RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2...

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: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2...

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: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2...

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/27/2015 1:59:38 AM

Retreat1970

Posts: 948
Joined: 11/6/2013
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HerpInYourDerp

The way the game currently works in terms of game mechanics means it's impossible for there to be a viable multiplayer solution. It's got nothing to do with just writing a bit of netcode.
For example, so much of the game occurs in real-time, but nearly all the strategy elements like research, diplomacy, expansion, etc. are completely or almost completely dependent on a UI that's effectively built for a turn-based/play-by-mail system.

You are correct, but there are ways around that. For example the game could be run at a set speed (x2, x4, or whatever), but when a window is open by someone it drops to a set speed (x.5, 0).

The best games though will have some automation set for all players so the game doesn't crawl along. Auto ship design isn't that bad with the right mod.

Anything above a 700 star system would take too long, unless everyone starts at a high tech and older system. As far as balance... forget it. If I want to play a MP as Atuuk, it's my own fault.

So with a little give and take, some sacrifices, and playing outside your comfort zone, it could work. I would love, absolutely love to co-op with someone, but that's just me dreaming.

I'm not very smart when it comes to computers or designing, so I don't know what's possible. It's just a feature I would like.

(in reply to HerpInYourDerp)

Post #: 91

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/27/2015 3:34:16 AM

HerpInYourDerp

Posts: 118
Joined: 5/7/2015
Status: offline

Things like forced automation of certain areas would be required in this instance, yes, but that's very much a textbook band-aid fix, especially given the limitations of the AI in many places.

Changing gamespeed would be a serious issue for any multiplayer game though; not only would it be really annoying in normal use seeing as how often you're required to access a window to do anything, but is also very abusable in any notion of a competitive MP format. There's a reason almost every single game in existence with a multiplayer component either doesn't allow for players to pause/alter gamespeed in an active session or only allows this as a server admin command.

(in reply to Retreat1970)

Post #: 92

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/27/2015 11:52:49 PM

Retreat1970

Posts: 948
Joined: 11/6/2013
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

Maybe DW2 is already here...

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=404&t=68396&sid=aa1e843e530170ad7ffeff28a0aa964e

and...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8XBx1jtvQI

Matrix/slitherine/code force worked on DW together so...

(in reply to HerpInYourDerp)

Post #: 93

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/28/2015 3:39:35 AM

Icemania

Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

Polaris Sector has a different developer. For anyone interested the developer is active over at the eXplorminate forums (Ufnv is his handle) and it's certainly a game to keep a close eye on.

eXplorminate Forums: Polaris Sector Thread

(in reply to Retreat1970)

Post #: 94

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/28/2015 3:45:58 AM

Retreat1970

Posts: 948
Joined: 11/6/2013
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

Thanks for the link Ice. I will keep an eye on it.

(in reply to Icemania)

Post #: 95

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/28/2015 6:52:16 PM

Ranbir

Posts: 142
Joined: 3/28/2010
Status: offline

Polaris looks okay but...rather gamey. I'll still get it ofc.

_____________________________

"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 Retreat1970)

Post #: 96

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/28/2015 7:08:08 PM

echo2361

Posts: 13
Joined: 1/25/2014
Status: offline

I'm actually enjoying my testing time with PS quite a bit. Feels like an interesting mix of traditional 4x game elements with some DW added in given its real-time nature. Probably best to save such a discussion for a different thread/forum so as not to derail the discussions about DW2.

(in reply to Ranbir)

Post #: 97

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/29/2015 5:03:06 AM

Cepheiden

Posts: 27
Joined: 12/29/2015
Status: offline

I find that the most important issue with the gameplay in DWU hasn't been mentioned yet: population growth.

Everything is extremely easy with high population growth. Higher populations, higher income, more research, more ships and more everything.
Playing the insect races is easy mode. On the other hand, you will often find yourself in the red with slow growing races. The only racial bonus that matters is growth. What good is a 50% or so research bonus if due to lack of population the base value is barely half of what other races grow to be in within a few hours of gameplay? Even if you focus your research mostly on the economy and growth rates, you just get a multiplier to an already puny base value.

I personally modded the growth rates of each race to be within +-3% of an average value. As a result I get on average more large AI factions and consequently a much more interesting game. However, this is not a very sophisticated solution and it destroys some flavour.

What would need to be done here is to assess the actual economical value of 1 more individual. The insects might breed fast and follow orders well, however is that really enough to beat the creativity of other races where it should be quality over quantity? At the moment 1 insectoid is just as valuable as one brainy humanoid.

Another issue are the various difficulty settings in the game. Normal difficulty is rather simple after grasping the game mechanics, unless playing one of the low growth races. However it is just ridiculous that higher difficulty just means to decrease a few numbers only for the player. Why not give some bonus to the AI opponents who have trouble growing anyway? Why nerf something if you could just buff something else and the player won't feel like he just got robbed.
It's especially no good to nerf something to a point where it's almost unplayable (i.e. always being in the red and ships not hitting anything anymore).

(in reply to Retreat1970)

Post #: 98

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/29/2015 1:51:14 PM

Retreat1970

Posts: 948
Joined: 11/6/2013
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

quote:

Everything is extremely easy with high population growth.

Yep. I'm 21 years into an extreme game as Atuuk, and I feel like I've already won. +500k cash, 150+ ships, buying every research. Now comes the tedious process to victory. The AI doesn't manage pop growth well at all.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Cepheiden)

Post #: 99

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/31/2015 8:48:54 AM

Cepheiden

Posts: 27
Joined: 12/29/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Retreat1970

quote:

Everything is extremely easy with high population growth.

Yep. I'm 21 years into an extreme game as Atuuk, and I feel like I've already won. +500k cash, 150+ ships, buying every research. Now comes the tedious process to victory. The AI doesn't manage pop growth well at all.

Glad someone agrees. That really needs to be reworked. Difficulty settings don't help that at all, they only bum the player out with constantly being broke and ships that miss all the time.

Another suggestion: more varied ship classes with more of an actual influence on the finished product, somewhat like the carrier option that is already in.
In that case ship classes would determine:
-maintenance cost (for example escorts can get -x% and large battleships can get +x% maintenance cost)
-min and max size (research unlocks ship min size and next level will unlock max size / new ship type)
-performance (for example frigates getting +x% movement speed and destroyers get +x% fire rate / damage)
-allowed components (i.e. carrier needs fighter bays, capital ships need capital sized weapons etc.) (that of course would require to have components in various sizes i.e. small lasers, large lasers, capital lasers etc.)

That way the player would have to think twice which ship to build instead of just building the largest possible ship.
Need cheap defense? Build escorts.
Need fast pirate hunters? Build frigates.
Need to destroy strong ships? Destroyers.
Need to send ships on a long lasting mission far away? Cruisers.
Need a ship that is heavily armored and armed against strong bases? Battleships.
Need a ship that can destroy planets? Capital ships.

(in reply to Retreat1970)

Post #: 100

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/31/2015 11:09:28 AM

Icemania

Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

The difficulty settings certainly merit discussion. Extreme difficulty with Distant Worlds Vanilla never really presented much of a challenge (my concerns on this go right back to almost my first post here). To get a good game IMO you need BOTH house rules and the AI Improvement Mod ... have you guys tried this?

The house rules I typically use are:
� No Technology Trading (or other diplomacy exploits like selling Research Stations, Sanctions/War etc)
� No Homeworld Invasions are permitted until the 30 year mark and no use of sneaky fast troop transports (otherwise too easy, although harder now that what it used to be and I've done what I can in the AI Mod)
� Intelligence Agents must remain on Counter Intelligence duties (otherwise agents can sometimes become uber powerful particularly if they have concealment, there really should be a lower cap on skills)
� Recovered ships must be retired (as they are super powerful although with the AI Mod the AI explores much better so more will be found and fight against you)
� Debris field ships may not be recovered until they are within my territorial influence (as a huge research booster which the AI is uber slow to exploit, nothing I can Mod here unfortunately)
� Exploration ships must be on Automatic, no micro (stop and move to greatly increases exploration speed and goody finding)
� Cannot attack the Eruktah Refugees until they reveal themselves as the Shakturi (pure cheese)

The storylines are important in my view, you can be ahead of all the other AI's, and still lose to the improved Shakturi in the AI Improvement Mod.

It's also worth comparing on Max difficulty with other games, Gal Civ 3 for example. Personally I don't mind % bonuses the AI gets but it reaches a point where you feel the AI is playing a totally different game and becomes immersion breaking. For example in Gal Civ 3 the AI sees the entire map with no fog of war (in comparison with Distant Worlds the AI must explore the map), gets gifts of "free" cash/tech/ideology (not in DW) and their ships get massive bonuses to mass, range, accuracy etc, etc (not in DW). I greatly prefer the approach in DW.

Gal Civ 3 Difficulty Settings

For DW2 the main issues is making sure the AI properly uses all the mechanics in the game and there is decent balance. In DW the AI doesn't use diplomacy well (e.g. tech selling), and when you combine that with the huge sums of cash available, so in DW2 the AI should play the diplomatic game like we do. Now we'll still play better than the AI but with better balance (e.g. less cash for techs, even less for techs the AI doesn't need etc) we would be less able to excessively exploit it. I also think a bunch of things done in the AI Improvement Mod should be in DW2 (e.g. the AI targeting wonders better and so on).

Ship roles fully agree and hope that is addressed in DW2.

< Message edited by Icemania -- 12/31/2015 12:09:58 PM >

(in reply to Cepheiden)

Post #: 101

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/31/2015 11:11:07 AM

Icemania

Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: echo2361
I'm actually enjoying my testing time with PS quite a bit. Feels like an interesting mix of traditional 4x game elements with some DW added in given its real-time nature. Probably best to save such a discussion for a different thread/forum so as not to derail the discussions about DW2.

Great to hear that you are on the PS Beta team echo!

(in reply to echo2361)

Post #: 102

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/31/2015 10:41:10 PM

Cepheiden

Posts: 27
Joined: 12/29/2015
Status: offline

Of course you are right, it's too simple to just buff the AI instead of nerfing the player. It just makes it feel less punishing. I think in order for the AI to use all the mechanics properly, the mechanics need to be reworked, especially in terms of population growth, which is the determining factor for almost anything.

I have your mod installed right now and it does a great job, increasing the size, expansion, aggressiveness and variety of the AI. Thank you for that and sorry, because I didn't find the time yet to give you feedback in that thread. DWU is the first grand strategy game I ever really played and I only got to know about it 3 months ago and installed your mod about 2 months ago.

Anyway, as you wrote the game is still proving too trivial once you've figured out all the mechanics in a way the AI simply can not.
I am not a big fan of house rules since I can't get myself to stick to them, except for a few that I follow subconsciously anyway, like no sneaky troop transport. Instead I did some modding for myself, i.e. adjust growth rates for each race to be within a smaller range and in order to have them all grow as large as possible as well as a a small weapons rework since some of them are comparatively weak (for example missiles, phasers, high end rail guns).

< Message edited by Cepheiden -- 12/31/2015 11:43:55 PM >

(in reply to Icemania)

Post #: 103

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 12/31/2015 11:43:04 PM

Icemania

Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

Modding the growth rates at this stage of development is a really good idea i.e. doesn't solve it but it's a quick workaround.

With house rules I totally agree that they aren't ideal but I've come to accept they are needed in any Space 4X that I enjoy and play a lot. The list of house rules for Gal Civ 3 is shaping up to be a lot longer.

Hopefully during DW2 Beta testing, whenever it arrives, we get the opportunity to provide the equivalent comments to help and hopefully the less house rules needed the better.

(in reply to Cepheiden)

Post #: 104

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 1/2/2016 4:14:36 AM

Kayoz

Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/20/2010
From: Timbuktu
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
� Exploration ships must be on Automatic, no micro (stop and move to greatly increases exploration speed and goody finding)
� Cannot attack the Eruktah Refugees until they reveal themselves as the Shakturi (pure cheese)

While I agree with most of these "house rules", these ones I find difficult to play by.

Exploration ships frequently miss exploring ruins/specials. This is an old bug, and incredibly annoying. Taking manual control of exploration ships is sometimes necessary to mark debris fields or such. It is particularly annoying in pirate-controlled systems, where the explorers insist on being killed to check out an asteroid field instead of more relevant targets.

Eruktah refugees all too often attack me before they reveal themselves. I've been forced to stomp them down early on several occasions despite my reservations. Improvements to the diplomacy system in DW2 would be most appreciated.

_____________________________

�That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.� ― Christopher Hitchens

(in reply to Icemania)

Post #: 105

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 1/3/2016 2:06:18 AM

Icemania

Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

Yeah fair comment on the explorers and I admit I still check the more interesting specials are explored at least.

With the Eruktah refugees, needing to defend if they attack is fine. What I started to do though was prepare in advance (e.g. fleets/troops) and declare war before they became a real threat, as a result of knowing what was coming.

Strongly agree on Diplomacy in DW2.

(in reply to Kayoz)

Post #: 106

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 1/23/2016 9:14:30 PM

Guardian54

Posts: 56
Joined: 12/6/2015
Status: offline

Hey guys, even aside from the obvious "We need to have more groups of refugees instead of JUST the Shakturi, all of them accuse each other of being the Shakturi, one actually is, one or two are Shakturi Separatist factions who are basically rebels against the main group's warmongering and believe it will only lead them to ruin, and the player can decide if they want to exterminate them all or get them as allies" part... there's a problem with multiplayer.

Securans would be the most sought-after allies in the game in multiplayer (Atuuk reduced construction speed means they're not as good at spreading out quickly and/or defending themselves). Quameno would also be pretty damned high on the list due to sheer research capability (and good early reactor). Add in Ackdarian for zerg rush with bigger ships and, well... The coordination need not even be obvious, they can Teamspeak in secret.

In weapons...
One guy researches fighter tree
One guy researches torpedoes (and missiles and PD enough for the fighter guy to research his stuff in time, due to tech sales)
One guy researches ground combat techs.

Epic pwnage ensues.

In energy, go with NovaCore in early-mid game with Turbothrusters, spread the other techs out among the guys. Cheese resupply ship warfare to the max as IIRC Ackdarian +20% size stretches even to that... I should check myself, I think.

Hightech is basically irrelevant as long as there is Teamspeak agreement.

(in reply to Icemania)

Post #: 107

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 1/25/2016 12:26:21 AM

Retreat1970

Posts: 948
Joined: 11/6/2013
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

Turn Shakturi and tech trading off. Don't assume your allies will always be allies.

(in reply to Guardian54)

Post #: 108

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 1/25/2016 5:34:42 AM

Guardian54

Posts: 56
Joined: 12/6/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Retreat1970

Turn Shakturi and tech trading off. Don't assume your allies will always be allies.

The Shakturi thing was completely separate from my comment on multiplayer.

Tech trading off still means money funelling should be doable. as for alliances... as long as Team Victory is a thing and people play together more than a few times they will stay allies usually.

(in reply to Retreat1970)

Post #: 109

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 1/25/2016 3:12:52 PM

Retreat1970

Posts: 948
Joined: 11/6/2013
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

That's fine as long as you want to play the easiest game possible. To me that's no fun. Plus what happens when the AI is toast? Quit or war vs allies? If you quit, might as well stick to SP. If I thought I had an advantage, I'd drop my MDP and stab an ally in the back lol. Even if I lost, how much fun would that be? a lot.

(in reply to Guardian54)

Post #: 110

RE: Suggestions for Distant Worlds 2... - 1/28/2016 6:19:34 PM

Cepheiden

Posts: 27
Joined: 12/29/2015
Status: offline

How about reworking the research system into the following:

- There is only one research pool and you can assign how much is spent on what category / subcategory / project.
- Differentiate between these 3 categories

1. Invention (something completely or largely new)
2. Innovation (a combination or variation of something that already exists)
3. Research (systematic effort to gain new knowledge or improve existing knowledge)

1. Inventions
For example warp drives or shields. Of course that category would be empty rather quickly if you go straight by the definition of invention, so it should also include for example warp drive 2.0 or shield 3.0.
Inventions will be made at set intervals, depending on your research hours invested and your bonuses from race, government etc. However, the content of the Invention is out of your direct control and only influenced by where you spend your research and also again race, government, resources etc.
The actual stats on a module you get from an Invention are somewhat randomized and again depending on factors such as race, government etc. For example: One race could develop a basic shield that has 1 recharge and 100 capacity and another could develop one that has 2 recharge and 50 capacity. On that note: Shields could have extra resistence stats against certain weapons, for example lasers, but that is a whole different story that has no place here right now.

2. Innovations
For example High speed warp drives / energy efficient warp drives or high capacity shields / fast recharge shields. This category basically allows to create specializations of made Inventions.
Innovations are much more specific than Inventions, yet the actual stats of the researched module are again randomized, yet largely better than the initial Invention.

3. Research
This category allows to improve the efficiency of already existing modules (Invention or Innovation) by a certain %. Of course the amount of research time invested will increase exponentially while the efficiency gain will be linear or even degressive. For example spend 1 year to improve shields to 200% efficiency and then another 10 years to improve them to 300% efficiency.

What this does:

-You won't be stuck on some tech for 10 years without anything happening inbetween
-Constant improvement
-More choices, as to how to go about your research
-no more refitting research modules
-randomized modules will create the sense of always playing a new game
-Many more possible difference between races and playstyles
For example: Machine races are great at research, yet not very creative for Inventions, while Securans are very creative for Inventions, yet party too hard to do proper research. Insects could suck at all 3 of them, but instead get a moneyless economy and absolute control through hivemind, alleviating those drawbacks and offering a completely different playstyle that is based around literally throwing the lives of their workers at problems. Rodents could be good at making Innovations to existing tech, but suck at actually thinking of new stuff themselves and thus require to trade or steal new tech from others.

On a side note: There are many other topics that could be touched, like moneyless economies (why do they all work the same in DWU?), modules that only fit certain structures (i.e. space stations, ships, planets) or certain sizes of structures or certain types (i.e. civilian, corporate, military etc.), reworking of certain mechanics like wonders or armors and shields or even damage and ship types and many more, but that's too much for 1 post.

(in reply to Retreat1970)

Post #: 111