Opportunity for DW2 now that Stellaris just shot itself in the foot

[Aeson]

ORIGINAL: General Patton

What, no veggies. [:D]....GP

Many herbivores eat only vegetable matter, and the wise have it that you are what you eat. Ergo, many herbivores are vegetables.

[LordMM]

ORIGINAL: Japhet

Stellaris still does a couple of things clearly better than DW...

1/ Race customization and diversity. No doubt about it, still by far the king in this area.
2/ Exploration and the resulting missions and side-quests.

No, just no. Stellaris is only better at race customization because DW doesn't really has race customization. However, the pre-existing races of DW still offer more diversity in gameplay than Stellaris: None of the trait choices, ethics, governments or even appearence matters. It's all window dressing. Even hive minds or machine empires don't play radical different from normal empires. Hell, you can argue that hive minds are worse, because they don't have two mechanics (happiness and inner empire factions) that normal empires have. The only thing in race customization that really affected gameplay in a meaningful way was the different FTL-drives. Go figure...

And exploration and side quests? Well, kinda. Exploration is indeed the best part of Stellaris but in the long run, it doesn't matter that much because none of the stuff you can find is really a game changer. And the quests and missions are just glorified pop-ups, just like in EU or CK. They are mostly there to "shake things up" or to "topple the status quo". After all, we can't have the player have a trouvle-free time running their empire, THAT would be boring!! And after you have read them a couple of times, you simply skip over the text and click on the button that provides the best outcome, no matter how well written (read: full of references to better franchises that only TRUE scifi fans like us understand) it is.

Stellaris is an utter unsalvageable mess, developed by a bunch of incompetent people. Their only solution to fix gameplay issues is to throw in more numbers (consumer goods), to pile on more poorly thought out mechanics (factions) or, worst of all, gimping or flat out removing core features (ship design, ftl). It's kinda amusing how every dev dairy these guys have released starts with the phrase "I was always unsatisfied/unhappy/disappointed with..." But remember kids: "Stellaris is a great game and it will only get better! Paradox games are like fine wine, they only get better with time! (also more expensive but pssssh)"

Also, Martin Anward, Stellaris' game director, is kind of a dick.

Rant over.

The exploration aspect of Stellaris is interesting for the first 50 hours or so until you discover everything. Then it gets old and then you're just clicking away the dialogue boxes. Even certain events mentioning "Intergalactic trade routes, or Major Trade hub" in Stellaris felt Shallow as Stellaris never had such a feature, to begin with. For me space exploration is more important when the writing element is mixed in with the visual element. When you can actually see the Derelict ship, hidden space station, Remnants of Battles. The best thing the next Distant Worlds game could do is add a better backstory to several of these sites. Maybe Derelict ships of a battle can have two or more types of ships, or there could be Derelict ships around a Half broken planet indicating the last stand of a species.

[balto]

ORIGINAL: Osito

Really happy to hear that, Eric (and really happy to get some hard information about the game!).

This talk about DW 2 has caused me to again have a massive, freak show sized erection. So yea, that is some HARD information.

[Retreat1970]

Just to spite everyone I expect a 2020 release. Also most people also expect DW2 but I'm not so sure. I'm thinking DW1.5 maybe. We'll see.

[Osito]

ORIGINAL: Retreat1970

Just to spite everyone I expect a 2020 release. Also most people also expect DW2 but I'm not so sure. I'm thinking DW1.5 maybe. We'll see.

I don't know about others, but I have no expectations at all. It'll be done when it's done, and that may be 2018, 2019, 2020 or whenever. I have no idea.

Regarding the game itself, I admit I do now expect warp travel :p

From my perspective it, wouldn't be so bad if it were DW1.5. Better modding abilities, clearer graphics, and an expansion on the DW:U mechanics would do it for me.

The thing about DW:U is that it ain't broken, and the problem with many developers making '[Insert Game Name] 2' is that they break the original in the process.

[Bingeling]

I expect it to come out, but I am far from sure.

I expect it to look at least somewhat like DWU (some of the same concepts).

I hope that it will be at least almost as good, and almost as fun. As written above, it is very possible to mess up a sequel.

[USSAmerica]

My hope for DW2 is to see at least the same game we have now, but built on a 64 bit and multiple core processor capable architecture.

[Uncle Lumpy]

I'm encouraged that Erik has chosen to participate in this thread.

It seems we all have hopes for DWU-2. Unfortunately hope often leads to expectation, and expectation often leads to disappointment. That being said, I keep returning to this interview with Eric: http://www.spacesector.com/blog/2013/08 ... o-shadows/ , and http://www.spacesector.com/blog/2013/08 ... nd-sequel/ . I know it's over four years old, still IMHO I think you can take somethings from it regarding at least about the discussions at that time between Eric and Elliot regarding DWU-2. It is the only thing I know of where anything at all about what DWU-2 might actually be like has ever been published, though.

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: Osito

ORIGINAL: Retreat1970

Just to spite everyone I expect a 2020 release. Also most people also expect DW2 but I'm not so sure. I'm thinking DW1.5 maybe. We'll see.

I don't know about others, but I have no expectations at all. It'll be done when it's done, and that may be 2018, 2019, 2020 or whenever. I have no idea.

Regarding the game itself, I admit I do now expect warp travel :p

From my perspective it, wouldn't be so bad if it were DW1.5. Better modding abilities, clearer graphics, and an expansion on the DW:U mechanics would do it for me.

The thing about DW:U is that it ain't broken, and the problem with many developers making '[Insert Game Name] 2' is that they break the original in the process.

^^This! DW is already a fantastic game, DW 1.5 would be just fine with me too, if it aint broke dont fix it. About the only things I think it could really benefit from are.

1/ Better (or any) race customization options.
2/ Better diplomatic options including the ability to form multi-race alliances (like Federations).
3/ Finding high tech-ships NOT being a massive game changer, perhaps a slider to determine the tech-level or chance of ships found in debris fields. Currently if you find a working high-tech capital ship early on you've pretty much won the game and this is not good because it always happens in every single game.
4/ More varied tech options / paths, cool weapons..... etc.
5/ Better quests / missions with exploration, DW could really learn some lessons from Stellaris in this area.

[Retreat1970]

I was hoping no one would take me seriously. Bacon should have DW1.5 when he's done. We deserve a true sequel.

[SirHoraceHarkness]

DW 1.5 would work a charm for me too as long as it wasn't just a ui and graphics refresh. Better combat and allowing hardpoints on ships would be a great addition. Maybe instead of gigantic fleet balls the amount of ships is reduced to make it more tactical instead of moving ship blobs around the map.

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: SirHoraceHarkness

Maybe instead of gigantic fleet balls the amount of ships is reduced to make it more tactical instead of moving ship blobs around the map.

Yes that would be a HUGE plus, watching two giant blobs eating each-other is not fun for me, but tactically managing a few important ships definitely is.

Also it would be great if combat was instanced so that you could watch and manage an entire battle without being constantly interrupted by a dozen other trivial or mundane (but important) tasks or other battles from different parts of the galaxy. Perhaps make it optional (popup: do you want to participate in this combat? If yes the combat is instanced and you dont get interrupted by any other events, if no the combat happens in real time as normal).

This would especially help with managing events in large 1500 star galaxies where the rate of important events being constantly fired at you almost always begins to resemble rapid machine-gun fire and multiple important battles, ALL of which you'd ideally like to manage are occurring simultaneously.

[Cauldyth]

ORIGINAL: Lucian
Also it would be great if combat was instanced so that you could watch and manage an entire battle without being constantly interrupted by a dozen other trivial or mundane (but important) tasks or other battles from different parts of the galaxy. Perhaps make it optional (popup: do you want to participate in this combat? If yes the combat is instanced and you dont get interrupted by any other events, if no the combat happens in real time as normal).

Not a fan of that approach. I like the fact that, during a battle, I can redirect more ships to the area, and have them arrive in time to swing the balance of it. Same goes for ground battles. If you separate the battles from the strategic map, then the outcome of the battle is determined by the starting forces, and things start to feel less fluid, and too static.

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: Cauldyth
Not a fan of that approach. I like the fact that, during a battle, I can redirect more ships to the area, and have them arrive in time to swing the balance of it. Same goes for ground battles. If you separate the battles from the strategic map, then the outcome of the battle is determined by the starting forces, and things start to feel less fluid, and too static.

You're right of course, any sort of reinforcement ability would be lost with instanced combat which would be a shame but for me at least it would be a regrettable but acceptable price to pay for the following reasons.

1/ The galaxy in DW is so huge that the number of times that ship reinforcements manage to actually arrive in time to make a difference to an existing ship battle is almost - but not quite - zero. So it hardly ever happens but I readily admit that the few times it does happen are pretty cool.

I see no reason why instancing should apply to ground battles. IMO ground warfare is fine the way it is, it cant be tactically managed anyway, so really there's no reason to instance it.

2/ The amount of frantic, unmanageable chaos which ensues with a 1500 star galaxy is so great that large games become pretty much unplayable without massive amounts of automation, and even then I miss out on managing (or even seeing) many battles that I would love to have at least looked at because they're occurring at the same time that I'm doing several other important things at once. For me, the loss of possible reinforcements would be an acceptable sacrifice to be able to, calmly and without being rushed, manage all the battles in a large galaxy that I choose to.

That said, I think your point is quite valid and If I could think of a way to have the proverbial cake and eat it I would, instanced battles AND the chance of reinforcements would be the most ideal situation. But I cant.

[Cauldyth]

Yeah, fair enough, I certainly do feel overwhelmed when there are too many things going on in a large galaxy.

[Osito]

I'm inclined to agree with you about the instancing, Lucian. There have been many occasions where I have had more than one large battle going on simultaneously, and I've been unable to control them all properly even on the slowest possible speed setting. Obviously pausing is possible, but you usually need to have time passing to see what's going on.

[Aeson]

1/ The galaxy in DW is so huge that the number of times that ship reinforcements manage to actually arrive in time to make a difference to an existing ship battle is almost - but not quite - zero. So it hardly ever happens but I readily admit that the few times it does happen are pretty cool.

If the battles were instanced, it would probably cost me the ability to use one of my favorite early-mid game colony and base assault tactics, which is to jump a fleet into the system at some point relatively distant from the space stations, wait for whatever enemy ships are present to jump to the bait squadron, and then jump more ships in either on top of the bait squadron or onto the newly-undefended space stations and colonies, depending on how well the bait squadron is doing and what my priorities are at the time.

Also, I tend to find that at least for the first half or so of the tech tree ships don't really have enough range to allow the fighting to become too dispersed. You might get some nuisance strikes far beyond the front line, but most of the fighting will be concentrated in the five or ten sectors closest to the border, and unless your fleets are completely overmatched or unless your fleets are otherwise occupied, you'll probably have something close enough to reinforce. (I normally use five- or ten-ship fleets; if you tend to use larger fleets, then that might explain why I feel that there's normally something close enough to reinforce whereas you disagree.)

For me, the loss of possible reinforcements would be an acceptable sacrifice to be able to, calmly and without being rushed, manage all the battles in a large galaxy that I choose to.

Instancing the battles would almost certainly force the game to pause and ask me for a decision each time a battle happens. Personally, I don't think that the disruption to gameflow is worth the theoretical benefits of being able to give your undivided attention to each battle, especially if you or the computer decides to pursue a guerre de course rather than decisive battles - something which should become increasingly likely as the opponents become more and more unequal.

[Retreat1970]

Yeah, fair enough, I certainly do feel overwhelmed when there are too many things going on in a large galaxy.

Totally normal. Try using some AI assistance. It's not as bad as everyone says.

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: Aeson

If the battles were instanced, it would probably cost me the ability to use one of my favorite early-mid game colony and base assault tactics, which is to jump a fleet into the system at some point relatively distant from the space stations, wait for whatever enemy ships are present to jump to the bait squadron, and then jump more ships in either on top of the bait squadron or onto the newly-undefended space stations and colonies, depending on how well the bait squadron is doing and what my priorities are at the time.

Also, I tend to find that at least for the first half or so of the tech tree ships don't really have enough range to allow the fighting to become too dispersed. You might get some nuisance strikes far beyond the front line, but most of the fighting will be concentrated in the five or ten sectors closest to the border, and unless your fleets are completely overmatched or unless your fleets are otherwise occupied, you'll probably have something close enough to reinforce. (I normally use five- or ten-ship fleets; if you tend to use larger fleets, then that might explain why I feel that there's normally something close enough to reinforce whereas you disagree.)

Honestly I dont feel that combat instancing is even close to a perfect solution, I use some of the tactics you mention myself and I'd greatly prefer a solution that solves the very serious problem of being totally overwhelmed by event frequency in large galaxies without losing any of the cool features or tactical options that we currently have. I just cant think of one.

The real problem is that DW's central paradigm of "Real-Time-everywhere-all-the-Time" simply doesn't scale particularly well, if you increase the number of stars too much it basically breaks the game. What begins as quite manageable for a 400 star galaxy becomes a total chaotic cluster-**** with a 1500 star galaxy where even the message board at the top of the screen literally cant keep up with the frantic, machine-gun pace of the messages. And in my view, just letting the automation handle it all so that you never even see many of the interesting battles, let alone get to manage them, is a terrible solution. Its basically just letting the game play itself which defeats the entire purpose of why I play in the first place.

And even with the few battles you try to manage, you constantly have to pause and jump back and forth, either from battle to battle when they occur simultaneously (pause, jump, unpause for a few seconds, pause, jump unpause for a few seconds....... repeat for each battle) or to attend to multiple mundane but important events, you cant just relax and manage the battle. It doesn't quite kill the fun but it goes a long way towards doing so.

ORIGINAL: Aeson
Instancing the battles would almost certainly force the game to pause and ask me for a decision each time a battle happens. Personally, I don't think that the disruption to gameflow is worth the theoretical benefits of being able to give your undivided attention to each battle, especially if you or the computer decides to pursue a guerre de course rather than decisive battles - something which should become increasingly likely as the opponents become more and more unequal.

Yes that's a good point. A possible solution would be to provide a manual instancing toggle button (similar to how all fleets and ships have an automation toggle). Then you'd just select whichever ships or fleets interest you for instanced combat rather than have to deal with an avalanche of popups from every single explorer or trader who encounters a space-slug.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

It's not changing. [8D]

One thing I wish for DW2 or DW1.5 is something like an Interdictor in Star Wars.
I would like to intercept a fleet while it is in warp speed. Oblige it to exit from warp and engage them in a nice battle.

So often, I was willing to do this with pirates...