Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List

 
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 >> A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/19/2014 2:05:47 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 34566
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
This build will be available as a public beta today, hopefully as an official update tomorrow.

This build has the following changes from 1.9.5.3:

CRASH FIXES

- fixed rare crash when determining object visibility for an empire

BUG FIXES

- fixed bug where loading a previously saved game was sometimes auto-switching to default theme, even when default theme was already loaded
- building pirate bases, fortresses and Criminal Network using the Facility dropdown list in the Colonies screen now properly assigns facility ownership to player pirate faction
- now ensure that cost for building pirate Criminal Network is always properly deducted
- now ensure that custom ship names (shipNames.txt) are used for new pirate ships built using the Build Order screen
- fixed bug where ship design images were being rotated when received a popup message about new ship type research breakthrough (e.g. Carriers)
- fixed bug where Robotic Troops (BattleBots from Robotic Troop Foundry) were not getting maintenance reduction bonuses when recruited from action button under Selection Panel

RESEARCH AND SHIP DESIGN

- AI ship designer now always adds sufficient reactors to ship designs (possibly more than one) to enable hyperdrive to operate at full speed
- AI ship designer now more willing to shrink new designs to fit within current construction size limits, especially when first obtain hyperdrive technology
- altered size of starting Colonization Module component (now 300 instead of 360, updated components.txt)
- NEW MODDING FEATURE:
allow restricting any research project to specific races using the new ALLOWED RACES line in the research.txt file (updated header comments of research.txt explains)
- improved AI research pathing to better emphasize tech focuses from empire policy (ResearchDesignTechFocus1-6), while still researching other important techs
- increased research output for lab components by approximately 50% (components.txt and research.txt)

GAME BALANCE

- Shakturi now have faster construction and lower ship maintenance (updated Shakturi.txt race file)
- Shakturi ship design templates now use more weapons and other components (military ships, medium & large spaceports, defensive bases)
- Shakturi empire policy now builds more large military ships and less small military ships
- reputation gain from attacking pirates is now reduced by 50%
- Robotic Troops are now cheaper to maintain (25% of normal instead of 33%), and now twice as fast to recruit
- empires are now more willing to use excess cash on hand as factor when deciding whether to build new ships (e.g. low or negative cashflow, but large cash reserves on hand), especially when at war
- now much harder to perform intelligence missions against Ancient Guardians (steal maps, tech, etc)

OTHER

- no longer scrap and rebuild fighters after loading a saved game
- all sound effects (button clicks, etc) are now disabled when effect volume is set to zero in options screen
- savegame and settings folder location is now standardized to "My Documents\My Games\Distant Worlds Universe" (this remains the same across version updates)

- now send a message to an empire when one of their colonies is lost to a pirate faction that builds a Criminal Network there
- immediately update empire list in Diplomacy screen when trade Empire contact (can now immediately see new empire in list)

_____________________________


Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
Post #: 1
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/19/2014 2:10:29 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
Hm... I was hoping to see a fix for counterespionage and some fixes for pirates...

_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 2
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/19/2014 2:27:44 PM   
Dd_01


Posts: 64
Joined: 12/19/2012
From: Russia
Status: offline
quote:

- savegame and settings folder location is now standardized to "My Documents\My Games\Distant Worlds Universe" (this remains the same across version updates)

quote:

- now send a message to an empire when one of their colonies is lost to a pirate faction that builds a Criminal Network there

Ohhhhhh yeeeesssssss


(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 3
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/19/2014 2:29:20 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 34566
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
We have to pick and choose every week, there's not enough time to hit every point unfortunately. Double-checking counterespionage is still on our list. What Pirate fixes are you looking for?

_____________________________


Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 4
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/19/2014 2:52:51 PM   
Andy06r

 

Posts: 20
Joined: 6/7/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

We have to pick and choose every week, there's not enough time to hit every point unfortunately. Double-checking counterespionage is still on our list. What Pirate fixes are you looking for?


Probably a lofty goal, but I have some feedback

Is it intended behavior that pirate defense missions will attack private sector targets in the system? Makes it hard to use mercs for defense since you can't see if your trade partners have paid for protection.

Example - I was beset by five pirates and a merc answered a defense mission. The raids stopped, but the mercs killed all the traders from other empires.

It also costs 30,000 to defend a colony, but 1,000 to defend the spaceport in orbit.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 5
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/19/2014 3:03:26 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
Well, the ones I would probably consider high priority are:

- Counterespionage vs Sabotage
(Note: Not very fun to have a mining station/starport under construction blowing up every week...)
- Development bonus from multiple wonders on the same planet do not stack, it only seems to apply one and ignore the rest. Ruins are also affected by this as their development bonus is counted as a 'wonder'
- Smugglers will not repair if damaged, even if they are idling or docked with an owned spaceport
- Smugglers will not retrofit their ships, even if it is a massive improvement (early-game tech vs late-game tech) and the pirates have more than enough money to afford it
(Note: These are especially bad since you have no control over smugglers (you cannot even scrap them), and you still have to pay their maintenance costs)
- Empires will scan and attack smugglers that are providing resources that the empire requested
- Pirate-built wonders do not count towards the wonder cap. I built a Boskara highspeed shipyard as a pirate and roughly a few years after completion an empire built the same highspeed shipyard, even though I already had one fully built. Because of this pirates can also build multiple wonders of the same type, if they own multiple planets, can be big exploit
- Pirates do not gain any research bonus from research-oriented wonders
(Note: Likely due to the wonders providing the same locational research bonus as anamolies, which pirates cannot benefit from by design, this also makes the research bonus from anamolies completely worthless to research-oriented empires whom acquire the research wonders first, considering no locational-based anamoly will ever match or surpass the +50% bonus from wonders)
- Pirates do not gain any research bonus from scientist skills
- Most Race-wide modifiers do not work with pirates, I only confirmed two to work so far (Extra Intelligence Agents, Military/Civilian Ship Size modifier), rest do not function at all
(Note: This only gives you three viable choices for pirates, Ackdarian, Haakonish, and Ketarov)
- The Facility defense bonus provided by Smuggler/Mercenary pirate playstyles does not appear to do anything
(Note: I play as Smuggler, I watched a few of my pirate bases/fortresses get attacked and I only see the +50% Defender bonus)
- Pirates cannot change their Home Base, and cannot get a new Home Base if their initial one is destroyed
(Note: Important since pirates do not pay maintenance costs on their home base)

< Message edited by Nanaki -- 6/19/2014 4:42:20 PM >


_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 6
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/19/2014 3:18:27 PM   
Cauldyth

 

Posts: 687
Joined: 6/27/2010
Status: offline
Oooooh, lots of interesting goodies in there.

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 7
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 4:34:20 AM   
necaradan666

 

Posts: 256
Joined: 5/28/2012
Status: offline
checking out nanaki's post looks like we could do with an entirely pirate focused patch.

(in reply to Cauldyth)
Post #: 8
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 5:05:24 AM   
feelotraveller


Posts: 1040
Joined: 9/12/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
snip
- no longer scrap and rebuild fighters after loading a saved game
snip



That is so cool.

I'm hoping it will apply to savegames from older builds (1.9.5.2)?

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 9
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 6:18:14 AM   
Mandras

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 6/20/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nanaki


- Most Race-wide modifiers do not work with pirates, I only confirmed two to work so far (Extra Intelligence Agents, Military/Civilian Ship Size modifier), rest do not function at all
(Note: This only gives you three viable choices for pirates, Ackdarian, Haakonish, and Ketarov)




I just wanted to point out that racial troop strength still effects boarding pods, which are very useful for raiding, etc. Ackdarians have 44 strength from one pod whereas Ikkuro have 66. And trying to board anything with Ketarov would be very painful at 27 strength per pod. The Boskarans, Mortalens and Ikkuro have the highest troop strength I believe, so these would be the best raider types.

< Message edited by Mandras -- 6/20/2014 7:30:01 AM >

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 10
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 10:52:25 AM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mandras
I just wanted to point out that racial troop strength still effects boarding pods, which are very useful for raiding, etc. Ackdarians have 44 strength from one pod whereas Ikkuro have 66. And trying to board anything with Ketarov would be very painful at 27 strength per pod. The Boskarans, Mortalens and Ikkuro have the highest troop strength I believe, so these would be the best raider types.


Are you sure you are accounting for the pirate playstyle differences? Mercenary and Raider gets a +25% bonus to boarding pod strength while Smugglers get a -25% penalty to pod strength. When Pirate Bases/Fortresses get attacked, it seems to not matter weither you are Atuuk or Ikkuro, your troops are exactly the same strength. Also, the facility defense bonus given by Mercenary and Smuggler playstyles also seems to not function at all.

< Message edited by Nanaki -- 6/20/2014 11:55:39 AM >


_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to Mandras)
Post #: 11
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 5:10:48 PM   
pkoko

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 6/8/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

- increased research output for lab components by approximately 50% (components.txt and research.txt)



Why?? It is very easy to generate large research points. Whether the empire can actually preform the research is another matter because of the research cap.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 12
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 6:13:09 PM   
ASHBERY76


Posts: 2099
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: England
Status: online
I feel it should be harder to max out research and not easier.I do not see much strategy in that.

_____________________________


(in reply to pkoko)
Post #: 13
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 7:59:42 PM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
The problem is that we can build enough labs to reach max capacity, but the AI does not. This way everyone is capable of having enough labs. For a human it amounts to clicking the > button a few less times when building designs...not a big deal. Definitely not a loss in strategic depth. I'd be surprised if anyone intentionally didn't build the right number of labs in the past.

< Message edited by Tcby -- 6/20/2014 8:59:55 PM >

(in reply to ASHBERY76)
Post #: 14
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 8:01:18 PM   
Cauldyth

 

Posts: 687
Joined: 6/27/2010
Status: offline
Yeah, when you can place as many research labs on your homeworld's starport as you want, there's never any difficulty in maxxing out research, even before this change.

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 15
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 8:09:26 PM   
ekiller

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 6/12/2014
Status: offline
quote:

no longer scrap and rebuild fighters after loading a saved game


Any idea what was issue?

(in reply to Cauldyth)
Post #: 16
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 8:10:15 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
But you still had to pay more money and higher maintenance costs for those research labs... if anything it should have gone in the opposite direction, lower research output per lab in order to encourage more labs... Ofc, it still does not fix the problem of centralized labs being king but the required changes necessary would be a DW2 thing.

_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to Cauldyth)
Post #: 17
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 8:19:01 PM   
Bingeling

 

Posts: 4969
Joined: 8/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ekiller

quote:

no longer scrap and rebuild fighters after loading a saved game


Any idea what was issue?

When loading the game, all ships/bases with fighter would only start with half of its fighters present. They would of course rebuild them, but loading without fighters was incorrect.

(in reply to ekiller)
Post #: 18
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 8:22:27 PM   
ekiller

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 6/12/2014
Status: offline
Ok, Thanks. I never noticed that.

(in reply to Bingeling)
Post #: 19
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 8:24:02 PM   
ChildServices


Posts: 47
Joined: 5/12/2014
From: Australia, mate
Status: offline
Could you add a similar "allowed races" line to governments?

_____________________________

Alexander the Great, his name struck fear into hearts of men.

(in reply to ekiller)
Post #: 20
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/20/2014 8:32:04 PM   
pkoko

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 6/8/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tcby

The problem is that we can build enough labs to reach max capacity, but the AI does not. This way everyone is capable of having enough labs. For a human it amounts to clicking the > button a few less times when building designs...not a big deal. Definitely not a loss in strategic depth. I'd be surprised if anyone intentionally didn't build the right number of labs in the past.


Why not instruct the AI to keep building research facilities until the max is reached? It is not that hard of a programing fix. Eric is fixing the problem the wrong way.

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 21
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/21/2014 7:26:44 AM   
Mandras

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 6/20/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nanaki

Are you sure you are accounting for the pirate playstyle differences? Mercenary and Raider gets a +25% bonus to boarding pod strength while Smugglers get a -25% penalty to pod strength. When Pirate Bases/Fortresses get attacked, it seems to not matter weither you are Atuuk or Ikkuro, your troops are exactly the same strength. Also, the facility defense bonus given by Mercenary and Smuggler playstyles also seems to not function at all.



I thought about this so I started two games as Mortalen and Atuuk with Balanced playstyle just to be sure, and the boarding pod strength on the starting escort ships were 69 (Mortalen) and 34 (Atuuk) respectively.

The forces spawned to defend secret bases are very weak, basic Mortalen Conqueror infantry have 13800 attack or so, but Mortalen pirates defending their base have 8000 attack/defense, and Mortalen pirates raiding a planet from assault pods are even weaker (6900 strength).

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 22
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/27/2014 1:46:01 AM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nanaki

Well, the ones I would probably consider high priority are:

<snip>
- Development bonus from multiple wonders on the same planet do not stack, it only seems to apply one and ignore the rest. Ruins are also affected by this as their development bonus is counted as a 'wonder'
<snip>


I actually like this. I think it is better that wonder development bonuses do not stack, because it gives us a reason to build them on different planets. Otherwise it is usually best to build them all in the capital. It devolves wonders into predictable bonuses that you always get in your capital. As it is now you have to make a decision whether the wonder bonus alone is enough to justify building it at your capital instead of at another planet that will also benefit from the development bonus (thus making the wonder more valuable in the long run, paying for its own maintenance etc).

As for ruins also counting as wonders for the purposes of stacking effects...ruins being nullified by the research wonders and vice versa, is definitely not good.

< Message edited by Tcby -- 6/27/2014 2:48:00 AM >

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 23
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/27/2014 2:08:12 AM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
I disagree with you, for the following reasons:

- The AI generally does not understand this. It will build all its wonders on its homeworld. This is also what led me to believe it is a bug and not WAD
- Not all empires will have spare planets to build wonders on. For example, if a 2-3 colony empire manages to get 4-5 wonders, they will have to stack wonders. They should not be penalized for being small
- Some wonders have a strong inclination to stacking with certain other wonders. For example, there is a very strong incentive to stack all three research wonders on the same planet, as you would only need to assign your scientists to one place instead of three
- I like the idea of massive vertical expansion, an empire being able to become a superpower without having to colonize half the known galaxy, or even expand beyond its home starsytem, one of DW's ideas that I like is that a tall empire is just as equally viable as a wide one.

< Message edited by Nanaki -- 6/27/2014 3:09:23 AM >


_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 24
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/27/2014 2:37:53 AM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Such a speedy reply! Discussion is fun . Also props on the detail with pirate gameplay bugs. I really want to get in some pirate games once they have been ironed out. Especially the issue with smugglers.

My position on each of your points:
Firstly, I'll ignore for the moment whether something is working as intended. Given that we are talking about the relative merits of each approach, what approach Elliot has in mind is sort of beside the point for our purposes (something being intended doesn't necessarily mean it is good or bad design).

Regarding the ability of the AI to understand wonder placement, that is a limitation that should be patched. It's boring for them to build everything in their capital, as well.

AFAIK It doesn't matter which planet you put your research wonders on, because their effect is global. Where your scientists are located doesn't effect the bonus like it does with a research location.

As for stacking other effects, this leads to what I mentioned in my previous post: actual game play decisions. Do you stack Bakuras high speed shipyards with the Advanced Medicomplex for early growth and speedy construction? Or do you build them on different planets, accept that one is going to take a much longer time (potentially then being beaten by an AI building on their capital), and aim for better output in the (very) long term? Money now is always stronger than a bit more money in 20 years time. It is still a much stronger play to build the traders bazaar on a highly populated planet with a wonder already in place, than on a freshly conquered independent with half a billion pop. The wonders are almost all far more powerful when placed on a highly populated planet. Far, far more powerful.

Continuing on, I agree with you about wanting tall to be viable compared to wide. The thing is, in distant worlds a tall empire is FAAAAAAR more powerful than a wide one. Wide empires do not exist in distant worlds. Consider the overwhelming superiority of conquering another capital instead of founding several of your own colonies. Tall empires don't need a leg up at all. At the moment what I feel the game needs is payoff for colonization that doesn't take decades to show you a return. If you think that wide empires are just as good as tall ones, check out Icemania's extreme AAR.

Perhaps we have different definitions of tall vs wide..?

< Message edited by Tcby -- 6/27/2014 3:41:45 AM >

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 25
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/27/2014 11:21:20 AM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
quote:


AFAIK It doesn't matter which planet you put your research wonders on, because their effect is global. Where your scientists are located doesn't effect the bonus like it does with a research location.


Hmm, I read up on it and you are right, I thought it worked like location bonuses but it seems like I am wrong. Which is odd because it should work for Pirates, then.

quote:


As for stacking other effects, this leads to what I mentioned in my previous post: actual game play decisions. Do you stack Bakuras high speed shipyards with the Advanced Medicomplex for early growth and speedy construction?


It depends. My last game I never expanded beyond one or two planets so all my wonders were clustered on the same planets.

quote:


Continuing on, I agree with you about wanting tall to be viable compared to wide. The thing is, in distant worlds a tall empire is FAAAAAAR more powerful than a wide one. Wide empires do not exist in distant worlds. Consider the overwhelming superiority of conquering another capital instead of founding several of your own colonies. Tall empires don't need a leg up at all. At the moment what I feel the game needs is payoff for colonization that doesn't take decades to show you a return. If you think that wide empires are just as good as tall ones, check out Icemania's extreme AAR.


This is just incorrect. Wide empires are always better in the long run because they always eventually surpass tall. Sure, capturing capitals is better, but also more difficult (unless you use exploits), colonization is an easy, pain-free way to spread your empire. The biggest bonus of wide is that it increases your territorial influence which gives you more exclusive systems to set up mining stations and resort bases on, which also boosts your economy.

Taller empires have far fewer planets and thus their influence is small, in the far more extreme cases tall empires will even deal with resource issues due to their limited influence.

Also, even if a tall empire can match the economy of a wide one, IIRC your research capacity is determined entirely by population

quote:


Perhaps we have different definitions of tall vs wide..?


Tall = few, well-developed planets. Wide = Many, lesser-developed planets.

_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 26
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/27/2014 11:35:32 AM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
You don't need many mining stations at all. Especially if you only have a few colonies. You only need those extra mines if you have the extra colonies.

Let me ask you this: if the development bonus stacked, and assuming you started a game with a standard start (ie without extra colonies or tech), when would it be advantageous to not build wonders in the capital?

As for more colonies being better in the long term, that is true. But its such a long term that you can have easily won the game before that times arrives. This is assuming you conquer the independents near you, leaving you with ~3-4 colonies. Do you consider that a small number?

Edit: to clarify, what I'm more concerned about is there being an actual choice for where you build wonders. You seem to want the development bonus to stack because you want to always build wonders in capital. That is your play style. I want there to be a choice, based on the circumstances of the game. I play both tall and wide. I am not aware of ANY situation in which I should not build the majority of wonders in the capital, if the development bonus were to stack. Even without it stacking, the advantage is overwhelming for the first tier wonders. If this could be addressed in some other way, I wouldn't mind at all that the bonus stacked.

< Message edited by Tcby -- 6/27/2014 12:44:17 PM >

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 27
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/27/2014 12:15:06 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
quote:


As for more colonies being better in the long term, that is true. But its such a long term that you can have easily won the game before that times arrives. This is assuming you conquer the independents near you, leaving you with ~3-4 colonies. Do you consider that a small number?


Yes, to both. Given, I play with 960K research costs, rare independants (you wont find more than 1 or 2 independants near your homeworld), 1400 stars, and 15x15 all of which are more conductive to wide empires.

quote:


Edit: to clarify, what I'm more concerned about is there being an actual choice for where you build wonders. You seem to want the development bonus to stack because you want to always build wonders in capital. That is your play style. I want there to be a choice, based on the circumstances of the game. I play both tall and wide. I am not aware of ANY situation in which I should not build the majority of wonders in the capital, if the development bonus were to stack. Even without it stacking, the advantage is overwhelming for the first tier wonders. If this could be addressed in some other way, I wouldn't mind at all that the bonus stacked.


Ideally, you generally want to build wonders at your best planet, which may or may not be your homeworld. It is actually possible to find worlds that not only surpass your homeworld in quality and size, but also have something else like a ruin that also boosts development. As for your concerns, I would be perfectly fine if additional wonders provided a reduced amount of development, but they should still provide development none the less.

_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 28
RE: A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List - 6/27/2014 8:16:21 PM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
After I posted that message I considered adding a little disclaimer that 'capital' is probably better described as 'best planet' rather than starting planet. My point is that you pick your planet with the best quality and size and plonk everything there. Usually that means the starting planet gets a bunch of first tier wonders, and the 90+ planet you find nearby gets the rest in the years to come. The split is determined, of course, by research speed.

There being one obviously superior strategy, that just so happens to be the easiest and safest, is...boring. I feel like there is very little differentiation between colonies as it is. Making sure that you'll never even think about putting wonders on anything but the best one makes expansion even more bland.

But thems opinions, I guess.

Allowing them to stack with reduced development bonus sounds like a good approach.

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 29
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> A preview of the v1.9.5.4 Change List 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

0.184