Distant Worlds:Updates,Expansions,and Sequels.Tell the company your wish list.

[Wade1000]

ORIGINAL: elliotg

ORIGINAL: Wade1000
-In those cases, would our reputation still lower if the civilian ships we destroy are of a "bad guy"/ low reputation race?
I remember that it was stated that if you planetary bombard a low reputation race then your own reputation would not lower as greatly; depending I suppose on how low the reputation is of the targeted race.

Yes, blowing up passenger ships will always lower your reputation - regardless of the empire they belong to.

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
2. Bombard them back to the stone age - the more traditional "exterminate". If you choose this option, you had better be fighting against the most evil and urgent threat the galaxy has ever faced, or everyone else in the galaxy is likely to start viewing _you_ as the most evil and urgent threat the galaxy has ever faced. Typically, no other race in the galaxy likes to see planets being bombarded to rubble and will react accordingly lest the same fate befall their own worlds. Now if you really happen to be fighting an alien race that really has behaved in a way that makes everyone else in the galaxy hate them and consider them evil, you've got a much freer hand in how you deal with the problem.

Regards,

- Erik

tm.asp?m=2402878&mpage=2&key=planetary%2Cbombardment? (from thread: A few screenshots... )

-It is odd that the factors of planetary bombardment affecting reputation are not the same as the factors affecting civilian ship destruction. If there is an ultimate "evil"/"bad guy"/low reputaion/ race(that maybe consumes or mass kills other people any chance they get) then I can planetary bombard them and my reputation is safe. Yet, if I destroy their civilian ships that are supporting their "evil" planets then my reputation gets lowered...odd. [&:]...[8|]
I can see this issue arrising much throughout the future of posts after release. I think it will be wanted by many to be addressed in an update.
-----

If the "big evil" race civilian ships I destroy are like any of the following then my reputation should not be lowered with other races similiar to me.

Borg-like, Zerg-like(Starcraft), Flood-like(Halo), Tyranid-like(Warhammer 40,000), any various races like spiders,insects, or others similiar that are extremly different and hostile to us(like they eat us or do genocide against us), maybe like the Wraith of Stargate Atlantis, any robotic race that are extremly different and hostile to us(like they do genocide gainst us): maybe like Terminators and their Skynet AI leader, like Replicators of Stargate-SG1 TV series, and like Necrons of Warhammer 40,000.

Think of all the science fiction you know off involving those extremely different types of "evil" races. I think most of those stories involving total war includes destroying civilian ships with no resulting reputation loss.

Civilian ships of a "big evil" race that I destroy should be considered as a legitimate target in a total war. Other races similiar to mine should agree.
Civilian ships are large part of a space civilization economy that is supporting the military you are fighting; as are the planets.
Civilian ships could be carrying factory workers, scientists, soldiers, supllies, etcetera. There could be a group of scientists(or some sort of mind)on a civilian ship that may be close to creating a super weapon against your civilization.

But yeah, civilian ships on historic, real life earth involving our one race, being targeted is generally viewed as bad.
tm.asp?m=2408957 (from thread: Specifically targetting private vessels?)
-----

To clarify, I agree in regards to if the targeted civilian/trade ships are of a high reputation race then that should lower your reputation. If the targeted civilian/trade ships are of a low reputation race then your own reputation should not lower, or it should lower very little.

Total war including civilian/trade ship destruction, planetary bombardment, and planetary genocide options, against low reputation races that are out to annihilate and commit TOTAL genocide upon your entire civilization and others should NOT lower your reputation; or it should lower very little.
tm.asp?m=2408957 (from thread: Specifically targetting private vessels?)
-----

I suppose it's just that many people feel that destroying civilian/trade ships in any situation against any type of enemy is dishonorable, even when other of attach like planetary bombardment is okay. Odd.
My points are just that planetary bombardment AND civilian/trade ship destruction should not lower your reputation if the target is a low reputation "bad guy" race."

"Your points should then also apply to planetary bombardment; which from how I understand it is okay with reputation if the target is a low reputation "bad guy" race. If that was the situation, those same types of civilians would likely be on the targeted planets also. But I disagree with your point because, again, it would be a "bad guy" low reputation race targeted.

Another, counter-point is that if the targeted race civilian/trade ships and planets are of a "bad guy" low reputation race then it might be unlikely that there would be other races friendly to us. If the targeted enemy DOES include a mixture of assimulated/integrated races then...they are now the enemy...helping to support the infrastructure building the military for the "bad guy" low reputation civilization."

"So, do you think planetary bombardment against a "bad guy" low reputation civilization should also lower your reputation; if that civilization is one race?; if that civilization is multiple races? If it IS multiple races then, well, it is still the enemy civilization supporting their military.
I say bombard those alien civilization "bad guy", low reputation planets if you have little troops transports availabe.
I say destoy those alien civilization, "bad guy", low reputation civilian/trade ships that are helping their economy to support their military.

I don't think that my reputation should have to suffer as a result."

"Reputation measurements involving alien race civilizations during total war while facing extinction from low reputation, ultimate "evil", alien civilizations might be quite different then historical reputation of Humans on earth. "
tm.asp?m=2410036 (from 'Politics')

[Gertjan]

I would suppose that your reputation loss is also affected by the reputation of the race's ships you destroy, like it is with planetary bombardment.

[Wade1000]

Regarding civilian ship destruction he said:

Yes, blowing up passenger ships will always lower your reputation - regardless of the empire they belong to.

Yet, regarding planetary bombardment he said:

...If you choose this option, you had better be fighting against the most evil and urgent threat the galaxy has ever faced, or everyone else in the galaxy is likely to start viewing _you_ as the most evil and urgent threat the galaxy has ever faced....
Now if you really happen to be fighting an alien race that really has behaved in a way that makes everyone else in the galaxy hate them and consider them evil, you've got a much freer hand in how you deal with the problem.

[Webbco]

Just a total stab in the dark, maybe ships like passenger ships and trade ships bring some sort of benefit to other empires? E.g. Inter-planetary traders visit colonies of other empires to generate income, so all empires will be affected if you destroy a trade ship...even from the "most evil and urgent threat the galaxy has ever faced".

[Webbco]

Wade, why did you post this EXACT same question on a different thread, thus creating duplicate discussions/answers?

[Wade1000]

If the targeted civilian (or even trade ships) are of the race that is the "most evil and urgent threat the galaxy has ever faced" It should be unlikely that races similiar to mine would be trading with them.

Again, I like to imagine such races as types like these:
Borg-like, Zerg-like(Starcraft), Flood-like(Halo), Tyranid-like(Warhammer 40,000), any various races like spiders,insects, or others similiar that are extremly different and hostile to us(like they eat us or do genocide against us), maybe like the Wraith of Stargate Atlantis, any robotic race that are extremly different and hostile to us(like they do genocide gainst us): maybe like Terminators and their Skynet AI leader, like Replicators of Stargate-SG1 TV series, and like Necrons of Warhammer 40,000.

[Wade1000]

ORIGINAL: Webbco

Wade, why did you post this EXACT same question on a different thread, thus creating duplicate discussions/answers?

The issue came up on that other thread. That's why I put a link to it from here also. I moved my "wish" to this relevant wish list thread. I wasn't expecting debating it here, as this is a wish list thread. I though further disscussion on it might continue on the other thread.

I have done the same thing with some other wishes that I placed in this thread that originated from disscusion in other threads. To consolodate wishes to here.

But it doesn't matter to me. I don't get very concerned over how people decide to post.

[Wade1000]

ORIGINAL: frugaldude

[align=left] [/align][left]I have no idea of what to expect the political game mechanics will be so this is purely hypothetical. The subject at hand is different ramifications of planetary bombardment vs. attacking civilian ships of a given empire. I hope it will depend on a number of factors and affect each empire in varying degrees and weighted appropriately.[/left][left]
[/left][align=left] [/align][left]Each of the AI empires should be weighing these questions among others:[/left][align=left] [/align][left]Do I know the existence of the warring parties?[/left][align=left] [/align][left]Do I trade with either of the factions?[/left][align=left] [/align][left]What commodities are affected on the planet attacked and does the trade interruption affect me?[/left][align=left] [/align][left]How far away from my borders is the transgression?[/left][align=left] [/align][left]Did the aggressor in the action start the war?[/left][align=left] [/align][left]How many commodities are affecting me by the attack of civilian transport?[/left][align=left] [/align][left]

[/left][align=left] [/align][left]These are just a few variables off the top of my head. Remember this is just a post to pass the time as we wait for the release. I am in no way suggesting this is how these game mechanics will or should function. I am anxious to see how the developer has approached this.[/left]

-----

ORIGINAL:  frugaldude
Did the aggressor in the action start the war?

-This one would be okay if an act of sabotage against me leading to me declaring war does not lower my reputation. Declarations of war are not always from an aggressor.
I suppose I'm hoping is that an act of sabotage can considered as a primary-war declaration...if it leads to a regular war declaration from the sabotage victim.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2410036 (from 'Politics')
-----

ORIGINAL: Joram
Are there more ways to control fleeing behaviour besides the few shown? For example, what if I didn't want shields to save on energy but had a large amount of armor. Could I tell it to flee if my armor reached a certain level of damage?

-That would be a good element.
tm.asp?m=2411040&mpage=1&key=&#2411469 (from 'Ship Design AAR')

[Wade1000]

Resource quantity or Abundance percentage slowly refilling(like a bombarded planet quality).

If I understand the system correctly, maybe this could be an interesting mechanic to enable.

Perhaps you can make the quantity of a resource at a mining site slowly replenish like a bombarded planet does, instead of having the resource quantity reset back to full.

This might help balance late game by giving less advanced empires a chance against empires that have mined much resources. Resources would still be unlimited in game but slowly refill or stay evenas mining continues.

Alternately, maybe each time the quantity gets to zero and resets then the Abundance percentage drops 1 percentage. When the Abundance percentages reache 0 they slowly refill or stay even as mining continues.
-----

ORIGINAL: elliotg

ORIGINAL: lancer
A specific resource has starting amount and abundance percentage, eg. Caslon 622k, 74%

1: I get the amount but how is the abundance percentage calculated? Eg. is, say 1000k, the standard 100% datum point for all resources? This doesn't seem to be the case as some resources have, say, a 64% abundance with a different quantity to another resource with the same 64%.

Amount means how many units are left at the planet. Abundance essentially means how easy is it to extract - higher abundance means faster extraction.

2: The resource extraction tech's specify, for example, 'extraction 14'. Am I correct that this mines 14 units of the resource per day and this in turn decrements the resource quantity by a similiar amount? How does this affect the abundance percentage?

Yes, but the amount actually extracted is a combination of the mining component tech level and the abundance. So if the abundance was 100% then you would get 14 units per second.

3: The Galactopedia (great job there by the way) specifies that resources rarely run out and that they top up when depleted. I haven't played enough to see this in action but how does this work as I can't see what the point is of having quantity & abundance stat's for every resource deposit if they are essentially unlimited?

I agree - amount doesn't mean a great deal. In the past resources didn't top-up, but that caused issues with resource shortages, so we changed it. So amount is not especially relevant now.

But abundance affects how fast you extract the resource - so the higher the better.

tm.asp?m=2414322&mpage=1&key=? ( from: 'Question-Resources')

[Sammual]

Resources

Each time the quantity gets to zero and resets then the Abundance percentage drops 1 percentage. When the Abundance percentage reaches 0 they very slowly refill.

^
||

That sounds good to me. Over time it gets harder and harder to mine the resources.

Sammual

[Wade1000]

quote]ORIGINAL: Wade1000

ORIGINAL: EisenHammer

Wade1000 you're probably right. but as far as I know, cats like to kill rodents. so they should probably not be classify with them. It just doesn't sound right.

On Earth, each race "Family" of the game has predatory versions that like to kill others types in its "Family".
"Rodent" was the only viable "Family" option to change "Feline" to.

So now there are:
Amphibian: 3 races
Rodent: 3 races
Humanoid: 3 races
Ursidian: 3 races
Insectoid: 4 races
Reptilian: 4 races

Heh. Besides, other than the Zenox previously stated as "Feline", NOW no where in the original race portrait characteristic does it state that the Zenox are cats or cat-like.
Their portrait art can even be imagined as more intelligent and/or predatory rodents. For those that want cats then they can be imagined as alien cats that have evolved to coesist peacefully with (other) rodents. Perhaps their "cats"(rodents) had a different source of prey other than rodents on the planet that they evolved on.

I like cats. I like dogs. I also like squirrels. The Zenox can be squirrels in my imagination. The Zenox also can be dogs. They resemble some dogs, like Terriers. They even resemble wolves.
One Zenox empire can be cats and another be squirrels and another be wolf/dogs...in one game.

The Zenox can be imagined as several types of Earthly animals: cats, squirrels, or even wolf/dogs...or even more.
The Keterov also can be imagined as several types of Earthly animals: bears, dogs, or even cats,...or even more.

We should remember that all of the races are alien.

The Distant World developers are brilliant with these game design elements.
-----

-Upon more thought, maybe there needs to be another race "Family" to group mammilian races that do not seem appropriate for Rodent Family and Ursidian Family. Maybe call the Family... Therians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theria
-----



[/quote]
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2414056 (from 'Chaos Cats in space. First impressions.')

[Univeraakh HG7]

And anyway where can i ask Matrix to release a expansion of DW where i can add new planet and star types?
Add them, not replacement of graphics

[Data]

You can put it on the modders wishlist.

[Malevolence]

Holy necro-post batman!

[WoodMan]

lol, he PM'd me saying he couldn't find the wishlist thread, I think he found the wrong one [:D]

Uni, here is the link to the thread you need man tm.asp?m=2418281

It's a stickied thread 42 pages long on the first page of the forum [;)]

[MadMcAl]

Well, the wishlist... let the war begin [:D].


But seriously, DW is a great game with an awesome potential, but like everything else, it has room for improvements.

There was a wish for options after conquest.

There I have a few:


1. The good old slow extermination (aka 'Work camps', 'Gulags', 'Concentration Camps' and so on...). Basically let them work them self to death for you. Obviously not the most friendly option, but still a little better than the food processor. Should give massive diplomatic flak.
2. The native reservations. Simply spoken, take over 80 - 90% of the usable surface (of course the choice bits) and force the surviving 'natives' into the rest. Let them fend for them self in there, just control for... nasty little surprises like uprisings. From the diplomatic point of view the best option. Hey, if they wanted to use 100% of their planet then they shouldn't have lost it. In the short view no problem from the diplomatic point of view. In the long run, a negative view adds up. Not the most stable thing.
3. Colonisation in the 19th century european context. More or less force your own morals, laws and social structures onto the natives, set up a few puppets on the local thrones, appoint the whole upper levels of the administration, give your own rich civilians the choice bits of industry, resources and what ever and let the 'natives' more or less in peace as long they bring you the riches of the planet and follow the laws you make.
4. Subjugation, force the 'natives' into a slave status. Use what ever means are necessary to do that (use of force, extortion or what ever). Not exactly something you should brag about in the neighborhood, and of course, watch out for Spartacus.
5. Long term 'breeding'. In the short term anything of the above, but in the long term (over the course of generations) you force the 'natives' to breed submissive tendencies, and what ever else you want in them. Obviously in DW only for reference, and just to demonstrate your evil ways.
6. Genetic engineering. Make the breeding instead over several generations happen in only one, maybe two generations. Not for the weak of the heart, and you should be able to withstand the disapproving glances of your fellow sophonts. But obviously the most effective way of dealing with this little problem...


I hope that these ideas are enough for the time being, as I can't think of any more (besides 'kill them all, let god find his own').

---

Now what I would want into the game is some sort of UNO for the galaxy (a bit similar to the galactic senate in MoO but not quite). This institution has no real authority or power (so being elected leader of it will not win the game for you, and has a more symbolic value) but it can be voted for resolutions, place sanctions onto an empire (for example economic sanctions that are, in effect a galaxy wide trade sanction, except of those empires that chose to ignore the resolution, with the risk of getting a sanction them self) and most important can vote for a mandate of war (simply said, if empire x is so evil that it pisses off enough of the rest than beginning of a war against said empire will not only not have any negative effect on the diplomatic side, but rather a positive, as you step up to enforce interstellar law) and, in extreme cases can vote an genocide resolution (meaning empire x is not only free to be fought against, but you can do everything against them, including using world destroyers with impunity, as everbody sees this empire as a blight that has to be exterminated with all means.

Such a institution would bring the diplomatic aspects of the game to a whole new level.

---

Another idea is to split the research we have now into theoretic science, applied science, engineering and design.

With the theoretic science your scientists lay the basics for everything. They predict that if you manage to bring an energy-field of type x with a strength of y you should break into hyper space. At this point the basics are there, but using it is still far away.

Applied science now searches for ways to generate said field x with a strength of y. Or in other words, they search for ways to break into hyper space.
Not every theoretical science breakthrough should be practical. And (to make this interesting) it should be randomly defined by creation of the galaxy witch of the 3 or 5 theoretical ways are usable.

Now this very first hyper space system is the size of a small space station, needs the energy that can only produced by reactors the size of another small space station and of course is highly unpredictable.

That is where engineering comes into the play. They take the 2 space stations and apply any trick they know to bring it into the size of a middle sized car, and device controls for it (to make it predictable) of the size of a small car. And have now an usable hyper drive.
With out a ship around it.
They can build a ship around it, but, well, it is expensive, not very practical, but it does what it hast to.
But every single ship build in this stage is a absolute unique ship.
Something like the whole prototype stages of the early jet planes.

That is where the design process comes into the play. The designers get the parts (like the hyper drive), they get specifications what the ship should do and how big is at best can be and so on... and a year later they give you the standard blueprints for your ship. With this blueprints every yard in your empire can build the ship.

Now how I see the 4 steps working ingame.

1. You fund the theoretical scientists, point them into the general direction you want (hyper drive, torpedo, beam weapon, ai and so on) and they deliver theories for you. Endlessly. Randomly.
2. Out of the theories you get you choose the one you set a number of your applied scientists on. They in turn try to find ways to use said theories and make them work somehow. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes not. Sometimes after you get a bit further in your tech, you get a message that with the new break through xyz the theory could indeed work, and you can decide to fund another stint in trying it. Until a theory is once and for all proofed wrong it vanishes from the list. When it it proofed right it is moved to another list. If so funded you can let your scientists work on a theory even after they made it work, to find another way to bring it to work. Another way that may be more effective. Or faster working. Or instead of unobtainium uses simply a platin-gold-alloy.
This will give you alternative lines for these weapons, like... well the hyper drive.
3. The engineers now come up with ideas how to combine these working theories into a working gadget. They take the hyper space distortion generator, the newly discovered super conductors, the quantum computer and a bit handwavium to present you with a working hyper drive.
They take the super conductors, the high gauss magnetic field projection, the ultralight radiation converter (developed to detoxify all these radioactive waste) and build you a fusion reactor.
They take the new remote controlled self mobile nano tool unit, the quantum computer, the artificial intelligence programming and you have a repair bot.

And most important, as long as you pay for them to work on it, they continuously work on it, make it more energy efficient, smaller, faster working, of give it a higher output, and generally making the toy better and better with time.

And while the theoretical scientists try to find new ideas (for example formulate the theory that if you pulse the hyper space distortion wave in a specific harmonic you should be able to reach higher 'hyper bands'), the applied scientists work on better and more efficient basic units, the engineers don't really develop new ideas, but combine ideas they get in new ways.

All in all this should bring the tech tree to an enormous and every time new level. You don't have a 'simple' and 'tried' way to develop, but you have always to start learning anew.

That brings me to the last part of the 4, the design.
The design is basically the ship/base designer.
The other 3 steps give you the parts, and with the design you can build your ships out of them.
If you want it really interesting then don't make the design process instantaneous and not without charge. 'Design' your ship in the designer (meaning forming the specifications) and then pay a team of designers to design the ship/base with these specs.
That should make for some interesting fluctuations, like, a ship is very good designed, you had luck with your design team. It is 2-3% cheaper in purchase and 5-10% cheaper in maintenance.
Or it is a bit smaller, and such a bit faster.
Or you can have a bit of bad luck, and the team was not able to make the specs. The ship is a bit more expensive, is a bit bigger, they couldn't bring all weapons into the design and so on.

---

Th next point on my personal wish list are military logistics.
Make every weapon except (area)pulse and beam weapons munition based.
Make the torpedo weapons quite a bit smaller, but give them a fixed size for every single shot. For example 50 shots have a size of 2 or 3, cost 50k and when they are shot they are shot. So you have to build ammo magazines into the design. 50 shots for a capital ship are not so much. You need for a bigger battle what, 1000? 5000? And of course you have to build them too. So you have to build munitions fabrication, munition supply depots and so on.
The supply ship becomes a whole new importance, as it carries the shots to the ships.
Maybe in the later tech levels make it possible for the supply ships to fabricate the munitions.
And in even later tech levels make it possible for the ships them self to fabricate the munitions. For that they could actually 'digest' the battle debris (not the repairable wrecks but the free floating debris) after the battle. Or require the needed raw materials from any station in the larger area.
'Press' civilian ships into short time service to bring the raw materials, or the finished munitions, to the fleet (obviously that is something said civilian won't really like). Enable empire controlled freighters that can be bought as fleet colliders. Make it possible for the supply ship to function as mining ship in a pinch.
That would totally shift the emphasis of the game to strategy, as you need the logistic pathways for your fleet to operate.
Make it necessary to have raw materials for repair bots to work.
That would mean you can't simply collect your cruisers and capital ships into 2 or 3 fleets and smash the enemy capital into submission, as you won't be able to sustain the battle without enabling the replenishment. So you have to work your way through the border systems. And you can't ignore the strong fleet base and go through the weak systems, as said fleet bases will be able to disrupt your logistics, and let your fleet run dry.
Of course this also will make the beam weapons much much stronger in the long run (while they only have 20% of the firepower for size-unit and/or credit they simply won't need anything else than energy. They don't need 60 to 300! size units for magazines. They don't need to have a freighter or 10 in the ships train to replenish the used shots).
But of course defensive units will emphasize the torpedo-weapons. So I need 5000 shots for my torpedo's? Well duh, dude, do you see this gigantic supply depot just outside of the enemies range? Or the dozen torpedo fabs? Do you really, really think I will run out or torpedo's? Better think again, and this time a bit harder.

That of course makes an attack much more... interesting, as your ships have to be able to run through the hyper deny zone, through the range of the enemies torps before you can make your first shot. And of course the enemy makes 5 times the damage per shot.
Can you spell big ouchie?

And if you now ad air, water and food... well, a major campaign will have to be much much better planned than ever before.

---

Well, that's for now. My other ideas need still a bit of detail work.
I hope the post was not to long.

[Hanekem]

One of the things I'd love to see in the game, not sure if it is a feature for legends, is a way to limit the civilian expansion. Most of the time I end up horribly overextended because my civies are busy at work, miners and what not, half way across the galaxy. Same goes with constructors building installation too far for me to really protect.

so what I suggest as a setting would be "build within X Lightyears of my borders" or even build within my borders only.
Because otherwise I start feeling the game more of a chore, where I am juggling an increasing number of pins, and probably the odd flaming chainsaw

[Data]

That is actually a great idea for an option that we could have in a game, you should wishlist this.

[WoodMan]

This thread should probably be locked, its been rezz'd from a year ago and now we have two competing wishlists [:D]

[Data]

I even forgot this used to be a wishlist, which is why I recomend to wishlist...in a wishlist. My head is going to explode [:)]