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: Master Wishlist Thread

 
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 Series >> RE: Master Wishlist Thread Page: <<   < prev  35 36 [37] 38 39   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 2/14/2011 6:33:05 PM   
Data


Posts: 3908
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
introducing race pick ala MOO2 or other similar games, to extend the customization and gameplay

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Data)
Post #: 1081
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 2/14/2011 10:28:16 PM   
unclean

 

Posts: 163
Joined: 12/31/2010
Status: offline
I like the fuel system, but I think there's still a lack of feedback for it that makes things hard for new players. For one thing, there isn't an easy way to tell how much fuel is in a system, and when you run out the game doesn't tell you, all you see are your ships wander off. On top of that it's hard to tell exactly how much fuel a group of ship needs, which makes things difficult if there isn't enough fuel for them in a system.

I made a mockup that I think would help improve the situation:


The idea is a slider that shows how much caslon and hydrogen are at spaceports and refueling ships (up to 20,000 each since that seems to be the max), and if you have a group of ships selected and mouse over it shows how much fuel they will consume when they refuel there.

It's a rough idea, but I think some form of it would be really helpful.

(in reply to Data)
Post #: 1082
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 2/15/2011 2:26:44 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7855
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2727075

That is the discussion thread for the food and farm system I'd like to see. While it certainly doesn't have to be that complicated, some kind of food production and consumption system that would help slow and limit empire growth would be a nice edition.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to unclean)
Post #: 1083
Better Messaging - 2/15/2011 5:57:20 PM   
Wreck

 

Posts: 49
Joined: 2/8/2011
Status: offline
I am surprised this is not already in the Master Wishlist, so I'll mention it.

I want a message system like that found in EU2 (and, I assume also EU3).  EU2, for those that don't know, has a realtime system similar to DW.  (There are actually "turns" in EU2, namely days.  But they fine-grained enough, and there is no way to automatically pause on each day, nor would this be desirable.)  Thus, the messaging needs of EU2 and DW are very, very similar.  But EU2, old though it is, has a much superior messaging system.

The EU2 message system works as follows.  Every kind of message in the game -- and there are probably more of them than in DW -- can be configured by the user as to how it will display.  (This can be done in two ways: (1) on a master list of all messages, and (2) on a particular instance of each message.) There are the following options:
  • do not display this kind of message at all
  • display only in the scrolling list (similar to what DW does at the top of the screen)
  • display in the list, and pop up a nonpausing notification dialog
  • display in the list, pop up a notification dialog, and automatically pause the game (stop time)
The third item in the list above is more for playing other humans, because it is rude to pause the game for every little thing.  Since I only play single player, I never use it myself.  However, I mention it for completeness and also because some people do seem to like it even for SP.

Another loosely related thing I dislike in DW is that it automatically unpauses when you dismiss a message that autopauses (i.e. letting the AI control some empire task but with "ask me").  This is sometimes desirable, but more often than not, not desirable.  And if you add many, many dialogs (as I am proposing), then it will become much more intolerable, because in most cases you must dismiss the dialog in order to give the orders that are necessary given the changed condition.

Oh, and since I am writing this anyway I will add my voice to second the good ideas related to messaging that are already in the FAQ, namely:
  • more detailed messages (you can fit much, much more on a dialog than one line -- and should!)
  • Order/Mission history for all ship messages
  • Popup warnings for mission interruptions
  • more messages overall
One more EU2-ripoff change I want: the scrolling list of messages should be ... um... scrollable!  I hate it when an event I was using to find a ship scrolls off, and I have to go manually find the thing.

Finally, let me add something not from EU2, which would just be nice.  Make all message dialogs be minimizable.  The minimized messages should queue up on the left side of the screen, just as diplo offers do now.  And the ones that block the game should probably be highlighted with a pulsing effect or something to make sure players don't lose track of why the game cannot be unpaused. 

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 1084
RE: Better Messaging - 2/16/2011 2:23:53 PM   
Shuul

 

Posts: 131
Joined: 2/16/2011
Status: offline
Combat and design refit
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2728587

< Message edited by Shuul -- 2/16/2011 2:24:46 PM >

(in reply to Wreck)
Post #: 1085
RE: Better Messaging - 2/17/2011 6:44:44 PM   
Webbco


Posts: 601
Joined: 2/6/2010
Status: offline
A stronger focus on Xploration and discovery in order to sustain immersion late into a game.

See http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2720910 

(in reply to Shuul)
Post #: 1086
RE: Better Messaging - 2/17/2011 8:16:03 PM   
Data


Posts: 3908
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
+1

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Webbco)
Post #: 1087
RE: Better Messaging - 2/18/2011 6:54:32 PM   
J HG T


Posts: 1093
Joined: 5/14/2010
From: Kiadia Prime
Status: offline
Come up with idea for exploration today; Add some kind of artifact system to the game. You find different artifacts and other ancinet or forgotten technology from planets, much like ruins. These findings give your empire random bonuses (small or large depending on rarity) to different areas of your empire.
For example, 10% bonus to speed of all of your ships due to ancient mass effect tech. 15% bonus for shatterforce lasers due to extremely good quality "green gems" (don't remember the name ) on some volcanic planet. 30% percent diplomacy bonus with Teekans 'cause you found old statue representing their ancient god, "Shai-Hulud".
I could spend whole day writing these but you get the idea. There are some of these bonuses in the game, but adding more of them with greater variety of effects would really add some depth to the world. Also, some of these bonuses could/should be shared with other empires for various benefits.

Come to thing of it, this is actually somewhat similar idea as bonuses and artifacts in Sins of a Solar Empire.

Exploration is one of those areas which enhancement would do only good for the whole game.


< Message edited by J HG T -- 2/18/2011 6:56:23 PM >


_____________________________

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it!
"And they hurled themselves into the void of space with no fear."

(in reply to Data)
Post #: 1088
Rebels and rebellion - 2/23/2011 4:31:54 PM   
Wreck

 

Posts: 49
Joined: 2/8/2011
Status: offline
I have always wanted a game where I could play being a galactic emperor -- and it was hard. Your government is unpopular, and rebels keep appearing. You, of course, put them down as fast as you can, but corruption is rampant and you are losing control...

DW is, currently, not that game. But I think with some modest additional programming, it could be.

First, let me second several ideas already raised in the suggestion FAQ.

  • Migratory factors should include racial/diplomatic/governance factors. (Look, it may be difficult for USA to identify and deport, say, illegal Mexicans. But it should not be difficult at all for a high-tech empire to identify and deport monstrous insect-people.)
  • pressured and/or forced eviction of unwanted species
  • different levels of civil unrest starting with no taxes, damage to state property, etc.


OK, now "my" ideas, in this case largely stolen from EU2.

Several items of data are added to existing data structures. First, each army is tagged with a species, which it is assumed to be uniformly composed of. (This is already sort-of present, in the names of the units.) Also, each army unit is tagged with one of three owners: "empire", "elite rebel", "popular rebel". (Could add "pirate" to this set, if pirate armies were introduced...)

Second, each planet has a planetary government, which has one attribute: controlling species. (A second attribute, planetary government type, is a natural addition. But this is long enough, so I won't detail that.) There may be one controlling species, or none, but no more than one. (There will always be a controlling species for some types of empire governments, i.e. hivemind. But it may or may not be for others, i.e. democracy in a multi-species planet.)

Similarly, each planet may have a "popular" species: the dominant species in terms of numbers. Whenever one species is 60%+ of the population, it is the popular species. I would suggest that for "nice" government types (democracy, republic, way of ancients), the popular species is also necessarily the politically controlling one.

Now, here's how the above data are used.

There are two kinds of rebellions. One is the "popular" one (the popular species rises); the other is a "elite" rebellion (the political class rebels against the empire). Some general factors make both kinds of rebellion more likely; others make only one more likely.

Elite rebellions should be more likely to happen at a planet if the politically controlling species:

  • is different than the species controlling the empire
  • is the species controlling an empire which the owning empire is at war with
  • is aggressive, stupid, reckless (use existing species attributes)

Popular rebellions should be more likely to happen at a planet if the popular species:

  • is different than the species controlling the empire
  • is different than the species controlling the planet
  • is the species controlling an empire which the owning empire is at war with
  • is aggressive, stupid, reckless

Both kinds of rebellions should be more likely when the planet:

  • is unhappy (use "happiness" already present in DW)
  • has few or no garrisoning military units
  • already has rebel troops present
  • has had no failed rebellion in a long time (see below)
  • has no starbase(s) overhead, or unarmed/weak ones

If a popular rebellion happens, then the game should automatically generate rebel troops on the planet. Rebel troops are independent: they have a species, but no owning empire. Popular rebels are weak -- they have, say, one quarter the strength of normal troops of their species. (Ideally this should be done by making them start damaged, so later on they can heal up to full power.) However, they may be very plentiful: a rebellion should get say one unit of troops for every 100 million of their species on the planet.

An "elite" rebellion is similar in effect, but it gets fewer but better troops. Its troops are full-strength for their species, but the amount generated is only 1-4 units.

Once they happen, rebellions are resolved just as other combats are. If the rebels lose, it is simplest just to end it there. But DW might add a "purge" option for a bit more realism, particularly after a popular rebellion loses. In this case, the options might be:

  • bring them in the government: rebel species gets political control. Failed rebellion counter is not set.
  • mild purge: Political control by empire's species (if possible). Failed rebellion counter is set for 10 years.
  • bloody purge: 1/100 of species on planet is killed. Failed rebellion counter is set for 20 years.
  • decimate: 1/10 of species is killed or deported. Mild reputation hit. Failed rebellion counter is set for 40 years.
  • genocide: 9/10 of species is killed or deported. Large reputation hit. Failed rebellion counter is set for 60 years.

If the rebels win (i.e. there are zero empire troops on the planet, and 1 or more rebel troops), then the planet should become rebel-controlled. When this happens, the owning empire loses any income from them, cannot build troops or bases/ships (on the ground), and cannot access planetary stockpiles of stuff. Orbitting bases are still controlled by the empire. The planet is still owned, and may be fully regained by timely enough military means. However, there is a high chance (say 30% per month) that it rebels and leaves the empire.

When a planet rebels, it may either go independent, (petition to) join an existing empire, or form a new empire. In all cases:

  • Starbases should have a chance to defect.
  • all "elite" rebel armies persist (owned by new polity of course)
  • "popular" rebels mostly demobilize: 3/4 vanish. The others remain, with full strength as per their species.
  • The new planetary government is controlled by whichever species had the most powerful military faction (elite or popular)

The choice of independence, own empire, or join existing should depend mostly on species. Species with lower aggression tend towards independence. Higher intelligence tend to want to join others. Existing and powerful empires of their species will tend to be chosen. The ownership of the local system should also have a role: if it has no owner (after accounting for the rebel planet's loss), independence should be more likely. Otherwise the existing owner should be a contender for new affiliate.

< Message edited by Wreck -- 2/23/2011 4:36:14 PM >

(in reply to J HG T)
Post #: 1089
Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 2/24/2011 7:47:14 PM   
Wreck

 

Posts: 49
Joined: 2/8/2011
Status: offline
I find the current system both tedious (since the player must MM like crazy to optimize scouting), and unfair (since AIs don't/can't scout optimally). Thus, I'd like the following changes:

First, relics should not be detectable simply by entering a system. You must actually scan the planet. It would also be nice for players if unexplored relics were marked differently than explored ones.

Second, although I agree it seems reasonable to let scouts see the existence of a planet, and its size and type simply by entering the system, I think it is debatable whether they should also be able to determine its quality without a nearby scan. So, add planet quality to the list of things requiring a nearby scan.

These two changes alone would help the AIs significantly, without any additional changes. AIs still would not be able to scout anywhere near as effectively as a player, but at least they'd get a reasonable share of relics.

However, I also want the MM nightmare to be addresses. Add a new mode for exploration; call it "quick scouting" mode. A system is "un-quick-scouted" if it has any known planet which:
(a) has a known but unexplored relic, or
(b) [if in own or unowned system] is currently colonizable, but uncolonized, and not scanned for quality
(c) [if in foreign-owned system, and checkbox for "settle in foreign systems" if on] ditto (b)
In quick scouting mode, the ship would:

  • target a nearby un-quick-scouted system (more or less as it does now), and hyperjump to it.
  • if system has known but unexplored relic(s), explore each one
  • if system has currently colonizable planet(s) that are not explored, explore each one
  • if fuel is half or less, and fuel is found in the system, go fill up
  • if fuel is quarter or less, go fill up at nearest
  • loop

AIs might vary in how they use this mode, but generally they should do what players do: build their first N scouts and put them on this mode. (For 250 stars, I find about 6-8 scouts will do the job, so maybe try for one scout per 40 stars.) Later scouts can determine resources and hunt for relics.

(in reply to Data)
Post #: 1090
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 2/24/2011 11:54:38 PM   
Merker

 

Posts: 208
Joined: 7/3/2010
Status: offline
I've been told it's best to put my ideas from the thread in here, so here they are:

1. Military transport - basically, just make a new ship role called military transport, which is just a freighter which can be controlled by the STATE, and it's sole purpose would be to move resources to strategic areas or wherever they're needed.
The ship would have a new set of commands like: load cargo ... at ...; unload cargo...at....; run supply run between ... and ...(basically just continuously moves resources between two set locations).
This kind of new ship role would enable players to broaden their war tactics and would probably solve the fuel and other material supply issues. Of course, the problem might be in making the AI properly control the ship. A new resource need routine might need to be added. But for player use this ship would indeed be a boon.

2. Planetary military bases
- Right now we can build military bases of all kinds in orbit of uninhabited planets to prevent colonization by greedy enemy empires. However, what I'm proposing is the addition of a new ship called "mobile command base" or something that can go to any uninhabited/uncolonizeable (except obvious things like gas giants) and make a 'military base' type colony. Basically it's just like any other starbase or monitoring station except it's on the planet, and so that planet can't be colonized until the base is dealt with. The base needs at least 1 troop contingent on it to exist, can house maybe a set number of troops, and has a maintenance cost(say like 2-3000 or maybe based on number of troops stationed so as to prevent abuse of them on the front line). But I do believe this would be preferable to the easily destructible orbital bases and the lengthening construction queue for the C-ship. They would also be bombardable without reputation consequences but same planet damage. Might make nice forward bases for troop contingents, or maybe a first step to colonizing a system.

3. Landscape modifiers - what I'm referring to is the existence of effects from the various space environments existent in DW.
For example, my favorite place to play in in any space game, be it X3, or Nexus the jupiter incident is an asteroid belt. Mostly because I can dodge enemy shots using the roids and turn their superior numbers into nothing. So in DW, an asteroid field would modify the stats of any ships already in there by let's say -50% visibility, -50% targeting by the enemy outside and -50% speed due to navigational hazards (or just +50% shields and -50% speed).
A star would add -50% visibility to all and maybe -25% shields due to rad damage for example, making sensor research a goal for commanders with the habit of fighting in orbit of stars. A nebula would add -75% visibility, -25% laser damage and -25% speed, making it ideal for covert strikes on enemy mining expeditions, or a place to ambush the heavily armed but poor sensors enemy fleet by your lightly armed but with much better detection equipment and engines strike force. It would be awesome if battlefield location actually mattered, and open up new tactics for guerrilla forces and strategy oriented players. Kind of hard to make the AI use them though, but through sheer luck, a sensor research oriented AI might get to beat your laser research oriented heavily armed fleet for example.

4. A most desired thing(for me) I have yet to see in any games is a PROTOSTAR, a star in formation. Might be neat to see it in DW, maybe make it be of extreme value for the informed commander, sort of like an El Dorado for miners. What I've thought about is a very radioactive and beautiful star in the center, with lots and lots of asteroid belts with roids containing rare materials. The closer to the star the more valuable and numerous the materials. But there's a catch: the star emits huge levels of radiation, so you need better rad shielding as you get closer to it. That could make the basis for a whole new tech tree of anti-rad armor, or just make the normal armor have a % of rad protection for each tech level, giving armor a whole new other role(since I've seen players claim it's mostly useless). Maybe also add radiation damage near stars, neutron stars and supernovas for unarmored ships. So to get to the richest things near the protostar you need some of the highest levels in armor research, multiple armor layers not stacking rad protection.


5. Illegal trade goods
- these are a must for any empire dealing with corruption. And generally speaking, what one empire considers normal and legal, another one might think otherwise. So there should be new trading wares, relatively rare, that are illegal to some races and not to others. For example, the nabataya liquor might be just a mild drink for teekan but highly toxic and addictive for humans, so humans ban it from their colonies. There might also be an option to permit illegal trade or not. If your freighters are caught then you take a rep penalty and a decrease in relation with the empire you sent the goods to.
Also, pirates deal in wares illegal in your empire and sell them at your colonies, earning a profit and increasing their size, while your colonies get a development penalty for becoming addicted to the drugs/toxic stuff.
Goods illegal in an empire value 100 times more than their normal price, making smuggling EXTREMELY profitable, but the relationship damage considerable. However, illegal goods cause a development penalty for the colony that receives them.
Perhaps a new "scanner inhibitor" or "hidden cargo compartment" component could be added, but that might just complicate things.

6. Selectable trade goods
- the ability to select which ones of the commodities that your empire has you want to trade with the other empires, including illegal wares mentioned in the previous point. If for example you don't want to sell your scarce illosian jade to the dhayut, who don't really need it, and only want to sell it to the wekkarus, who have a huge shortage of it on their colonies, you just select it in a new trade menu that can be opened for each race.
I think this could be worked out with the reserved resources mechanism that currently makes DW trade tick. The trade menu would just prevent one resource from being reserved for a specific empire removing the occasional need for a general trade sanction. Goods illegal for certain empires would automatically be blocked from trading with that empire, to prevent you getting rep hits if you don't want to trade them.

(in reply to Wreck)
Post #: 1091
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 2/25/2011 8:09:55 AM   
Data


Posts: 3908
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
good work, merker, even more detailed than previous ones on this
+1

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Merker)
Post #: 1092
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 2/28/2011 9:35:53 PM   
Merker

 

Posts: 208
Joined: 7/3/2010
Status: offline
BETTER PIRATES
There's a thread on the main forum in which people declare their dissatisfaction with the current limited life and immersion of pirates. And I tend to agree with them. My idea for making them better is this:

Make them like an independent colony in the sense of evolution. The pirate bases spawn further away from empires, and if they survive long enough, a nearby habitable planet is turned into a PIRATE COLONY, which basically is like an independent colony, acts like a pirate base, but harder to find, and their number and power of ships increases exponentially, the pirates get cruisers and such, and they can trade.
That colony, if it survives long enough becomes a PIRATE SYNDICATE, a small empire, which deals in illegal cargo, or if that's too complicated to add, trades with empires of bad reputation, that have many trade sanctions. For example: you manage to get the korrabian spice, which you keep for yourself and your ally and deny the Dhayut empire you dislike so much. The nearby pirate syndicate, however, seeing the opportunity takes spice from you and sells to the Dhayut for twice the price, making money and expanding its fleet and colonies, eventually turning into an empire of its own.
Pirate syndicates would become a means of dealing with hated empires, or obtaining goods otherwise banned from you by the others, also housing quite a formidable fleet, in case you're looking for mercenaries as well, or if you're looking for combat..., eventually becoming a threat to the middle-sized empire if left unchecked.

Pirates are such a COOOOOOL feature of this game, I believe they have been seriously overlooked. They really need a bigger role than to bother starting empires.

This idea would be so doable it would be a shame not to implement it. Go DW devs!!!

(in reply to Data)
Post #: 1093
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 3/2/2011 1:42:20 AM   
Kakuzu

 

Posts: 17
Joined: 10/24/2010
Status: offline
Purging: When you conquer a world, you may choose to “purge” the population. The population vanishes for whatever reason. There’s no given explanation after you press the button. Whether you forced them to leave or killed them all is left up to the player’s imagination. Aggressive and less friendly races would “purge” newly conquered worlds more often than not. The Shakturi, for instance, would “purge” every world they conquer. In addition to the flavor, this offers a strategic twist. Purged worlds don’t need to be defended from enemy attacks since there’s no population to defend. Likewise, troops don’t need to be stationed on that world since there are not enough people to actively revolt. However, “purging” hits your reputation quite hard, and after the war, you’re left with a bunch of uninhabited planets.

Open/Close Borders: You may choose to open or close your borders to certain races. This way, you can found a race of only humans or only insectoids. Unfortunately, you don’t gain whatever racial bonuses you’d normally get from alien immigrants. Likewise, your population wouldn’t rise as quickly since you’re excluding certain populations from immigrating to your worlds. However, its nice flavor, and it would be realistic for certain races to close their borders (i.e. insectoids to humans).

Terraforming: There should be a technology branch that allows you to improve planet quality via buildings. For example, a technology called “Advanced Terraforming” allows you to construct an “Atmospheric Regulator”, “Radiation Absorber”, or an “Artificial Gravity Machine”. These buildings would increase planet quality by X% when constructed. The idea here is to take those less habitable worlds (i.e. below 50%) and turn them into paradises by constructing expensive terraforming equipment. The downside, however, is that these devices are great targets for the enemy fleet. Lower planet quality would mean a drop in population and production.

Recycling: Bouncing off the last idea, there should also be a technology branch for recycling. You can research recycling for key resources. X% of all consumed resources are recycled back into the market for further consumption. Subsequent technologies increase the percent of resources recycled. This would also allow construction of “Recycling Centers” that increase this boost. Overall, this would allow for a higher galactic population and “bigger” galaxies.

City Worlds: One hidden per galaxy, inhabited or uninhabited. A city world is a planet where its land area is entirely cityscape. A city world has a very large population but few resources. If we follow the previous two suggestions, then they’d have both terraforming buildings and recycling centers. The point of one of these worlds is recruitment, taxation, and commerce. Since they’re almost entire city, resource extraction would be impossible. The best example I can think of is Coruscant. The entire surface is covered in city, and its population is enormous. It imports raw materials but exports industrial goods, commerce, and culture.

I think these would add more flavor to the game.

(in reply to Merker)
Post #: 1094
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 3/8/2011 3:19:37 AM   
lancer

 

Posts: 2891
Joined: 10/18/2005
Status: offline
Player Only Game Options

The Idea

I'd suggest a couple of small extras - in addition to the existing comprehensive set - that only apply to the Player, not the AI. Keep it simple.

First would be a check box like "Longer Construction Times" which if ticked adds +50% to all player initiated construction times such as for bases and ships.

The second would be another check box, such as "Higher Resource Useage". This causes all player constuctions (ships and bases) to require +50% more resources than they normally would. Eg. a ship component normally needs 4 Argon, now it needs 6.

The Sales Pitch

Reasons for adding both checkboxes would be to cater for the chunk of players, such as myself, that would prefer the option of having ships take longer to build and for resources to have more meaning.

As it only applies to the player there is no need to have to rejig the AI. They are optional settings that would take up minimal screen space. As both construction time and resource useage multipliers are liable to be global variables within the game it would - I think (?) - be relatively easy to implement.

As a bonus you would - in one fell swoop (cue trumpets and a drum roll) - shut down a lot of arguments on the forum between different groups of players regarding the direction that they think the game should take. Eg. those that like a more grognard approach vs. those that like a more streamlined game.

If you wished to make use of the options then they are there for the taking and if you not then you could happily ignore them.

Smiles all round, world peace and cheaper Caslon for the masses.



Cheers,
Lancer

< Message edited by lancer -- 3/8/2011 3:20:29 AM >

(in reply to Kakuzu)
Post #: 1095
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 3/13/2011 10:09:34 PM   
Merker

 

Posts: 208
Joined: 7/3/2010
Status: offline
1. Trade node
A New class of station called a trade node, that can be placed on long trade routes as a resupply for freighters, or be used to direct the creation of trade routes to your liking, maybe even around that hostile empire between you and your trading partner, or around that pirate-infested nebula. It could be coded to be considered as a colony is for trade and be used as a resource drop-off point even for longer routes, thus enabling the creation of custom trade routes.

2. More explorer control

Currently the exploration ship seems to not be so functional on manual. But maybe adding customizable AI control options could solve the issue. Example: the ability to tell the E-ship to focus on finding habitable worlds and not linger in every system for detailed scans, or find fuel sources or other rare resources then tell you about it. Perhaps an option panel for each explorer, so you can have dedicated explorers for resources and others for colonies.

3. Continuous laser beams
In DW I have yet to see a laser beam to my liking, as in a real beam, continuous from ship to target, like in Homeworld's Ion beams. It's not a requirement, or really urgent, or necesary, and the lack of it would never make me stop playing, but I thought I'd share the idea in case the devs want to add more weapons.
Picture first to explain the concept:


The concept is based around different resistances for both shield and armor types, so now researching those techs has more meaning than just durability. So if for example you research molecular shields and reactive armor and your newest enemy has mostly researched beam weapons as offensive potential you can easily take on his more numerous but beam-only equipped shields, but if he has pozitron shields and you incidentally only have classic blasters(which are weak versus pozitrons, strong vs molecular shields) then it's just going to be a long battle, and you'll actually have to use TACTICS

4. Crew resource.
The concept of crew for ships has been approached multiple times. It might be a very complex thing to add though. So I tried to think of an easier way to implement this.

What if crew was actually a resource, like fuel, generated at colonies and maybe spaceports. The bigger the colony, the greater the generation speed; perhaps a space academy facility could be built to speed up the process. Each hab module on ships and spaceports would have a certain amount of crew, the greater the number the more crew you have on the ship/port. Each ship starts fully crewed from port. The life support component gets a critical role here. Once that gets damaged crew starts dropping rapidly, the only thing that could stop it being the repair components fixing the life support or the arrival at a spaceport.

Once a ship is crew-less, it turns into a derelict, and can be claimed by any empire that brings a C-ship. C-ships would carry some extra crew aboard for such eventualities. So, this would probably make huge derelict fields possible during actual gameplay, but also make the process of claiming them more difficult.




< Message edited by Merker -- 3/13/2011 10:10:10 PM >

(in reply to lancer)
Post #: 1096
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 3/16/2011 11:17:09 PM   
cookie monster


Posts: 1695
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline
When another empire asks for mining stations etc, it would be nice if you could hotlink to the location.

Rather than having to scroll and zoom.

Loading troops at planets with multiple ships takes too long. It's a PLANET, I think a large amount of ships can land at the ''Military Base''.

This is also compounded when migrant transports are docked.

I realise I can build larger troop carriers, but still...

_____________________________


(in reply to Merker)
Post #: 1097
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 3/17/2011 9:26:45 AM   
Bingeling

 

Posts: 4692
Joined: 8/12/2010
Status: offline
I think you can also build more docking bays on your space ports? Or build space ports in the first place.

I would not expect a spaceship to ever enter the atmosphere.

(in reply to cookie monster)
Post #: 1098
RE: Changes to Exploration and Scouting - 3/17/2011 9:39:24 AM   
Data


Posts: 3908
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
Planetary entrenchment

Orbital bombardment damage cannot be avoided but we could have different levels for this (underground pop and buildings, on the surface but fortified, etc) to reduce the damage.

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Bingeling)
Post #: 1099
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/17/2011 10:05:32 PM   
jrhindo

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 3/16/2011
From: France
Status: offline
Hi, I have a couple of suggestions to submit and try to improve this great game!
-All celestial bodies should be colonisable (except suns ofc). Gas giants could have floating cities, think of a city like Bespin of star wars but completely isolated from the planet's atmosphere. Same for all the useless rock planets, they should be colonisable just build a domed city. This kind of colonisation obviously require engineering skills and some thourough research before actual attempts, and could be quite expensives, but would sure give more strategic possibilities.
-Space cities! Also acting as space port and dockyard. Very expensive things to make and avaiable late game, but would provide a very useful forward base.
-Colonisation attempts should have the possibility to fail. Simple realism and would slow down a bit the expansion of empires.
Edit: -And, something maybe less important, Independent Nations should be a mini faction of their own just like the pirates and you should be able to get information from them and do basic things like absorb them by intimidation/love, or support them to become a real empire (no need for free trade deal, it is automatic no?).

< Message edited by jrhindo -- 3/17/2011 10:15:37 PM >

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 1100
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/18/2011 4:18:33 AM   
lancer

 

Posts: 2891
Joined: 10/18/2005
Status: offline

Pirate Alliance


An additional spy mission, "Negotiate Secret Pirate Alliance".

If successful it enables you to 'gift' ships to a pirate faction and specify a target.

If unsuccessful your dark deeds are revealed and you suffer a big reputational hit.

Idea being to enable you to wage a 'behind-the-scenes' proxy war against an AI empires' trade and resources.

You can do this already by paying them to attack a particular empire but this enables you to beef them up with more firepower and turn them into a bigger threat.

Fine tuning the concept could be the bigger your 'gift' (eg. the total combat power of the ships you are handing over) the higher the difficulty of the mission.

Also, to be fair, the AI - particulary sneaky ones - could use this tactic against you.

A side-effect would be to make pirates a potentially bigger problem than before, especially mid to late game, particulary if they had a large client state backing them.


Cheers,

Lancer


(in reply to jrhindo)
Post #: 1101
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/18/2011 7:53:47 AM   
Data


Posts: 3908
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
Corsair stuff, me like it, you can use it to decimate AI ships without going to war with them - no rep hit should be taken if you destroy an AI ship under pirate flag.

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to lancer)
Post #: 1102
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/18/2011 7:57:36 AM   
J HG T


Posts: 1093
Joined: 5/14/2010
From: Kiadia Prime
Status: offline
Nice one lancer.

Though, have to say that this could be done in "normal" diplomacy by giving the player and AIs an option to gift ships to other empires (been requested for some time). Also, being able to request AI empire to attack other even when you aren't in war/have trade sanctions with them would be handy. Currently you can only request AI empire to attack other one only when you are at war with the one you want your "ally" to attack. Same with trade sanctions. These request should, of course, be VERY hard to make so player couldn't exploit them by spamming them on all AI empires.


_____________________________

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it!
"And they hurled themselves into the void of space with no fear."

(in reply to lancer)
Post #: 1103
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/20/2011 3:16:31 AM   
cookie monster


Posts: 1695
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline
A target direction arrow for the ship when selected.

Its hard to know quickly where the ship is going, unless you look for direction and system name.

It's probably already been wishlisted.

_____________________________


(in reply to J HG T)
Post #: 1104
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/20/2011 8:32:16 AM   
Data


Posts: 3908
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
It has but it's good you brought it up again, we should put this on the poll as well and I think it would skyrocket to the top. It's small but very important.
Even if this is not implemented a search system to quickly locate any object in the game would be nice also. This could be harder as there are tons of objects in this game

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to cookie monster)
Post #: 1105
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/21/2011 5:58:37 PM   
Lord_Astraios

 

Posts: 72
Joined: 3/13/2010
Status: offline
Here is a mix of wish list for me. And in between something about modding too.

1: EVENTS - As we do have our storyline when choose to have it or not but also have other random stories in between, like getting in to a planet or star system triggers a series of events , but also something modable, probably when the system and the scripts are implemented to be able to edit them, or preferably add them. Since i have a science fiction story im making and it would do great if i created something playable in this game.

2: MODDING SYSTEM - I dont know if this can be done but probably an idea for the next expansion, and i know little by little scripts has been made available in patches but my issue is that i want to maintain the same ship sets and same graphics as it came when i bought the game. But the capacity to add and not to replace.

3: EMPIRE SETTINGS AND AUTOMATION - We do have the system but as i recall, and thats why i never use the Empire settings but the ability to add custom values, like for example, the automatic tax change if you select low,

medium, or high on the growth of the planet but the High setting doesnt show what percentage, so we could have something like 3 or 4 options like "at 3 million people will set the tax to 20%" As an example.

4: PLANET OPTIONS - Is mostly to have few more options, like to have controlled ship so we can move people to one place to another, like evacuation if something is coming at your way, or abandon a planet.

More facilities.

5: MORE SHIP FEATURES - Capturing ships, crew on ships. In space empires 4 and 5 they do have that system, a set of crew, a "module subsystem" but not something you use to attack or gets damaged but it gives you 200 crew, also you get to have a command bridge or a master computer, as the computer gives you an advantage, you dont get captured, self destruct module works 75% chance when the ships gets capture and it explodes.


6: PIRATES AND SPACE CREATURES - More varied, Pirates to be more stronger over time, not only one station and a set of ships. Get them to have planets, more bases and stronger, make them grown but 50% less of the speed of a regular empire and less also than a independent colony or also giving them money to boost them up. Where there are more corruption, pirates will find their heaven. Like growth speed example... 100% <Normal speed> for Normal Empires - 50% for independent colonies and they become empires if set - 25% to 5% growth to pirate.

7: MODDING OPTIONS - few more things to have if possible, i mentioned bofore the story, but also scripting of the weapons and making new weapons with new graphics, directional beam weapons like this mentioned above in one of the posts, create new tech or tech tree with new graphics...

About the beam weapons...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVa_M6-iZws

In the editor to have a command system or something to be able to do few details... i havent through on everything but a command to clear all systems from the editor.

Just an idea splatter.


_____________________________

*That* is the exploration that awaits you. Not mapping stars and studying nebulae, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence.

(in reply to Data)
Post #: 1106
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/22/2011 4:23:25 AM   
lancer

 

Posts: 2891
Joined: 10/18/2005
Status: offline

[copied from the GeneralForum]

Leader Ideas

Having Leaders to provide further immersion of Distant Worlds living, breathing environment would be terrific. After thinking about it for a while I’ve found that it’s surprisingly difficult to rough out a working implementation.

Leaders could be done in all sorts of ways but once you start looking at the implication of doing this or that you can easily find that you’ve opened a can of worms.

Making it fun is even trickier. Probably why smarter brains than I design and develop games.

Fumbling around with the concept on my own I’ve figured out that you probably have to choose a couple of aspects and maintain a tight focus on these to prevent the whole project spinning out of control and being unworkable.

So for the benefit of general discourse on the possible implementation of Leaders here are my thoughts.

Illustrated and in colour! I couldn’t resist.

Focus

Restricted to the Player only. Makes the task ten times easier. The AI empires can be assumed to have numerous nameless leaders. They don't need to be fleshed out.

Restricted to leaders who will be in control of a fleet.

Keep the focus tight. Widen it to include colonies, research and armies and the job grows like a noxious weed or, alternatively, has to be dumbed down so much, in order to be manageable, that it ends up bland and boring, a-la-MOO3.

Leaders are exceptional individuals whom, because of their status, command very high levels of popularity on their home planets. Leaders are derived from a specific colony within your empire. They come from somewhere.

The Broad Brush

Admiral Rickunder from Planet BeetleJuice is constantly in the news back home. While he might be Mr. Nobody to the rest of your Empire he is regarded as a shining example of the Beetlejuician way of life and a fine upstanding example of Beetlejuician manhood and military genius.

The career trajectory of the Admiral is off great interest to all those who call Beetlejuice home. They are intensely proud of their Admiral and will react badly if he isn’t treated fairly.

Likewise Admiral Rickunder will have a difficult decision in the event of planet BeetleJuice choosing to separate from the Empire. Which, in the right circumstances could come about directly from the urgings of the Admiral.

Will he look to his own or stay loyal to the Empire? The fleet under his command awaits his decision.


Which leads directly to the two areas where I have chosen as a focus for leaders – Politics and Loyalty.

In a Nutshell - Politics


Leaders could have a number of qualities but the two key ones – apart from their skill in leadership – are Political Cost and their Loyalty.

Political cost is a randomly determined number between, say, 1 and 10 for each leader. It reflects the political sway a leader has back home. Think Douglas McArthur.

Now if you want to fire your leader or, heaven forbid, he resigns in a huff at your bad treatment, then there is a direct hit to the Colony Approval rate of his home planet equal (or worse, depending on the situation) to his Political cost.





How often have you read military histories where the wrong General was in charge but the political cost of removing him was considered too high?

So right up front your choice of leader now encompasses not only his level of skill but the political ramifications that may arise from your treatment of him. This feeds directly into the approval rating of his home colony.

You want to dismiss Admiral Butterfingers? You’d love nothing better to do so right now but his home planet of Arial-7 is currently ‘unhappy’ and he has a political cost of 7. Slicing a big chunk of approval from Arial-7 might just be enough to tip it into revolt. Looks like Admiral Butterfingers will have to stay for the time being.

In a Nutshell – Loyalty

Each leader has a loyalty rating. Loyalty to their empire.

In the event of their home planet revolting then the leader must make a choice – Empire or Rebels? The game makes a die roll against his loyalty rating and a failure results in a leader joining the revolt – along with the ships in his fleet.

So now there is a third dimension to your choice of leader. Do I go for Admiral Sensational who is a strategic and tactical genius but a disloyal son-of-a-b*tch or do I play safe and opt for Admiral Plod who is hopeless in a battle but loyal as a brainless puppy.

Fine Tuning Loyalty


Political cost is a straightforward in operation. Visible and easily comprehensible.

Loyalty, however, is a different beast. One that is wide open to abuse. It needs some finessing.

A player could easily choose only loyal leaders for instance. Wayward leader problem solved. Or he could use disloyal leaders and, whenever it looks like their home planet is on the verge of revolt, transfer all the ships out of the fleets they lead as a precaution. Or he could do the same thing just before firing them to mitigate any ‘blow-back’.

To get around players ‘gaming’ loyalty I’d make it a hidden statistic. Over time it is gradually revealed. Eg. When a leader first arrives his loyalty is ‘unknown’. After a year it is known enough to be classified as either ‘good’ or ‘doubtful’. Another year and you’d get a finer grained picture, say ‘rock solid, high, above average, normal, poor’ etc.

The idea being that you don’t know at the start, but over time the picture becomes clearer. Which, if you’re the Emperor, is probably a reasonably accurate picture of how your leaders would evolve in a large, sprawling empire.

One other finesse would be required. Whenever you added an extra ship to the fleet commanded by the leader then you’d get a small lift in their loyalty rating. Egos, after all, are there to be stroked.

Conversely whenever you remove a ship from his command then there is a larger, significant, hit to his loyalty. Furthermore if this drops his loyalty rating below a threshold (and remember you probably don’t have a clear idea of his exact rating) then he must make a ‘loyalty test’ – a simple die roll against his loyalty.

Fail this and he resigns his commission in disgust. Good riddance you might think? Not really. There is an immediate hit to his home planet approval rating of two times his Political cost due to the absolute outrage back home of their favourite Admiral being shafted.

Far fetched? Maybe. What would Montgomery or George S. Patton have done if they were told that – as of tomorrow – half their command is now going to the other general? No hard feelings, fella.

Overview of Politics and Loyalty

With these two simple stats you have a pros and cons process regarding which leaders to use, where to use them and how to treat them. Eg. As a player you get to make interesting and meaningful decisions without being snowed under with ‘too much information’. Paradox, I’m looking at you.

By tying both aspects into their home planet colony approval rating you also get a political sub-game with a reasonable amount of depth but with minimal additional development overhead.

Where do Leaders come from?


You could dabble with additional planetary structures here such as Naval Academies. Or other, similar systems.

All of which probably are a lot of work for little return. I’d keep this part really simple.

Provide a pool. Say six leaders. These are generated randomly and the player can pick from the pool whenever he needs a leader to command a fleet. There would be no limit to the number of leaders you could have in active service.

One for every fleet. Every time you pick a leader out of the pool it generates another random leader and refills. After a certain time interval perhaps, say, two months.

Pretty simple but you could easily make it interesting by having a couple of leader orientated policy settings in your Empire Policy Screen.





‘Allow Ethnic Diversity’ generates leaders from anyone within your empire. All those independent races you absorbed. All those funny looking insects.

Welcome to the Officer Corps! At ease, Son, we’ll find you a uniform that fits. Not sure about the shoe size, though. How many did you say you needed?

Ticking this doubles you pool size. Now you have a wider choice of up to twelve leaders. Much better. The downside is that you now have to keep an eye on your racial situation. Anytime a leader’s home colony gets a negative impact to their approval rating ‘cause you have gone to war with a similar race as they, then your leader suffers a similarly scaled drop to his loyalty.

You may find yourself with an ex-independent colony about to revolt ‘cause of your ill-considered warmongering ways along with their leader who happens to be in charge of a sizeable chunk of your fleet.

With the newly improved migration abilities your ethnically diverse empire could throw up all manner of these situations. So your vastly increased chances of generating better leaders in a larger pool is offset by a potentially more difficult political juggling act.

A second option ‘Highly trained Officer Corps’ provides randomly generated leaders that have a positive modifier to their leadership skill. As this is time intensive you end up with a pool size that is halved.

Now with a racially pure, highly trained Officer Corps your pool size is reduced to only three. They would likely all be better quality leaders than normal, but not always.

With such a small pool your expansion plans would need careful thought because of the time delay between refilling the pool once you’ve assigned a leader. You may well find – in a period of rapid expansion – that you temporarily run out of leaders. Your pool runs empty.

On the other hand if you allowed ‘Ethnic diversity’ then you are back to a well trained pool of six.

You’d probably also need the player to hit a few population size benchmarks before they were able to open up all the available pool slots. That’s assuming a typical 1 planet 4x game start.





Can I fire Leaders?

Sure you can. Don’t like ‘em, get rid of ‘em.

If you fire a leader that is residing in the pool then their political cost acts as a malus to their home colony approval rating. What an insult declare all the local newspapers!

Firing a leader from the pool simply causes him to leave and a new one, randomly generated, takes his place. Bye bye Captain Dead D*ck and hello Captain Wonderful.

Firing a leader on active service is a bit trickier. The slur you are laying down upon the fair citizens of, for example, Beetlejuice and their chosen leaders military prowess is terrible indeed.

Political cost x 2.

What effect do Leaders have?

I’m thinking a kind of fleet-wide effect such as with the ‘Fleet bonus’ techs.

Could be something else. Doesn’t matter as long as there is a range of skill levels amongst leaders. From very good to very bad.

Randomly generated, of course with a positive kick-along to the generation routine if you have a policy of ‘Highly trained Officer Corps’.

As an interesting twist you could make leaders from each unique race have a specific skill focus. Eg. Humans are good at Beam weapons, Rats at Repairs etc.

Now you aren’t obliged to provide every fleet with a leader. However if a fleet didn’t have an assigned leader then it would suffer a penalty of some kind such that the benefits of having a leader, even a bad one, outweigh the disadvantages of a leaderless fleet.

Do Leaders Gain Experience?

Yep. This is another low-overhead, high return feature residing within my thought bubble.

Leaders all enter the pool at the initial rank of ‘Captain’. They then gain experience over time.

Every battle that their fleet is involved in provides a bonus experience boost regardless of the result. You learn by doing, even from your mistakes.

To keep it simple the bonus would be randomly determined within a range. Learning isn’t a linear process. No need to figure more points for bigger battles, etc. Just assume that some leaders are going to learn faster than others.

Gain enough experience, go up a rank. Each rank provides a small boost to the leader’s skill level making them more valuable. Importantly it also increases their ability to command.

So a Captain, for instance, at the bottom of the scale, could exercise his command ability over a maximum of four ships. Any more ships than this in his fleet and his skill bonus is negated (but still better than the fleet not having a leader).

As a leader goes up in rank his ability to command increases commensurately. Say Captain 4 ships, Commodore 8, Rear Admiral 16, Admiral Unlimited.

Your leaders, in charge of specific fleets, become more and more useful over time. With a bit of luck they may even prove to be loyal.

Importantly the experience is with your Leader, not your fleet. No need to track individual ship experience levels and tie that into the battle system.

Now leaders within your talent pool gain experience at the same rate as in the field. The exception is that they aren’t getting a battle bonus.

All leaders start in the pool as Captains. Overtime they increase in rank and usefulness so you have another reason to have a larger pool and to manage it so you have a decent replacement admiral or two on hand to plug the gap in case of an unexpected ‘fatality’ or sudden ‘resignation’.

An additional advantage of ‘grooming’ your pool of potential leaders is that, as they gain experience and go up in rank, their loyalty becomes less and less opaque. You have a better idea of what you are getting, loyalty wise.

So proper management of your pool of leaders becomes important. Weeding out the duds while they are only Captains could be advantageous provided you can ride out any potential political storm.

One other tweak would be to increment a leader’s Political Cost by one every time he rose in rank. Higher the rank, the harder they are to get rid off. If you are going give Captain Dead d*ck the flick then don’t wait till he is tying up a slot in your pool as a full Admiral.

If you wanted to get more into the political side – and I’m off on a tangent here – you could have leaders, residing in the pool, start demanding a fleet command. Their home colony would suffer a permanent approval malus of, say, one point. But this would gradually increase over time – up to a capped value equivalent to their political cost – as their demands for a command become more and more insistent.

The people of Beetlejuice DEMAND that Admiral Rickunder be put at the head of a mighty fleet!

The fact that Admiral Rickunder is a rolled gold dud and you couldn’t find an opportune time to fire him from the pool when he was a lowly captain is now your problem. Have fun.


Other Stuff


The obvious. Leaders in command of a fleet reside in a flagship. Damage to the flagship command module could be the end of your leader.

Leaders could – and should – also be female. Higher loyalty and lower Political cost?

Would leaders die from old age? No, pump them full of life enhancing drugs and be done with it.

Summary

That’s it.

Leaders, K.I.S.S with a tight focus on Politics and Loyalty.

A few thoughts and ideas – O.K, I got carried away – to throw into the mix.


Cheers,

Lancer

(in reply to Lord_Astraios)
Post #: 1107
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/22/2011 7:46:04 AM   
J HG T


Posts: 1093
Joined: 5/14/2010
From: Kiadia Prime
Status: offline
Good ideas there Lancer. Interesting read for sure. "Allow ethnic diversity" option is a must if/when leaders are put in. Having some Teekan businessman and Quanemo scientists when playing with Kiadian would be so ace!

Umm... "Leaders could – and should – also be female. Higher loyalty and lower Political cost?" Lower political cost? Nu uh, if you ask me! Equal costs for both of them! No offence but I tend to support sexual equality. Maybe just make the costs relative to leaders skills? Better cost more and so on.




_____________________________

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it!
"And they hurled themselves into the void of space with no fear."
Post #: 1108
RE: Master Wishlist Thread - 3/22/2011 10:07:16 PM   
aprezto


Posts: 822
Joined: 1/29/2009
Status: offline
Small tweak in UI of shipbuilder.

When i click on an item already in the ship configuration, can the selector in the 'possible components' list mirror this? So that I only need to click the 'add', or 'remove' buttons rather than having to scroll up and down to find the component I want to add.

example: I have a destroyer blueprint. I copy it. I decide I want to add armour. I click on the armour already in the blueprint. The component list jumps to armour and I can add or remove using the buttons between the blueprint window and the components window.

At present I have to scroll up and down on the components window to find armour in order to add or remove it.

(in reply to J HG T)
Post #: 1109
Page:   <<   < prev  35 36 [37] 38 39   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> RE: Master Wishlist Thread Page: <<   < prev  35 36 [37] 38 39   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.191