Looks better, but...

[Menzoberranzan]

DW2 looks great, but it feels like the few advantages it has over DWU (or even DW without any expansions) are outclassed by all the short comings.

Praises:
Graphics are great.
64 bit support is awesome.
Ship hulls having size limits is great.

Criticisms:
Lack of ability to queue orders for ships (especially exploration ships).
Ships having hard points dedicated to specific systems is bad. (Just let me fill the available space with whatever I want).
Hiding information on the races and ships in non text files.

Overall, DW2 doesn't feel like an improvement but a step to the side and back.

[Buio]

DW2 is much better than original DW at release.

[Panpiper]

Ship hulls having size limits is great.

I absolutely loath ship size limits with a livid passion. It is an utter copout, a failure of imagination.

Leave the ship size completely free, but introduce a tech category maybe called "Ship Scaling" which increases the size of ship your empire can build easily. Ships bigger than this experience a logarithmic increase in cost the more they exceed your capacity and ships smaller than this receive a linear reduction in cost, all proportionate to the degree they differ.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Ship hulls having size limits is great.

I absolutely loath ship size limits with a livid passion. It is an utter copout, a failure of imagination.

Leave the ship size completely free, but introduce a tech category maybe called "Ship Scaling" which increases the size of ship your empire can build easily. Ships bigger than this experience a logarithmic increase in cost the more they exceed your capacity and ships smaller than this receive a linear reduction in cost, all proportionate to the degree they differ.

I completely disagree with this... in DWU there was ZERO reason to build ships smaller than max size of ANYTHING.

Complete freedom reduce the number of actual viable ship variations you can make.

The current way then smaller ships actually is interesting as they have different capabilities that larger ships don't. Constraint give us options to give ships different roles based on characteristics of the hull. It also is WAY more realistic that hulls put limits on what type of components you can put on them, that is realistic in a sense. Just being able to put anything into a hull that is extremely gamey and the current iteration is a better "simulation" in a sense.

You also still have scaling... you research bigger and bigger hulls as you go along. Nothing stop you from building five different types of battleships that all have different roles.

Hardpoints also is more fun as that give different species character and separate ways to approach the game in combat, that produce even more variation and re-playability.

[BTAxis]

I completely disagree with this... in DWU there was ZERO reason to build ships smaller than max size of ANYTHING.

Well, cost.

Also, gravity well range, if you use the Bacon mod.

[Jorgen_CAB]

DW2 looks great, but it feels like the few advantages it has over DWU (or even DW without any expansions) are outclassed by all the short comings.

Praises:
Graphics are great.
64 bit support is awesome.
Ship hulls having size limits is great.

Criticisms:
Lack of ability to queue orders for ships (especially exploration ships).
Ships having hard points dedicated to specific systems is bad. (Just let me fill the available space with whatever I want).
Hiding information on the races and ships in non text files.

Overall, DW2 doesn't feel like an improvement but a step to the side and back.

I agree with not able to queue orders... but not the other two... the ships is just an opinion and not a fact, and the races and ship are in plain XML files (can be opened in notepad) so not sure what you mean?

[Jorgen_CAB]

I completely disagree with this... in DWU there was ZERO reason to build ships smaller than max size of ANYTHING.

Well, cost.

Also, gravity well range, if you use the Bacon mod.

Bacon mod does not count as that is an exe mod and not Distant Worlds... the cost is a none factor as you never just use ONE tiny ship to do anything on its own anyway, that is not effective for anything anyway.

[BTAxis]

There are legitimate reasons for keeping ships as cheap as possible. Small defense fleets, sensor ships, constructors, etc. Just because you never do something doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

[Jorgen_CAB]

There are legitimate reasons for keeping ships as cheap as possible. Small defense fleets, sensor ships, constructors, etc. Just because you never do something doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

I'm was talking about combat ships when I say you want them as big as possible... of course you want a scout ships to be as small as possible to accomplish it's task. But that is true in this game as well so there is NO change there at all. As for civilian ships or constructors you just build them the same way all the time anyway so it does not really matter if they are unlimited anyway.

You always built your civilian ships as minimalistic as possible just as you do now... there is really not much of a change there. There really was no viable option how to build those ships.

I also don't understand why you would want to ever build a combat ships smaller than max size in DWU... you never had fleets with less than two ships anyway?!?

The only reason to build a ship small was if they operated alone for a specific function, such as a scout ship on its own.

[Retreat1970]

Again it's about player freedom. If I want a small and fast Escort I could do that. If I want a huge and slow Escort I could do that. If I want a minimal cargo ship I could do that. A large ultra-armored shielded cargo... you get the idea.

It's a single player game. Why anyone cares how I design ships is strange.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Again it's about player freedom. If I want a small and fast Escort I could do that. If I want a huge and slow Escort I could do that. If I want a minimal cargo ship I could do that. A large ultra-armored shielded cargo... you get the idea.

It's a single player game. Why anyone cares how I design ships is strange.

But you can do that in DW2 as well... you just have to use the Battleship hull type and give it the escort role.

The issue I had with DWU design was that it was gamey in the sense it make no sense to build a ship with pretty much just engines on them. Realistically hulls do have constraints in how you can use them... this also then ties into overall ship roles and the use of the hulls for different purposes and able to give them inert bonuses such as better speed etc..

Some hulls simply are more efficient for certain roles than others... you could not have that distinction in DWU... everything was the same.

I get that some people think that something is taken away from them... but in my opinion the new system is way more fun and interesting to work with all things considered. There also are rooms for improvements and added features to the system in the future.

[BTAxis]

But you can do that in DW2 as well... you just have to use the Battleship hull type and give it the escort role.

Sorry, that's not correct. The "close escort" fleet role determines where it is in a fleet formation. In the case of close escort, it's the center ring of the formation.

I don't actually know if the automation has different behaviors for different ship roles, because I never let my ships off the leash of the fleets, but I assume it does. DW1 did.

[Jorgen_CAB]

But you can do that in DW2 as well... you just have to use the Battleship hull type and give it the escort role.

Sorry, that's not correct. The "close escort" fleet role determines where it is in a fleet formation. In the case of close escort, it's the center ring of the formation.

I don't actually know if the automation has different behaviors for different ship roles, because I never let my ships off the leash of the fleets, but I assume it does. DW1 did.

The hull type has nothing to do with the ships role and automation... you can define that however you like.