Total research vs actual output?

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

Liquid5n0w
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:35 am

Total research vs actual output?

Post by Liquid5n0w »

So I've built a ton of research bases, but I seem to not be getting any effect from them, why is this? Can you only have 1 base per planet?

My research page says I have total output of almost 1mil in weapons, but actual output of 350k, whats going on here?
Spacecadet
Posts: 1784
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 5:52 pm

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Spacecadet »

You have two research lines.

The upper line the current research you can support based on the number and type of research labs (actual capacity).
The bottom line is what your are actually generating based on development and bonuses (current potential).

You want the upper line to be greater in order to benefit from what you are generating - (actual capacity) > (current potential).

CPU: Intel 2700K
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: GTX 970
OS: Windows 7 (64 bit)
Res: 1920 x 1200


Liquid5n0w
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:35 am

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Liquid5n0w »

I don't think you are understanding me, my actual output is lower then my total capacity. A lot lower, it's one third the size. This means most of my capacity isn't being used. What gives?
caerr
Posts: 113
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:40 pm

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by caerr »

Can you post a screenshot of your research screen?
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Shark7 »

I believe there is a mechanism in the game mechanics to help limit research so the player can't get too far ahead of the AI (basically, its a balancing mechanism).
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
Spacecadet
Posts: 1784
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 5:52 pm

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Spacecadet »

Ah, research capacity grows over time with development.

The total of the three disciplines should add up to the number on the right middle - Empire Research or something like that.


CPU: Intel 2700K
RAM: 16 GB
GPU: GTX 970
OS: Windows 7 (64 bit)
Res: 1920 x 1200


User avatar
lordxorn
Posts: 768
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:18 am

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by lordxorn »

The Actual Research is based on your Strategic Value, which will grow as that does. However it will hit a limit where further research will be severly limited to control people like you. [:D]

This is explained in the galactopaedia.
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: lordxorn

The Actual Research is based on your Strategic Value, which will grow as that does. However it will hit a limit where further research will be severly limited to control people like you. [:D]

This is explained in the galactopaedia.

Just think of it in these terms...all those fat government grants...the researchers start skimming from the funds...next thing you know... [;)]
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Nibelung44
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 4:24 am

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Nibelung44 »

Although this limit is reached so fast that the extra bonus from special locations is rather useless I find. I prefer to stick 2-3 research bases on my home planet (they are cheap) and have my research maxxed in a secure way than disperse the stations in the space.
Litjan
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:16 am
Location: Butzbach, Germany

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Litjan »

I think we all agree that the system with the research cap and the way research in general is generated is very basic and boring from a gameplay perspective. The way it is displayed in the UI is not clear at all and could be improved by a few simple words.

Everyone who understands the display of "potential" and "actual research" just got used to this - it is absolutely not clear to a new user and could be explained by just adding two short sentences to that screen. I.e.&nbsp;&nbsp; "<--- this is your actual research points generated". And "<--- this is the maximum points you could generate". Well, maybe even relieve the user of the need to pull out the calculator and add all those actual points together. I will go totally wild and even suggest to have the programm form the DIFFERENCE between actual and potential points for us and display that&nbsp;[X(]&nbsp;[X(] . After all, this is a computer game, computers are really good at adding numbers!

Creating research points is just a chore of clicking to build a few bases, there is really no strategic decisions needed. Just ad a couple researchstations to your homeworld - the are built really fast, cost little maintenance and if they get killed at your homeworld the game is lost for you anyway.

I know there are fancy "research locations" all over, but it is hardly worth the effort to build a station there. Even the default labs in the spaceports will create more than enough research-points in almost all games. You can potentially save maintenance costs by using those multipliers, but then you have to manually mod the labs out of the spaceports first (otherwise you will have too many points, anyway). And the "autodesign" will just add them in again for the next iteration of spaceports, anyway.[:'(]

There are several ways I can think of to make this more "interesting" and somewhat "exciting", but I am sure the wishlist-thread is full of ideas and I am also sure Elliot is aware of the rudimentary nature of the researchsystem and will improve upon this in future updates.

User avatar
ASHBERY76
Posts: 2080
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2001 8:00 am
Location: England

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by ASHBERY76 »

I like the capped research system and the fact you do not have to spam a zillion spacestations ala GC2 thank you very much.One can also change the cost of tech and make it much more expensive too.
forsaken1111
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 6:30 am

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by forsaken1111 »

ORIGINAL: Litjan

I think we all agree that the system with the research cap and the way research in general is generated is very basic and boring from a gameplay perspective. The way it is displayed in the UI is not clear at all and could be improved by a few simple words.

Don't speak for me, I like the research system as it is.
User avatar
the1sean
Posts: 854
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 11:04 pm
Location: Texas, USA

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by the1sean »

ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76

I like the capped research system and the fact you do not have to spam a zillion spacestations ala GC2 thank you very much.One can also change the cost of tech and make it much more expensive too.

I agree, the capped research system makes sure that large empires dont get totally out of control compared to smaller ones, a big problem in tons of 4X's. Also, the idea that the screen need more labels is pretty moot since the game features an awesome Galactopedia that explains things pretty dang clearly. However, I dont mind answering questions when people get stumped [;)]

ORIGINAL: Litjan

I think we all agree that the system with the research cap and the way research in general is generated is very basic and boring from a gameplay perspective. The way it is displayed in the UI is not clear at all and could be improved by a few simple words.

I respectfully disagree. The new research system is light years ahead of the Vanilla DW one, and different in a few simple but important ways:

About the Research Locations, everyone seems to miss the fact that the bonus from those locations INCREASES YOUR RESEARCH AFTER THE TECH CAP. So effectively you get more research beyond your empire's normal cap in exchange for good map control. So any player who wants to max out research should definitely be controlling these points, and by the way they stack, so a +15% weapons location and a +25% weapons location will net you +40% research bonus, that is applied AFTER the math is done to determine your empire's research cap in that area. Racial and Government bonuses to research work the same way as well if i remember correctly.

So the new research location system rewards map control by giving empires that control them a tech research boost that exceeds their normal research capacity. Simple but effective. I find those locations to be hot points of contention in my games...
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: forsaken1111

ORIGINAL: Litjan

I think we all agree that the system with the research cap and the way research in general is generated is very basic and boring from a gameplay perspective. The way it is displayed in the UI is not clear at all and could be improved by a few simple words.

Don't speak for me, I like the research system as it is.

+1 I love the research system just as it is now.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: the1sean

ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76

I like the capped research system and the fact you do not have to spam a zillion spacestations ala GC2 thank you very much.One can also change the cost of tech and make it much more expensive too.

I agree, the capped research system makes sure that large empires dont get totally out of control compared to smaller ones, a big problem in tons of 4X's. Also, the idea that the screen need more labels is pretty moot since the game features an awesome Galactopedia that explains things pretty dang clearly. However, I dont mind answering questions when people get stumped [;)]

ORIGINAL: Litjan

I think we all agree that the system with the research cap and the way research in general is generated is very basic and boring from a gameplay perspective. The way it is displayed in the UI is not clear at all and could be improved by a few simple words.

I respectfully disagree. The new research system is light years ahead of the Vanilla DW one, and different in a few simple but important ways:

About the Research Locations, everyone seems to miss the fact that the bonus from those locations INCREASES YOUR RESEARCH AFTER THE TECH CAP. So effectively you get more research beyond your empire's normal cap in exchange for good map control. So any player who wants to max out research should definitely be controlling these points, and by the way they stack, so a +15% weapons location and a +25% weapons location will net you +40% research bonus, that is applied AFTER the math is done to determine your empire's research cap in that area. Racial and Government bonuses to research work the same way as well if i remember correctly.

So the new research location system rewards map control by giving empires that control them a tech research boost that exceeds their normal research capacity. Simple but effective. I find those locations to be hot points of contention in my games...

Another thing people miss about the research as it is...it also affects the trade screen because the cost of research can be heavily adjusted.

I play with research set to max cost (999k):

- No discovery, no matter how big he bonus is, results in an instant new tech.
- Trade costs for the base level items to trade is ~999,000 credits. The higher level tech was running into the hundreds of millions (ie 767,348,262)...
- Because of the costs, it is all but impossible to buy the techs, you have to give the AI some of your tech to get theirs, going a long way to balance and keep me from dominating.
- Research is slow enough that you actually have to use the new tech before the next breakthrough.

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
lordxorn
Posts: 768
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:18 am

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by lordxorn »

Maybe the planetary research stations on the planet should be very limited, that way the player should be rewarded for going out there and building dangerous research stations next to a black hole. (I mean how far have research labs gotten us here on Earth, we are not even close to what Back to the Future thought we would be at).

I liked the old system because it was always the best to design a research station with 9 labs of each field and deploy near a black hole. This was usually all your needed.
PaulP
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:28 pm

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by PaulP »

I think the research system is quite clear and works fine. I like it.
&nbsp;
And the bonuses are applied above and beyond your cap, so they are very useful. In my most recent game I have a site that gives +100% energy research. My total output of energy research is more than my entire empire potential due to it.
User avatar
Nibelung44
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 4:24 am

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Nibelung44 »

Great, did not knew the bonus was after the cap!&nbsp;[:)]
Sithuk
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 4:18 pm

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by Sithuk »

Nibel: I hadn't twigged that the bonus' were after the cap either. That'll certainly change the way I view those locations. I'm going to to max the research cost too, I like a more epic, slower paced game.
User avatar
the1sean
Posts: 854
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 11:04 pm
Location: Texas, USA

RE: Total research vs actual output?

Post by the1sean »

I like to play with 100k as the base tech cost, personally. Optionally I go for 250k for a long game. I like rounder numbers [:D]
Post Reply

Return to “Distant Worlds 1 Series”