm not sure but isn't such a button available in the fleet screen?
If not, selecting all the ships (either in space or in the ships and bases screen) and hitting the fleet -> no fleet option does not work?



nammafia -> Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/10/2011 9:18:48 PM)


Is this possible for Distant Worlds to have borders like in Distant Stars?  It really help with visualization part of the game.

http://www.spacesector.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/distant_star_map.jpg



Facedrop -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/18/2011 7:25:52 AM)

I certainly agree with Pipewrench's suggestion it would add allot more replay value to the game.
Maybe this should be added to the next poll?



Data -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/18/2011 8:27:44 AM)

There are several of us who want this (mostly SR2 diehards) but there are valid reasons for the other side as well since this is a 4x game and having this may complicate the gamepley. If designed properly I belive it would enhance it.
It certainly deserves a place in the next poll.



malisle -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/21/2011 10:55:30 AM)

Would it be possible to create our own component designs, just as we can create our own ships designs now?

I'm thinking something like this: you open component design window and select type of component you would like to create, torpedo weapon for example. Then series of sliders that allow you to manipulate range, damage loss over distance, component size, energy required to shoot, etc. show up. Their default position would be determined by your current tech level. Underneath the sliders would be a list of resources needed to construct the component , maintenance cost for component and similar.

If you wanted to increase damage your torpedo weapon deals you could do that by moving slider to the right with small price increase at the beginning, and then exponential growth of price the further you go. If you moved few sliders a small bit prices would grow fast. Again, current tech level would determine default prices, damages and other properties. Name of the weapon, component icon, torpedo graphic and other stuff should also be selectable.

That feature would satisfy modders and add a new dimension to DW gaming.



Rising-Sun -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/21/2011 11:51:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: malisle

Would it be possible to create our own component designs, just as we can create our own ships designs now?

I'm thinking something like this: you open component design window and select type of component you would like to create, torpedo weapon for example. Then series of sliders that allow you to manipulate range, damage loss over distance, component size, energy required to shoot, etc. show up. Their default position would be determined by your current tech level. Underneath the sliders would be a list of resources needed to construct the component , maintenance cost for component and similar.

If you wanted to increase damage your torpedo weapon deals you could do that by moving slider to the right with small price increase at the beginning, and then exponential growth of price the further you go. If you moved few sliders a small bit prices would grow fast. Again, current tech level would determine default prices, damages and other properties. Name of the weapon, component icon, torpedo graphic and other stuff should also be selectable.

That feature would satisfy modders and add a new dimension to DW gaming.


Yeah that would be great and alot of time usage, some do and some dont like it. Let having stock ships that already made. What i really want to see is where the weapon slots are facing, in this game they have 360 degrees and that is unrealistic. Also having light mounts, normal, heavy or even spinal mounts for different beams or projectiles. Least they have point defense :)



Simulation01 -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/26/2011 5:20:41 PM)

Has anyone mentioned random events like rogue comets/asteroids that slam into populated planets, but could be defeated by an intercepting fleet or powerful starbase?  Also, how about random supernova's...to be sure they wouldn't happen every few moments but maybe randomly every 1,2,3 hundred turns and would turn systems into rubble piles?  Solar storms?  Traveling spacial distortions that could maybe destroy a single planet... 



Data -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/26/2011 7:47:25 PM)

Yap, already posted by others and the Data the mooniac....but every new post counts, hope a poll on this will also reveal how much we want them.

The last one (Traveling spacial distortions that could maybe destroy a single planet) is a new one and it's an awesome idea.....even before it reaches the target planet it can have other effects in deep space, or maybe change the orbit of planets that doesn't hit but are near it's route.

Maybe they can be closed like in ST by ejecting a hyperdrive core or something.



Data -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/26/2011 7:48:37 PM)

deleted....double post due to poor eye sight and short attention span.



Simulation01 -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/26/2011 8:08:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Data

Yap, already posted by others and the Data the mooniac....but every new post counts, hope a poll on this will also reveal how much we want them.

The last one (Traveling spacial distortions that could maybe destroy a single planet) is a new one and it's an awesome idea.....even before it reaches the target planet it can have other effects in deep space, or maybe change the orbit of planets that doesn't hit but are near it's route.

Maybe they can be closed like in ST by ejecting a hyperdrive core or something.



LOL exactly



J HG T -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/27/2011 7:41:56 AM)

We concur about Simulation1's idea of random, but rare, hazards in space. Would add all kinds of interesting situations to the game.



Facedrop -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/28/2011 8:37:16 AM)

I would like to see space monsters, which when killed release a small amount of a new rare luxury resource. This would give hunting space creatures more incentive and could also tie in well with the space monster farm concept.



phatkarp -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/28/2011 8:54:19 PM)

I would like monsters that crap small amount of a new rare luxury resource.  You could follow the creature around and mine its excrement. 



Data -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/28/2011 9:13:14 PM)

Or maybe they produce them and we farm / milk the creatures for those luxury resources.



nammafia -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/29/2011 10:45:51 PM)

I have another wish for Distant Worlds.  If it was mentioned before, I think it is a good idea.

I would like to have private sector also affects the policies of the empire more directly such as requesting faster hyper drives (research policy), demanding removal of pirate bases and creatures, lower tax rate (economic policy), free trade with empires, etc.  You can ignore their demands and requests with consequences such as tax evasion, less trading, upgrading their ships at foreign star bases, etc.  This will make a living galaxy more lively.

Private sector should also upgrade and buy their trading vessels by themselves to maximize profit in competition with one another --> non-monolithic private sector with numerous trading companies and corporations.  They might be multi-empire trading companies with great influence.

In general, I would like the idea behind private sector to be hashed out more and develop further.  So that we can play as a trader in Distant Worlds directly and indirectly affecting the politics in the galaxy.  Maybe another expansion is needed: Distant Worlds: the Rise of the Private Sector. 



phatkarp -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/29/2011 11:38:50 PM)

YES!  A Giant-Kaltor milker! 

Tangy!



Dhanun_slith -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/30/2011 3:50:09 AM)

nammafia's suggestion is great. A more active private sector that could influence an empire's decision and even expansion. Corporations offering you reward for colonizing certain systems, getting trade agreements with other empires, and expanding their profit with your actions (or lack of).

A suggestion of mine (don't know if anyone has already come up with this): Nomad Civs. It could be a form of government, or a civ in itself, but the way it would act is opposite to the other "common" civs that settles and create countries. Basecally, a nomad civ would consist mainly around a fleet. They would colonize some worlds and suck them dry of resources, leaving them completly barren. After that, they'd abandon that world and go to the next one. With such unmeasured exploitation, they would build massive armadas that would travel the universe in search of resources to keep fueling their ships and feeding their people.
It'd be awesome for a AI only civ. But I imagine that with a number of restrictions would be very interesting to play with (and very hard too). These nomad nations could live in a constant war state, since they "destroy" worlds, and every civ in the galaxy is not inclined to make peace with them. But they could be "persuaded" to harvest some other civs planets (like the current "pay privateers" system to harass other people). I think it would be a great asset to the game, if possible to implement at all.



J HG T -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/30/2011 7:52:33 AM)

Suggestion on system ownership:
Note: I know that the coming border system will probably affect this idea, but I'll present it as it would work now.

In my current game I have a prime mining system next to my home-system. There's over ten mining station in this system and it provides the majority of Caslon for my empires needs.
Later I made contact with Securans that are now my allies. The only problem in our alliance is that they colonized a planet in that mining system. A lousy desert planet with one resource. Now they are the owners of that system, which will be causing certain problems in the future.

My suggestion is that there should be an "outpost" component for starbases that would count as a single planet towards the ownerships of a system. This component would need to be very costly (both high cost and upkeep) so you can't spam it, and quite large so you need to make dedicated "outpost" starbases. The outposts could also work as planets for trading purposes; Storing and distributing trade goods and resources via transports.
This would help you secure ownership of some resource rich systems that you are mining, but don't have interest of colonizing.

The border system will probably change this situation so I can buy that Securan planet, or they switch sides 'cause being under my empires influence.
Also, the outpost idea has been around if memory serves. This's just my take on it.




phatkarp -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/30/2011 4:09:25 PM)

Co-op Play!  I was thinking about this as I was spending a game just tooling around with a single fleet.  It would be fun to have one player "in charge", and have that player give me assignments, such as "take the explorers and find stuff" or "take 1st Fleet and do something productive."



Data -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/30/2011 4:34:24 PM)

hmm, sounds like battle school from ender's game....me likes it a lot, +1



Dhanun_slith -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (6/30/2011 9:11:25 PM)

Great idea indeed. It would be like Hearts of Iron shared countries option in multiplayer (don't know if that actually works, but sitll...). It'd be great to play as the Head of the government, while your friends are all admirals in your fleet, or governors in sectors from you empire.
Me likes a lot [2]



Niaru -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (7/16/2011 2:19:22 AM)

Sadly, I did not have the time to read all the posts, but since Mr. Data already told me to put the suggestions in here regardless of potential repetition, here you go:

1. Civilian ships should be retrofittable. Annoying to be endgame and still have freighters with the first engine ever turtling around in the empire.
2. Mining bases should be retrofittable via repair ships.
3. I greatly would appreciate a ground combat research tree, with weapons, armor and equipment, as well as some more detail to the ground combat ( a simple graphical breakdown of what happens on the planet "Master of Orion 2 style" would be enough.
4. On the other hand, planetary invasions should be impossible as long as planetary shields are up. I was able to invade Utopia with 12 troop transports full of Securan Battlechicks(tm) quite early in the game by parking the ships in orbit, and instadropping them on the planet. The ships got shot down in like 2 miliseconds, but hey, I got myself a beautiful planet. Unbalancing.
5. For the love of all that is holy, make something out ofthe victory screen. Like 15 years after I won my first "MoO2"-Game, I can still recite the text of the victory-film... " The power of the ancients is now yours to command... You've crushed all opposition beneath your heel.... yadda yadda". You can't imagine what I felt when I won my first Distant Worlds - in my oppinion better than MoO2 - and saw... that.
6. I Don't know how complex and time consuming it would be, but animations for the races in the politics screen would be awsome. I'm talking about basic stuff, like three basic animations for idling - neutral, angry and pleased, combined with three answer possibilites, approving (nodding or somesuch), disaproving (perhaps growling when angry?) and neutral (shrug?). 9 total animations per race.
Who would not want to see pleased Atuuk? Or angry Atuuk for that matter? Or... pleased Securan? No, I'm getting carried away ;)
7. Technologies to terraform planets to improve their value would also be nice. Not changing their type, just improving their value.
8. And finally, would it be possible to get to pick the racial statistics when I start the game? Alternatively more races, some of which would be able to colonize gas giants?



Data -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (7/16/2011 8:46:30 PM)

good, Niaru, moaaar.....moaaaar [:)]
and also about no.5.....brother mooniac, I also know that message like the fear litany in Dune. Great classic stuff.



solops -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (7/22/2011 5:07:21 PM)

In the colony list screen have a column for starbases (the F2 screen, I think). I'd like to be able to quickly seen which colonies do/do not have starbases built.



Data -> RE: Revisting the border system for visualization and functionality (7/22/2011 8:55:56 PM)

If that's not already possible on the map (not sure right now) than we should also have this for the map as well.



uberknight72 -> RE: Master Wishlist Thread (7/30/2011 7:29:28 PM)

While I have seen ALOT of what I would like to see in this game already here is just one thing I would like to see added, and that is for independent races to only choose a race that is not already chosen just for the sake of realism, or just make independent races choose from a list of cheaply made races that you can't play as or make a main race other than the 20 already in game. I just hate playing as a race that I imagine has JUST discovered faster than light travel then we would run into an independant version of OUR race during exploration, that is just awkward. Its also just as bad when I find an independant race of another main race in a galaxy that I imagine everyone has just discovered FTL travel or has never left thier home system until recently



Page: <<   < prev  38 39 [40] 41 42   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.984375