Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Playing with fewer habitable worlds

 
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 >> The War Room >> Playing with fewer habitable worlds Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Playing with fewer habitable worlds - 11/9/2013 2:05:41 PM   
Hyena Grin

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 9/3/2013
Status: offline
Does anyone play with scarce or rare habitable worlds? This has a huge effect on the game, where colony worlds are much more valuable and prized, but the outcome of games tends to get skewed toward those lucky enough to start with good worlds nearby. Also the AI can get a little confused if they have to go very far to colonize.

This also means a lot more systems with lots of mining stations but no colonies. Which also means lower income due to lower taxes, and a higher reliance on trade for income, which I don't think the AI handles very well. And it means that many vital resources that can only be found on habitable worlds become quite scarce. Which is problematic for this type of game.

Colony techs and commerce techs become absolutely crucial to advancement, and a failure to explore rapidly and colonize can cripple your empire seemingly irreversibly.

Overall the games tend to feel less predictable (more circumstantial to your starting situation) but also provide for better 'stories' in that every colony is valuable and the wars that occur over them are pretty epic. It's easy to grow attached to colonies when you have fewer of them.

I like the idea of fewer habitable worlds, because I feel like space should feel relatively inhospitable. I just wish there were more uninhabitable worlds that weren't barren rocks, as those get a bit repetitive when playing this way (with the lowest setting, a system will tend to be about 80% barren rock planets). It'd be interesting to see a handful more world types that can't be colonized (by anyone) but provide some resources you'd normally see on colonizable worlds (to fill the resource gap). Surely there must be some conditions that just can't be managed. Worlds that rain acid or whose atmospheres are filled with toxic and corrosive gasses.

< Message edited by Hyena Grin -- 11/9/2013 3:08:28 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Playing with fewer habitable worlds - 11/12/2013 10:15:35 AM   
Mastik

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 7/8/2012
Status: offline
I play scarce in all my games (Legends), it is just easier to manage. My previous game (15x15, elliptical, 700), i had about 25 planets before the shakturi arrived. Plenty of money and resources to defeat them. My present game (15x15, varied clusters, 700), i was placed in a very poor position, and only had 2 planets when the Shakturi arrived. A planet destroyer quickly took out my home world ; so now i doubt i will have the means to destroy the invaders.

(in reply to Hyena Grin)
Post #: 2
RE: Playing with fewer habitable worlds - 5/11/2014 10:17:50 PM   
FireLion1983

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 4/18/2014
Status: offline
Wow, I shall surely try this!

(in reply to Mastik)
Post #: 3
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> The War Room >> Playing with fewer habitable worlds Page: [1]
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

0.259