Galaxy227
Posts: 142
Joined: 12/1/2020 Status: offline
|
I thought about this myself and am hoping Elliot made it more efficient to research concurrent projects. I imagine it should work as follows: Let (N) represents whatever combination of values Elliot mashes together to decide the size & expense of technologies. Three projects should take 1(N) time to research concurrently, where Project 1: 1(N) Project 2: 1(N) Project 3: 1(N) Two projects should take 0.75(N) time to research concurrently, where Project 1: 0.75(N) Project 2: 0.75(N) One project should take 0.5(N) time, where Project 1: 0.5(N) This way, one project is faster for specific technologies, but three projects is always faster overall. For instance, imagine you're only hope to win a war is by researching those larger ship hulls. Time is of the essence, and so it makes sense to only research one project, as you'll get those ship hulls in half the time, 0.5(N), relative to researching three projects concurrently, 1(N). However, if you're at peace and not especially needing those ship hulls, it would be smarter to research three projects concurrently. This is because researching only one project at a time, where each project takes 0.5(N) of time, tallies up to 1.5(N) total time to research three projects individually. If you were to research three projects concurrently instead, it would only take 1(N) of time, 0.5(N) less than our previous 1.5(N) total. With some super simple math, you can make it so focusing on less projects speeds up the process for those individual projects, but broadening your research to three concurrent projects is still ultimately faster overall. Edit: From a game design perspective, I can understand why the developers would shy away from my proposal above. If my proposal were implemented, it could be especially confusing for new players. I could see many players only researching one technology at a time (as most games have you do), only to fall behind the AI researching projects concurrently. Even so, the argument could be made it's even more confusing to allow concurrent projects without any differentiation between parallel research and the more traditional one-by-one method. If there isn't any difference between individual and concurrent research, it's better to just stick with one method. Having both be an option is just extra fluff, and in a game as large as Distant Worlds 2, extra fluff only leads to confusion. TL;DR: It's confusing.
< Message edited by Galaxy227 -- 1/27/2022 4:08:31 AM >
|