Can we have an "even distribution" game-start preference?

[mordachai]

Game after game I get this sort of distribution:

Lopsided Distribution.png (1.85 MiB) Viewed 639 times

I want a relatively even distribution of starting empires - not 2/3 or 3/4 empty. And since the game editor won't allow a new empire to be formed in the waste, this lopsidedness is unfixable.

I don't want/need perfectly even distribution - but every single time this very lopsided distribution is just not that interesting.

In the same vain: we badly need for the game setup code to be willing to force the desired start conditions. If I say every empire should get 2-4 worlds - then every empire should - in fact - get approx 3 worlds, but never less than 2, and never more than 4, and their colony worlds should all be close to their hw (the algo should be written in expansion rings from the HW, organically spiraling outwards - not creating galaxy spanning strings of worlds).

To make that work - the algo needs to absolutely force some worlds into being habitable for the spawned race, rather than being limited to whatever happens to be initially generated by the map algo. Map algo says there's no Mortalen habitable worlds close enough? NOT "don't make any" -- YES "force some into existence - enough to meet their quota."

It's insanely hard to get a viable game to generate right now. And unless I immediately break out the game editor - and ruin the surprise element (which is by far my favorite thing in this kind of game - the slow growing and learning what's around me) - then I have no idea how pathetic the AIs are and therefore if I need to start yet another one to try again to get a reasonably balanced start to play from.

If the AIs used a research strategy instead of a blind level by level - that would help tremendously. As is, I have to give them several levels of research for free to have any chance at all that they won't be utterly incompetent when I encounter them...

But... sometimes they get good starting conditions, that massive empty space next to them - and they grow like wildfire w/ no competition ever and then they're impossible (or well, no fun) to face. I badly want an interesting, competitive game, without myself or an AI getting into a "runaway" mode where I or they are 2x the nearest competitor before we hardly encounter each other...

That's very hard to do -- but the incompetent "research everything including all that is irrelevant to me" algo + game-generator that doesn't do as asked are currently the most massive hindrances to my ability to successfully generate an interesting game to play out.

And I so want to play a fun game!!!

[mordachai]

Another fun game-generation algo setting (choice) would be "clustered empires" - so there are several groups of say 3 empires each spawned near each other, but the groups are evenly distributed throughout the galaxy.

So you get a mix of nearby competition (all empires do), and you get to face the "winners" of other groups as you successfully expand.

[mordachai]

Another really helpful automation setting would be to choose whether explorers should choose breadth first or depth first.

Basically - I want to at least have some of my explorers doing a thorough survey of my nearby worlds, and a smaller set doing a shallow scan of what's beyond -- or generally be able to decide / set a policy for how much resources to spend "learning everywhere shallowly" vs. "learning nearby deeply".

[AKicebear]

Agree all around. Especially would like clustered starts.

Better support for multiple designs of explorers would help with the wide vs shallow choice. As would functional automation settings - "auto explore" vs "auto survey" vs "auto (all)"

[mordachai]

Better support for multiple designs of explorers would help with the wide vs shallow choice. As would functional automation settings - "auto explore" vs "auto survey" vs "auto (all)"

Exactly!

[Thuran]

I want a relatively even distribution of starting empires - not 2/3 or 3/4 empty.
...

In the same vain: we badly need for the game setup code to be willing to force the desired start conditions. If I say every empire should get 2-4 worlds - then every empire should - in fact - get approx 3 worlds, but never less than 2, and never more than 4, and their colony worlds should all be close to their hw (the algo should be written in expansion rings from the HW, organically spiraling outwards - not creating galaxy spanning strings of worlds).
...

If the AIs used a research strategy instead of a blind level by level - that would help tremendously. As is, I have to give them several levels of research for free to have any chance at all that they won't be utterly incompetent when I encounter them...

Very good and useful suggestions, please consider them.

[100thMonkey]

Another really helpful automation setting would be to choose whether explorers should choose breadth first or depth first.

Basically - I want to at least have some of my explorers doing a thorough survey of my nearby worlds, and a smaller set doing a shallow scan of what's beyond -- or generally be able to decide / set a policy for how much resources to spend "learning everywhere shallowly" vs. "learning nearby deeply".

I'd like to be able to drag-select a region on the map (for instance the systems around my capital's system), to tell the game / my explorers to survey in that region. Ideally, it would be possible to add other regions in the same way as the game progress. As for the other regions, explorers would simply... explore (scout).

In fact, I'd like to see the ability to drag-select to be expanded to do much more than just select ships. For instance, to be able to drag-select mines in a region, to retrofit those mines, and only those mines. Could be useful for mines that are near other empires. That would allow to prioritize the mine retrofits in regions where they're more susceptible to attacks. So they would have more recent designs, with more powerful weapons and defenses. And doing so without having to go through a list of all the mines to find the ones in the region of interest.