The 3 simple things you'd like to see in Distant Worlds

[jpwrunyan]

Re extractors
I cant link the thread because this is just a crappy iphone 3g. But nedrear made this cryptic thread a while back discussing it in the war room. Suffice to say max extract on normal resources is 10. Gas max is more but i cant remember. Level 1 mining comps give an extract of 3. So to get the max you just need 4 mining comps. I would like to see the max removed personally. If I have the money and the construction limits to stick tons of mining comps on a mining station, then I should be able to do it, and get the subsequent extraction rate even if it exceeds 10. It should be hard to do and costly yet possible. But I digress. Lets just continue talking as though the extract limit was not a wrong headed way to address this exploit--even though we all know it was. Now it is too easy to get to 10 extraction rate with just starting tech. I think this is lame.

And yes gas planets are big. All planets are big. Should we be able to build more than one mining base per planet? Fair question. But since we currently arent allowed to, putting mining comps on research stations seems like an exploit, does it not? (hint: yes)

[unclean]

ORIGINAL: Fishman
There are THREE fueltypes? What's the third? I don't think I've ever seen a reactor run on anything other than Hydrogen or Caslon.

Look at this scrub only using two fueltypes! (okay fine I can't count)

ORIGINAL: Jaimoe
3. I'd also like to be able to assign fleets to patrol a sector instead of just a planet or system. This could be helpful when setting up empire wide defenses.

Do you have Legends? Fleet postures let you do that.

[Falokis]

Matrix pretty much has got my original top three over time. Here are my new ones:


1. Fighters do not auto respawn. Fighter bays should carry more fighters (holding most in reserve) and launch roughly the same amount they do now. After all fighters are destroyed, the ship should have to return to a base to "refuel" the fighter bays after being depleted.

2. Something that makes the ship classes different other than name. This can be AI, size limits, or whatever. Anything.

3. More racial tech and weapons. I don't care if they are just reskinned effects. I hate seeing all end game ships have all the exact same parts (same engines, beams, torps, shields, etc).

[Fishman]

ORIGINAL: jpwrunyan

So to get the max you just need 4 mining comps. I would like to see the max removed personally. If I have the money and the construction limits to stick tons of mining comps on a mining station, then I should be able to do it, and get the subsequent extraction rate even if it exceeds 10.

Yeah, see, that's how it used to be. The catch is that back when this was allowed, a single planetary resource was all you EVER needed for ANYTHING, because you could just stick 80-bajillion extractors on your mining base and have basically unlimited resources of that type. This seemed somehow...bad.

But the limit as applied to gas giants is just silly, because yes, you really COULD do that with a gas giant: It's just an enormous ball of gas. Plus, the idea that an empire can have a shortage of hydrogen is ridiculous, since hydrogen is the most common thing in the universe.

[Jeeves]

When you get right down to it, the two driving forces in the game are reputation from killing pirate bases and logistics of freighters, everything else is secondary.

Lonnie Courtney Clay

[Beag]

And searching for pokemon/abandoned ships. Gotta catch´em all!

With current resource system limited extractors are needed for the reason Fishman said... To remove the limit, then either resources could be depleted (and need new techs for the percentage to rise again) or extractors should be so expensive that building large mining bases would only be useful on very rich planets.

[MartialDoctor]

ORIGINAL: unclean

ORIGINAL: Jaimoe
3. I'd also like to be able to assign fleets to patrol a sector instead of just a planet or system. This could be helpful when setting up empire wide defenses.

Do you have Legends? Fleet postures let you do that.

He's talking about patrolling, not setting the fleet posture to defend.

[Evrett]

ORIGINAL: Jeeves

When you get right down to it, the two driving forces in the game are reputation from killing pirate bases and logistics of freighters, everything else is secondary.

Lonnie Courtney Clay

This is such a true statement.

[feelotraveller]

 
1) Better freighter logistics
2) Better computer player resource logistics
3) Better computer player money logistics
 
Simple to say.  [:'(]

[samspackman]

1. Private Sector Factions. Your private sector would be split up into corporations. At the moment, the private sector is just the 'private sector'. It would be cool for ships to be named after a company, say "[Homeworld] Inc" or "[Colony] Co.". That corporation is a 'mini-faction', kind of like pirates, that you can enter contracts with, like 'defend this sector/system for $X'. Or 'supply [resource] to [colony] for [x years]'. The private sector sits there with oodles of cash so it would be cool to outsource some jobs to them or be able to direct them somewhat.

2. Ship Design. Can it just be changed so that when you select a component to add to a design, the 'component to add list' doesn't jump around, it's always confusing.

3. Window optimization: The speed of the game is pretty good now, but every time I bring up a window it still loads each element of the window separately, which just looks janky and awkward.

[jpwrunyan]

As an asside, hydrogen mines presumably mine deuterium not standard hydrogen. And that certainly is rare, albeit more abundant in gas giants. That probably could be depleted over time with no noticable effect on the gas giant. Likewise helium is presumably helium-3. Caslon and Tyderios are make-believe. HTH, knowing is half the battle, similar platitudes.

[Cauldyth]

ORIGINAL: V for Vegas

3. Window optimization: The speed of the game is pretty good now, but every time I bring up a window it still loads each element of the window separately, which just looks janky and awkward.

I actually like that, and I thought it was intentional. Gives it a characteristic old-school feel, as the panel forms from its components.

[jpwrunyan]

I think the recent posts are losing sight of the word "simple"...
That said I wish the game had a proper window mode so I could drag it to my secondary (larger) monitor and resize it. Battle for Wesnoth is done this way.

[Rtwfreak]

1. More aggressive and better playing AI.

2. Better playing AI that is more aggressive.

3. More challenge out of a better playing AI that is more aggressive.

4. Buttons to increase AI performance to make it more aggressive and challenging.

5. An always at war with AI setup feature like Civilization IV.

[RooksBailey]

1) Meaningful ship/star base classes: Each class should have a distinctive tech tree with unique equipment for that class. For example a destroyer should not be able to use battelship-sized lasers, and while a battleship could use the smaller equipment from a destroyer/cruiser, there should be some sort of efficiency penalty. This change would go a long way in making ship design (and research) far more interesting with meaningful choices.

2) The private sector needs a voice: the AI-controlled private sector is the most fascinating aspect of DW, but it needs more development. For example, I would love to receive missions from various NPC corporations along the lines of designing a special freighter for them, or patrolling a hostile sector to keep cor[ ships safe from pirates, or even a request to go to war with a particular alien empire so as to get access to its luxury resources. Failure to complete these missions would have a negative impact on the players economy, and could even result in a strike or work stoppage, setting off a potential civil war even?

3) When ships are added to fleets, they need to be grouped together into one unit. In other words, I am tired of fleets arriving in combat by drips and drabs. Rather, all ships in a fleet should move as a single unit in a specified formation (with speed set according to the slowest ship class).

Bonus Suggestion 4: see here: tm.asp?m=3130727 for suggestions on creating a more living universe. [:D]

[Gelatinous Cube]

ORIGINAL: Rtwfreak

1. More aggressive and better playing AI.

2. Better playing AI that is more aggressive.

3. More challenge out of a better playing AI that is more aggressive.

4. Buttons to increase AI performance to make it more aggressive and challenging.

5. An always at war with AI setup feature like Civilization IV.

I see what you did there.

Also I agree.

[WiZz]

ORIGINAL: Rtwfreak

1. More aggressive and better playing AI.

2. Better playing AI that is more aggressive.

3. More challenge out of a better playing AI that is more aggressive.

4. Buttons to increase AI performance to make it more aggressive and challenging.

5. An always at war with AI setup feature like Civilization IV.

Just want to add - more using of diplomacy by AI to form alliances against the player.

[jpwrunyan]

Better AI != simple

Jeezus start a new thread. I suggest calling it "three impossible dreams that will never come true"

[onomastikon]

OK

1. Nuclear powered starship fellatio.
2. Insta-win sugar-coated martian phaser cereal.
3. Feedback from Elliot.

[jpwrunyan]

The first two are still, strictly speaking, possible under the right circumstances. The third one, however, is a mathematical impossibilty. Well done!