unhappiness - at war with race of colony

[Kayoz]

Woody -

I didn't have any problem of this sort before - it seems to be a recent change.

[Wonder Dog]

I think its the change introduced with the 1.502 beta for Troops and Invasions

Increased colony unhappiness factor 'At War With Our Race' so that invading and taking over a large world of an enemy is now more likely to result in a rebelling population

Colony rebellions now raise more militia troops, especially when at war with the dominant race of the colony

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: Wonder Dog

I think its the change introduced with the 1.502 beta for Troops and Invasions

Increased colony unhappiness factor 'At War With Our Race' so that invading and taking over a large world of an enemy is now more likely to result in a rebelling population

Colony rebellions now raise more militia troops, especially when at war with the dominant race of the colony

Aah, thanks - I poked around for the patch notes, but didn't see it.

Hrm - well, in that case thy created another problem. It's not just large worlds being taken over that are rebelling - everything is rebelling. Small colonies far away from the front, to freshly invaded worlds. Oh brilliant.

Result of their change:
Use any race other than your own for colonization, you're sc*ewed if you go to war with that race. Any new colony - gone. Any old colony - probably in rebellion as well. Oh, and to make it more fun, you're FORCED to micro-manage your colonization - or else the automation will happily use those populations in colonization if it can.

And to make matters even MORE fun, you have to go through your planets ONE BY ONE to figure out WHICH ONES aren't your own race - since there's NO way of sorting by race.

Great. Just great. Did they actually think this through and test it before implementing this change? Or did they just kludge it into the code?

[gmot]

Well 1.502 beta is a beta, so I'm sure the devs would like your feedback - without sarcasm I'm sure - on this issue if you feel it needs adjustment.

[ehsumrell1]

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

Great. Just great. Did they actually think this through and test it before implementing this change? Or did they just kludge it into the code?

I can relate to your frustrations Kayoz, but let me respond.

Understand that it must be a VERY tough position that Elliot takes to listen to the myriad
of FANTASTIC ideas and comments about the game and its gameplay. Especially those mirrored
in the two wishlists and from us testers. Remember the saying that "the needs of the many
outweigh the needs of the few....or the one"? It applies here.

My opinion is that Matrix, Codeforce, Elliot, Erik, and the beta test team (which I'm a proud
member of, amid the flak and flame we get at times) are doing the best possible to please as
many facets as we can. Unfortunately though, there are times that when adding a new, requested
nuance to the game code, it unknowingly tweaks or breaks something else. Usually, the thing
that breaks or tweaks has been well tested and found to function correctly beforehand. But when
it's overlooked and found by hundreds or more of players, then something (or someone) gets flamed
instead of understanding.

I'm TOTALLY happy with this game. Whether I was elected to be a tester or not has nothing to
do with it either. I've been involved with space games since the original StarFlight! Been though
the whole space 4x Hall of Fame. StarFlight II, STARS, Ascendancy, Star Wars: Rebellion, BOTF,
Master Of Orion series, Space Empires, Imperium Galactica II, GalCiv 2 and others. I'm not self-
proclaiming myself as an expert, but I will close my ranting by saying this.

DISTANT WORLDS ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
....and we're STILL working hard to make it BETTER!

Note: To Elliot, Erik and my fellow testers and modders alike, sometimes after reading the forums
and sensing a lack of appreciation, you just have to 'vent'! Thanks for the platform for us all!

[&o]

[J HG T]

We concur ehsumrell1. Well spoken.
I'm quite damn happy with DW (Definetly in my all-time top 10, even top 5) at the moment and I've never been much into nitpicking. DW still has its problems but so does pretty much every other game in the world. In case of DW, and similar games, it would be wise to remember that it's quite complex game so its testing and balancing is complicated and takes time.

Sorry for yet again derailing topic and praising DW. [8|]

 
 

[elanaahova]

Yes, I, too, am happy with DW. No game is perfect. I wish DW had the 3-D environment of SotS. I wish DW had more variety in specials on planets. I wish there were many more 'unique' things out there in the big space, weird encounters, perils,etc. But one can't have everything! My suggestion, in light of ehsumrell1's (and others) valid comments is this: more custom-ability.

By this I mean, when the code people add new code to introduce a 'new' feature to the game, make that new feature an option. Allow players to check a box, on creation, to indicate if they wish to implement the new feature, or wish to leave it out. That way, players who strongly dislike the results of the new feature, like the massive rebellions when at war, no way to sort by species when planning colonizing, etc., can opt to not implement that 'new' feature when starting a new game of DW.

I'm a big proponent of maximizing customizing game environment upon creation of the playing environment.

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: ehsumrell1

I can relate to your frustrations Kayoz, but let me respond.

Understand that it must be a VERY tough position that Elliot takes to listen to the myriad
of FANTASTIC ideas and comments about the game and its gameplay. Especially those mirrored
in the two wishlists and from us testers. Remember the saying that "the needs of the many
outweigh the needs of the few....or the one"? It applies here.

I disagree that Elliot has to weigh a myriad of "fantastic" ideas. Most are total rubbish - they're poorly thought through and create more problems than they fix. Sorting through the dross for the gems is Elliot's job - it's time consuming, thankless and tedious - but it's his job. I don't b*tch about my job - if I don't like it, I'm at liberty to quit and move on.

Game design is a juggling act - that's the joy and pain of the art. It's inevitable that attempting to balance one thing will upset another. I haven't seen any games free of this problem.

My problem with CodeForce, is the fact that they're implementing changes without any ability to turn them on or off. A simple registry key for example, to turn the adjusted happiness rates on or off - would allow people to test the change in isolation. That's how I usually implemented changes which I didn't have sufficient time to test, but clients asked for - that way, if they're happy with it, they leave it on and continue using it. And if not, they turn it off and still benefit from the other code fixes. But here we're dealing with 1.502 which addresses critical flaws - and it's an "all or nothing" deal - you get ALL the changes, or you roll back to an earlier version - which may or may not be playable.

Put simply - if you don't have time to QA a change - then make sure you have a switch so people can disable the change. That's how MOST companies work.

As for the beta testing team - well, CodeForce is not following industry standards. Beta testers aren't "elected" anywhere I've seen. It's not a popularity contest - it's a question of whether or not the applicants have the necessary skill sets. This is the first time I've ever seen the online popularity of an individual being a factor in their presence or absence from a test team. I'm mystified why testers are elected. I've never ever seen it done this way.

ORIGINAL: ehsumrell1

Unfortunately though, there are times that when adding a new, requested
nuance to the game code, it unknowingly tweaks or breaks something else. Usually, the thing
that breaks or tweaks has been well tested and found to function correctly beforehand. But when
it's overlooked and found by hundreds or more of players, then something (or someone) gets flamed
instead of understanding.

If I'm flaming something, it's their QA process and lack of flexibility in implementing changes. How hard would it be to recompile and repackage - one with bug-fixes and another which has balance changes? Hrm - change the DLLs in the Orca database - five minutes?

It's not what they've DONE that I'm annoyed with. It's HOW it's done. Their PROCESS is flawed.

ORIGINAL: ehsumrell1

I'm TOTALLY happy with this game. Whether I was elected to be a tester or not has nothing to
do with it either. I've been involved with space games since the original StarFlight! Been though
the whole space 4x Hall of Fame. StarFlight II, STARS, Ascendancy, Star Wars: Rebellion, BOTF,
Master Of Orion series, Space Empires, Imperium Galactica II, GalCiv 2 and others.

I think you have to exclude MOO3 from the "Master of Orion series" - #3 wasn't a game. It was just Excel with a spiffy GUI.

You're misunderstanding me - DW is quite well done. Compared to other indie games, it's marvellously well done. Kudos to them. But a mistake is still a mistake. Cheering is well and good, but when they've made a mistake, it's all the more important to call it to their attention. What I see right now, is a problem with their QA process and hotfix release/implementation methodology. Fixing it will ease their workload in the long run and improve future development.

[elanaahova]

I agree with kayoz about making each significant 'change' to the game optional in that each user can elect to implement said change in their current galaxy set up, or not, via a check box in one of the set up screens. As I have written before: customization of games is a VERY important 'feature' than can, sometimes prevent an intended 'feature' becoming a 'bug' (for some users). Allow maximization customization easily through the set up screens.

[WoodMan]

Put simply - if you don't have time to QA a change - then make sure you have a switch so people can disable the change. That's how MOST companies work

.

I've never seen this implemented in any game I've ever played in my,life, that would be in the hundreds [&:]

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: WoodMan

Put simply - if you don't have time to QA a change - then make sure you have a switch so people can disable the change. That's how MOST companies work

.

I've never seen this implemented in any game I've ever played in my,life, that would be in the hundreds [&:]

You see it more at the dev and QA end of things. Or on the corporate end of things, where hotfixes are released to address specific client requirements.

[cmdrnarrain]

This problem has been around from the beginning.  The problem I have with it is that there is no way to stop it or even effectively manage it.

You don't have to take over independent colonies to make this a problem.  The alien colony just have to be near by for their population to start showing up on your worlds.  This is what I can not stand, the lack of a choice.   I can choose to invade, use a colony ship of another alien race, or to take over an independent colony, but the passive infiltration of aliens race can not be stopped except by distance.  Which sucks.

I do not have a problem with the penalties, because adding alien races to your empire has a lot of benefits.  What this game needs is the ability to control and manage it.   To manage it you should be able to sort by population type on the colony screen.  It should show the ratio of comparative numbers of each.  Ideally, you should be able to transfer aliens around your empire easily e.g. to make worlds entirely alien or dilute the theirs across your empire, etc.   Rebellions shouldn't just happen either, you should have time to do something about it.

There should be new tech, which reduces the impact of have multiple alien races.  The should also be new tech which reduces war weariness because there is point in this game where all that is left to do is to eliminate all of the other alien empires.   Whichs is almost impossible to do now.

Their are also way to many Trekies and Star Wars fans on this forum.  They need to keep their ideological bullcrap out this game because it isn't a Star Wars or Star Trek.  That is what modds are for after all.

[tofudog]

Humie customs officer1: "Excuse me, Sir, but this is a No-Boskarans allowed planet."
Boskaran settler: "Racist pink-face! I will sue your space-dictator for violating species rights!"
Humie customs officer2: "Seems he has a point, maybe we better let it go..."

3 weeks later the planet (by now populated with a sizable minority of 42 bosk´ns and 462000 bosk´n guns) seceded from the glorious stellar federation and joined the boskaran space empire.

...sh*t happens [:D]

[cmdrnarrain]

Well the good news is that this a game, which means fun so you don't have to worry about all of the PC crap.
 
I really do think the developers need to take a long hard look at the managment screens and make a number of improvements.

[elanaahova]

ORIGINAL: WoodMan

Put simply - if you don't have time to QA a change - then make sure you have a switch so people can disable the change. That's how MOST companies work

.

I've never seen this implemented in any game I've ever played in my,life, that would be in the hundreds [&:]

With all due respect... I have, they are usually called hot fixes.