The Galaxy Lives On! Distant Worlds, the critically acclaimed 4X space strategy game is back with a brand new 64-bit engine, 3D graphics and a polished interface to begin an epic new Distant Worlds series with Distant Worlds 2. Distant Worlds 2 is a vast, pausable real-time 4X space strategy game. Experience the full depth and detail of turn-based strategy, but with the simplicity and ease of real-time, and on the scale of a massively-multiplayer online game.
For Asteroids, the amount of minerals shown on the tab is not correct. When we select one of the asteroid, the amount is different (see with the screenshot).
I didn't have this problem with planets, only with asteroids.
Thanks,
Have a nice day.
Capture d’écran 2022-03-14 132508.png (492.7 KiB) Viewed 455 times
If you're talking about mining station totals and individual asteroids, remember that the mining stations total up all available asteroids in range of the station. That's why the numbers look off.....
The screenshot posted saw what I mean. The numbers on top on the New Mining Location tab (for instance here : 23% and 25% for Asteroid BA33A) is different than for the reality (5% and 3%).
So the amount of resources that are indicated for each asteroid on the tab does not reflect the real thing. That'all
A new mining station will mine all asteroids in range of the mining station. The total list on top is that total. The individual asteroid is at the bottom. Hope this helps....GP
I'm really sorry, still didn't understand your answers. I think we do not talk of the same thing.
I didn't asked about mining stations (in fact, I didn't have any mining station in the Asteroid I'm talking about. The mining station is too far to mine it).
In the "new mining location" tab, the game show you all potential mining location. I use this tab a lot to check were I can build new mining station, and so, I use the "%" (the abundancy) indication to check wether the investment of a new mining station would be a good thing or not.
In this screen, the ressource abudancy value is not the same as the value that is indicated if we look at the asteroid. There is a mismatch between the 2 values.
Or there is something I didn't understand (but still, I think you are not talking about the same thing).
The mismatch is because of what I already stated. The new potential mining location is larger because it takes into account the nearby asteroids resources. That particular asteroid is just were the mining station is going to be located. It will then mine all asteroids in range, thus the total being larger in the upper part of your image....GP
