(Does) This game need(s) more sanity checks ... !?

A military-oriented and sci-fi wargame, set on procedural planets with customizable factions and endless choices.

Moderator: Vic

Post Reply
User avatar
Arralen
Posts: 911
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 8:00 am

(Does) This game need(s) more sanity checks ... !?

Post by Arralen »

No, this is not about a dev who started such a project all on his own with no help, or all those players who devote way too many hours to playing it ... [;)]

IMHO the game needs some sanity checks (or more "sane" parameter limits) during planet generation, e.g. planets with >20% mountains are not really playable (especially with lots of AI units which ignore supply completely), or too much radiation for an early start etc.

Starting positions are problematic as well - with 2 mountains in every direction you won't go anywhere (soon), and (not much) later those supply-ignorant AI units will overrun you. Likewise, starting 2 major players within 12hexes from each other on a 175 wide map shouldnt be "needed".

Random events should also check for some parameters, having this pop up on turn 3 is ... useless and frustrating, especially with a tech3 start:
Image
Attachments
EventFreeJoin.jpg
EventFreeJoin.jpg (173.64 KiB) Viewed 321 times
AMD FX-4300
Gigabyte 970A-DS3P
Kingston 24GB DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800)
Asus GTX 750 Ti OC 2GB GDDR5
Kingston SV300 120 GB
Windows 8.1
GazBot
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2020 5:50 am

RE: (Does) This game need(s) more sanity checks ... !?

Post by GazBot »

Ovrrall this is a fantastic game. That been said, the overall gist of the above comments would make the game even better.

Top of my list would be the AI Logistics. As outlined above the ability of the AI to freely expand over geographic barriers is a big limitation. Prehaps a 1/2 way point to what currently exists - where their is some cost applied to the AI for traversing high and low mountains????

I guess this is still not an easy addition as it still basically requires some level of logistical planning coded into the AI...but it would make the AI Majors more realistic
Luckspeare
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 2:10 am

RE: (Does) This game need(s) more sanity checks ... !?

Post by Luckspeare »

I think an event that requires you to conquer another town almost always happens on turn 3 or 4... it has in all five games I've started. I thought it was a set thing? Re-running the turn repeatedly, I find that it can vary in location and can vary between a couple of different events, but the game is quite adamant that it wants you to do this overall category of thing.
User avatar
Arralen
Posts: 911
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: (Does) This game need(s) more sanity checks ... !?

Post by Arralen »

ORIGINAL: Luckspeare
I think an event that requires you to conquer another town almost always happens on turn 3 or 4... . ... , but the game is quite adamant that it wants you to do this overall category of thing.
I have no trouble with "scripted" events like that, but that script should take into account ("sanity check") which starting option the player chose:
There's IMHO a great difference between a tech-3/milita only and a tech-4/2-army start in the way those events play out - in the first case, most likely you have to ignore them (not enough troops/iP for roads to get there in time), in the 2nd case they might quite easy to do ...
AMD FX-4300
Gigabyte 970A-DS3P
Kingston 24GB DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800)
Asus GTX 750 Ti OC 2GB GDDR5
Kingston SV300 120 GB
Windows 8.1
Luckspeare
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 2:10 am

RE: (Does) This game need(s) more sanity checks ... !?

Post by Luckspeare »

Correction: it always happens on turn 2 for me.
Post Reply

Return to “Shadow Empire”