Master Wishlist Thread

Distant Worlds is a vast, pausable real-time, 4X space strategy game which models a "living galaxy" with incredible options for replayability and customizability. Experience the full depth and detail of large turn-based strategy games, but with the simplicity and ease of real-time, and on the scale of a massively-multiplayer online game. Now greatly enhanced with the new Universe release, which includes all four previous releases as well as the new Universe expansion!

Moderators: Icemania, elliotg

User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: Fishman

There's no such thing as a "chassis" in DW. Ships are all built free-form, and the only thing that differentiates ships from each other is defined roles which carry mandatory equipment requirements needed to fulfill that role, and whatever else you care to staple onto it. Of course, allowing a player to define his own "free-form" roles by typing a new role name into a box would be nice. But all that other stuff is too SE-like and not really DW's style. A ship is defined by its parts and its role, not by some arbitrary chassis rules.

Well some of us would like the option to define it by chassis. I also like the idea of needing to build a certain size chassis for the firepower, plus getting the costs in line. This is a wish list thread, and this is one of my wishes. May never get it, but I'll never know if I don't discuss it.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
Geroj
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 5:53 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Geroj »

From my point of view it will be sufficient if ships categories are limited only by numbers of reactors.
Escort, Colony ship, Exploration ship max 1 reactor
Frigate, Troop transport max 2 reactors
Destroyer max 3 reactors
Cruiser max 4 reactors
Capital ship, Resuply ship max 5 reactors
Bases are stationary and can collect power from stars all the time so there is no need for reactor restrictions
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: Geroj

From my point of view it will be sufficient if ships categories are limited only by numbers of reactors.
Escort, Colony ship, Exploration ship max 1 reactor
Frigate, Troop transport max 2 reactors
Destroyer max 3 reactors
Cruiser max 4 reactors
Capital ship, Resuply ship max 5 reactors
Bases are stationary and can collect power from stars all the time so there is no need for reactor restrictions

That would certainly work. I'd just like to see a reason to build the bigger 'chassis' due to a limitation on the smaller ones.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Gerth
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 12:10 am

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Gerth »

Count me as a yea vote for chassis templating.
Fishman
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:56 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Fishman »

ORIGINAL: Geroj

Escort, Colony ship, Exploration ship max 1 reactor
Are you joking? You can't even operate a hyperdrive on one reactor sometimes. The starting reactor is incapable of operating many starting hyperdrives and you NEED two reactors. Even in the end game, two reactors are needed just to operate the weapons!
ORIGINAL: Geroj

Capital ship, Resuply ship max 5 reactors
You jest, right? Even the smallest capital cruiser has at least 6 reactors just to power its weapons! Have you ever actually BUILT any of these ships?
OberonDark
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:50 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by OberonDark »

Interesting's 1.04 economy thread inspired this idea.

You'll find a LOT of commerce in NYC and other big cities as compared to smaller cities. However, in DW, planets (cities) can eventually all grow to a massive size and then bring in that income. You don't see every small town turning into an NYC. The world would be insane. And it wouldn't be the positive money-flow you see in the game.

I propose that there should be advantages and disadvantages to large/urban and small/rural colonies.

I think there should be a food production value, and this could be turned into its own research area (farming/genetic plant modification)

As a basic framework, a planet's food production is inversely proportional to size/population. You would be able to "designate" food production planets (slower population growth/impose a limit/less immigration?) If you want to get deeper, designate a percentage of Urban and Rural area. Urban areas could still produce food (indoor greenhouses, etc. - Coruscant in Star Wars didn't import EVERYTHING, but most)

This would also add a strategic value. Do you attack an opponent's center of commerce and technology, or destroy his farming worlds? A comparison would be - Do you bomb Wall Street, or do you set fire to the country's farms?

Oh, and crime should be a seperate corruption value for individual planets. I don't know how that would work, but I think it would be interesting and could be used for different things.

Large/Urban
+ Centers of Commerce
+ Established Defenses (More Troops, etc.)
+ Technology Centers (Where ships are mainly produced, etc.)
- Crime Value (Mini-corruption on a planetary basis)
- Would require a lot of food

Small/Rural
+ Powerful food producers
+ Guerilla Warfare (Ground battles take far longer to resolve, takes longer to bombard)
+ Less Crime (People know each other)
+ Self Sufficient
- Much less tax income
- Does not have the population required to produce large ships

Anyone can feel free to adjust these ideas or lists.
Fishman
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:56 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Fishman »

The way the Research bonus works for governments and races should be changed from being applied before the cap (worthless) to being applied after the cap, in the same way the Ruins bonus is applied (awesome). As it stands right now, all the research races, particularly the Quamenos, are basically shafted, as the Quamenos have absolutely no other real selling points beyond their massive research boost...which is entirely worthless since they cap the same as anyone else.
Drusek
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 1:03 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Drusek »

ORIGINAL: Fishman

The way the Research bonus works for governments and races should be changed from being applied before the cap (worthless) to being applied after the cap, in the same way the Ruins bonus is applied (awesome). As it stands right now, all the research races, particularly the Quamenos, are basically shafted, as the Quamenos have absolutely no other real selling points beyond their massive research boost...which is entirely worthless since they cap the same as anyone else.
Also those racial bonuses are also worthless compared to +600% from black hole...
Geroj
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 5:53 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Geroj »


quote:

ORIGINAL: Geroj

Escort, Colony ship, Exploration ship max 1 reactor

Are you joking? You can't even operate a hyperdrive on one reactor sometimes. The starting reactor is incapable of operating many starting hyperdrives and you NEED two reactors. Even in the end game, two reactors are needed just to operate the weapons!
Calm down man its just a suggestion and can be altered. I know that lowest tech hyperdrive cant go at max speed with just one lowest tech ractor. But it can do the job, just not at full warp speed. Sollution is to develop better reactor. But i dont know if the one best ractor can adequaly supply best hyperdrive at max speed because i was never so far in research. Colony and exploration ships doesnt need weapons... and escort well, its just escort and not main core batleship [:)]
P.S.: In WW2 they first develop .50 Browning AN/M2 and then they have desingned plane for effective use of it

quote:

ORIGINAL: Geroj

Capital ship, Resuply ship max 5 reactors

You jest, right? Even the smallest capital cruiser has at least 6 reactors just to power its weapons! Have you ever actually BUILT any of these ships?
As i mentioned above they can be also 6 or 7 but i am not the one to make decisions. Only developers can do it because they know how it will balance or imbalance the game. My point is that reactor limitations can force you to make fast and less powerfull ships or slow but very powerfull ships. I know that you dont want class limits by size or bonuses in material usage by creating certain class or attack/deffense bonuses for certain ship/bases like in SE V. This game i more strategicaly based and SE V is more tacticaly based where you can with right design and little practice win with one ship against ten or more if you dont run out of amunition [8D]. And i never build any capital ship because my destroyers/cruisers were powerfull as any other AI capital ship.
SiempreCiego
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 12:40 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by SiempreCiego »

ORIGINAL: OberonDark

Interesting's 1.04 economy thread inspired this idea.

You'll find a LOT of commerce in NYC and other big cities as compared to smaller cities. However, in DW, planets (cities) can eventually all grow to a massive size and then bring in that income. You don't see every small town turning into an NYC. The world would be insane. And it wouldn't be the positive money-flow you see in the game.

I propose that there should be advantages and disadvantages to large/urban and small/rural colonies.

I think there should be a food production value, and this could be turned into its own research area (farming/genetic plant modification)

As a basic framework, a planet's food production is inversely proportional to size/population. You would be able to "designate" food production planets (slower population growth/impose a limit/less immigration?) If you want to get deeper, designate a percentage of Urban and Rural area. Urban areas could still produce food (indoor greenhouses, etc. - Coruscant in Star Wars didn't import EVERYTHING, but most)

This would also add a strategic value. Do you attack an opponent's center of commerce and technology, or destroy his farming worlds? A comparison would be - Do you bomb Wall Street, or do you set fire to the country's farms?

Oh, and crime should be a seperate corruption value for individual planets. I don't know how that would work, but I think it would be interesting and could be used for different things.

Large/Urban
+ Centers of Commerce
+ Established Defenses (More Troops, etc.)
+ Technology Centers (Where ships are mainly produced, etc.)
- Crime Value (Mini-corruption on a planetary basis)
- Would require a lot of food

Small/Rural
+ Powerful food producers
+ Guerilla Warfare (Ground battles take far longer to resolve, takes longer to bombard)
+ Less Crime (People know each other)
+ Self Sufficient
- Much less tax income
- Does not have the population required to produce large ships

Anyone can feel free to adjust these ideas or lists.

although i see where your going with this, I personally don't like the idea. You can't compare a planet to a city. Each world would want to develop/grow as much as possible. Also there is no reason why high pop worlds could not be food exporters.

Interestingly to give a real world example:

The Dutch rank third worldwide in value of agricultural exports, behind the United States and France, with exports earning $55 billion annually. A significant portion of Dutch agricultural exports are derived from fresh-cut plants, flowers, and bulbs, with the Netherlands exporting two-thirds of the world's total. The Netherlands also exports a quarter of all world tomatoes, and one-third of the world's exports of chilis and cucumbers.

The Netherlands is the 25th most densely populated country in the world, with 395 inhabitants per square kilometre (1,023 sq mi)—or 484 people per square kilometre (1,254/sq mi) if only the land area is counted.

User avatar
jscott991
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:45 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by jscott991 »

The game needs to run faster.

It needs to initially load faster.

Menus need to pop up quicker.

I'm running this on an extremely high end machine and it's performance is simply unacceptable. I'm using an i7 920 (2.66 Mhz) processor, NVidia 295, and have 12 GB of RAM, and the game is still slow. I frankly don't understand how most people are playing it.

And on my laptop (i7 720 QM, 1.6 Mhz, 8 GB of RAM, ATI Mobile 5870), it is even slower, taking 2-3 minutes just to initially load (perhaps longer).
Sliverine
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:10 am

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Sliverine »

u should overclock your processor. The base i7 920 is slow and the dynamic turbo-boosting doesnt seem to add much. I overclock my 920 to run at 4ghz at all times and i have almost similar stats to your machine and the only time i have ever experienced any sort of lag was when i was playing a 1000 star system game and almost the entire galaxy was revealed to me by that point of time. The amt of ships flying all over the screen was horrendous and by that time, i had so many ships that simply opening the ships & bases screen took me 2 seconds where it once opened instantly. For a high end machine to have a 2 sec lag wld mean a lag of over 10 secs on a lower end machine
If my lawn were emo, it would mow itself
Druthlen
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 2:05 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Druthlen »

Wow this post is getting huge. Can we delete it and recreate it with a new condensed master wish list in one post with bullet points for easy reading.
User avatar
jscott991
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:45 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by jscott991 »

ORIGINAL: Sliverine

u should overclock your processor. The base i7 920 is slow and the dynamic turbo-boosting doesnt seem to add much. I overclock my 920 to run at 4ghz at all times and i have almost similar stats to your machine and the only time i have ever experienced any sort of lag was when i was playing a 1000 star system game and almost the entire galaxy was revealed to me by that point of time. The amt of ships flying all over the screen was horrendous and by that time, i had so many ships that simply opening the ships & bases screen took me 2 seconds where it once opened instantly. For a high end machine to have a 2 sec lag wld mean a lag of over 10 secs on a lower end machine

The base i7 is much faster than older processors. You shouldn't have to overclock an i7 machine to run a game like this.
SiempreCiego
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 12:40 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by SiempreCiego »

Rhade18
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:50 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Rhade18 »

I have problems with diplomacy and i dont really know how to resolve it:)) Sometimes i find my ships in a system that belongs to an empire that isnt very friendly and who decides to attack my ships. Usually i avoid this type of conflicts and run away but now i see that they attack me even in my solar systems or systems that i share with other empires. I cant avoid conflicts there and they keep comming and comming. The game needs some changes at reputation..like if they attack me first i shouldnt get hated if i destroy the ship.
+ it would be great if the game could have the option to put restrictions on certain solar systems so the players ships cant go there if they are on automate.
User avatar
jscott991
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:45 pm

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by jscott991 »

Oh, one more thing.

Please give the option to NOT start with your homeworld as a moon.

I've started four straight games now and ended up as a moon every time.

I'm not sure whether this has any actual effect on my starting position, but it's quite annoying to me.
User avatar
Igard
Posts: 2282
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:43 am
Location: Scotland

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Igard »

@jscott991 Moons are superb starting positions when it orbits a gas giant with plenty resources.

One tiny suggestion. When in the expansion planner, After selecting a colony/construction ship to go to a selected planet, the menu scroll bar jumps back to the top. Could we have this stay where the last selected planet is? It just makes it easier when looking for another colony/resource to exploit.

Matman
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 2:07 am

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Matman »

ORIGINAL: Druthlen

Wow this post is getting huge. Can we delete it and recreate it with a new condensed master wish list in one post with bullet points for easy reading.

How about creating a new topic so that we can can make a single suggestion/idea as a thread which can be discussed and once that idea/suggestion has been added to the game (or not) then the admin can lock the thread.
Sliverine
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:10 am

RE: Master Wishlist Thread

Post by Sliverine »

there is already a condensed wishlist which i put up. I wouldnt dare say it is very in-depth or that it encompasses everyone's wish in it but i believe i caught most of the more important points floating about :)
If my lawn were emo, it would mow itself
Post Reply

Return to “Distant Worlds 1 Series”