Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question

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 >> Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question - 4/6/2014 10:36:58 AM

Einbauschrank

Posts: 14
Joined: 10/10/2008
Status: offline

Hi Board!

I have an asteroid named "The Golden Star" in my system, which sports 98% gold ressource and a scenery bonus. How do I use both attributes for maximum effect? Once I build the resort I can't select the asteroid as the base is on top of it and it doesn't appear in the expansion planner and the galaxy map doesn't allow me to select it (only "go to"). I tried adding a luxury mining component to the base but I didn't observe any freighters docking.

Another question: As the rather impatient type I often mis-click and e.g. build a research station I don't need. Is there a possibility to un-queue this besides searching the construction ship tasked with it and "clear all queued missions"?

Thanks!

Einbau

Post #: 1

RE: Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question - 4/6/2014 1:38:54 PM

CyclopsSlayer

Posts: 583
Joined: 2/11/2012
Status: offline

Just add the Mining Engines/Gas/Luxury Extractors to the Resort design. Depends on if you want to pay the maintenance, but it is worth it for things like that.

(in reply to Einbauschrank)

Post #: 2

RE: Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question - 4/6/2014 3:35:03 PM

Shark7

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

You should be able to design one with mining engines, and one without and be able to keep both current. The key is to always design the one without mining engines last so the AI see it as the most current design. The AI will then build the ones without the added expense of mining engines, allowing you to build the mining resorts manually at the special locations.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to CyclopsSlayer)

Post #: 3

RE: Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question - 4/7/2014 4:28:07 AM

Ralzakark

Posts: 225
Joined: 4/24/2012
Status: offline

From memory gold is a strategic not luxury resource, so you will need a standard mining engine. You can look at the cargo carried if you examine the base to see if it is mining anything.

(in reply to Shark7)

Post #: 4

RE: Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question - 4/7/2014 6:18:07 PM

Einbauschrank

Posts: 14
Joined: 10/10/2008
Status: offline

Thanks, with standard mining equipment I was able to get that station running. Any ideas on the queueing?

(in reply to Ralzakark)

Post #: 5

RE: Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question - 4/11/2014 10:41:00 PM

Fenrisfil

Posts: 216
Joined: 6/2/2013
Status: offline

On the queues, no you can't (at least I've never found a way to). you have to clear the lot. Personally, I avoid using queues at all as I rarely find the distribution of jobs to be especially useful. Far too often if I try and queue things they all end up assigned to the same construction ship.

(in reply to Einbauschrank)

Post #: 6

RE: Combined Resort/Mining station and queue question - 4/12/2014 3:10:26 PM

pycco

Posts: 345
Joined: 5/28/2013
From: United States of America
Status: offline

hmm in all my experience the freighters do not pick up resource from resort miners, same thing happens to star base miners. as for the queues you can if you press the hot-key for construction ships then queue to build repair then press the hot-key again repeat... as for right clicking on a planet or damaged ship then queuing does not work so well in my experience.

< Message edited by pycco -- 4/12/2014 9:34:48 PM >

(in reply to Fenrisfil)

Post #: 7