Poll: First DW2 expansion?

[sinbuster]

Modding support would definitely be up there for me. Modders make life easier. Plus, DW2 would be an amazing platform for a SW or ST mod.

I loved rotating planets but I understand if the game engine has its limitations. What made DW unique for me was definitely the living universe feel, with moving planets being part of that. But provided there is a really deep public sector and an eventual pirate system - which we all know is coming - I think the core of the game is intact.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Hmmm...If I want orbiting planets..I'll just dust off DW1. I have one huge galaxy sandbox that I've been digging around in for over 5 years RL [:D]

[CaptBeefheart]

The main reason I'm interested in DW2 is ships will get built. That's something that caused me to scratch my head in DW1--I could start a ship but it might never finish. "I'm being attacked, now where's that fleet I ordered?"

I gave up and went back to GalCiv 2.

Regarding this survey, moving planets isn't all that interesting to me and the developer's logic behind leaving them out is impeccable. If this were a one solar system game, and I noticed one is in the works by another company, then by all means planets, asteroids and the like should move.

Cheers,
CB

[StormingKiwi]

Ships do get finished in DW:U - the probable reason why they weren't being finished was that you didn't have the resources to build the components from which the ship is assembled - hopefully, the simulation in DW2 is still as detailed as it was in DW:U and so this will still be an issue. It means your industrial infrastructure actually matters. Unlike other games where you industrial production doesn't matter at all.

[SirHoraceHarkness]

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

The main reason I'm interested in DW2 is ships will get built. That's something that caused me to scratch my head in DW1--I could start a ship but it might never finish. "I'm being attacked, now where's that fleet I ordered?"

I gave up and went back to GalCiv 2.

Regarding this survey, moving planets isn't all that interesting to me and the developer's logic behind leaving them out is impeccable. If this were a one solar system game, and I noticed one is in the works by another company, then by all means planets, asteroids and the like should move.

Cheers,
CB

Ah the ole ship construction queue getting jammed up because a single ship in the process is missing a critical resource. Ways to get around that are to not use the top menu option to queue up fleets and to instead go to each starbase and individually queue up ships and make sure each starbase is only constructing one type of ship and isn't already stuffed full of civilian ships to build. If you use the top menu to order it all up the AI will mainly dump it all in the most capable construction yard even if that yard is already has a full build queue and only parcel out a small portion to other bases to build which leads to the production jams. Took me quite a while to figure that one out.

[CaptBeefheart]

Sorry to derail this discussion. I didn't bother to figure out why my ships weren't getting built in DW:U, I just moved on to a different title.

This is the entry from Erik Rutins that interests me:

"- Ship and Base Construction will now only commence once all required resources are available. This prevents incomplete construction waiting for resources to be delivered."

This is an improvement which should prevent a lot of frustration. I'm looking forward to DW2.

Cheers,
CB

[Miletkir]

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

If this were a one solar system game, and I noticed one is in the works by another company

Which game would that be?

[Galaxy227]

Not sure what he was talking about, but there's currently an RTS being developed called Falling Frontier that takes place in one system. The game will lack diplomacy entirely at launch, so it's less akin to Distant Worlds and more so towards traditional RTS-style games, but it still brings some pretty unique ideas to the table. Physical resources, proper supply chains, reconnaissance, and the overarching theme of "risk versus reward" are all things worth mentioning.

Edit: The YouTuber PartyElite released a neat video on FF last month here.

[StormingKiwi]

There's also Terra Invicta on the subject of single solar system space strategy games.

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

Sorry to derail this discussion. I didn't bother to figure out why my ships weren't getting built in DW:U, I just moved on to a different title.

This is the entry from Erik Rutins that interests me:

"- Ship and Base Construction will now only commence once all required resources are available. This prevents incomplete construction waiting for resources to be delivered."

This is an improvement which should prevent a lot of frustration. I'm looking forward to DW2.

Cheers,
CB

But if you are trying to build ships in DW2 you lack the resources to build, they still won't get built, so I'm not sure a lot has really changed in this regard..

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

This is the entry from Erik Rutins that interests me:

"- Ship and Base Construction will now only commence once all required resources are available. This prevents incomplete construction waiting for resources to be delivered."

This is indeed a very good improvement. [:)]

[LordMM]

Raw, processed and Manufactured resources is the winner. If this does become an expansion, then this will be absolutely brilliant.

[Miletkir]

You mean "Orbiting planets" is the winner.

[LordMM]

Yes and no as Orbiting planets is really not gonna happen due to how much of a resource hog it will be.

[martok]

ORIGINAL: LordMM

Raw, processed and Manufactured resources is the winner. If this does become an expansion, then this will be absolutely brilliant.

Completely disagree. That is way, way more detail than I want in my 4x games, even in Distant Worlds. Implementing something like that would be as much a waste of time & resources as the orbiting planets.



Out of all those features, there's really only three that I'm interested in:

1.) More playable races/factions
2.) Playable pirates
3.) Multiplayer.


Jump-gates and a more robust ground combat system would be cool, but I'm not chomping at the bit for them.

[Hanekem]

I mean, as an optional feature "use on your own risk" or maybe in limted size playmaps? could be neat to have. Just planets, though, not moons or asteroids (and maybe only inner planets, nothing with orbital speeds measured in decades/centuries per rotation) if we start adding which ones orbit and which wont, it might not end up being so much a resource hog

[wetpig]

I agree with your (martok) post in its entirety.

[Jorgen_CAB]

ORIGINAL: Hanekem

I mean, as an optional feature "use on your own risk" or maybe in limted size playmaps? could be neat to have. Just planets, though, not moons or asteroids (and maybe only inner planets, nothing with orbital speeds measured in decades/centuries per rotation) if we start adding which ones orbit and which wont, it might not end up being so much a resource hog

I would say no way... you only add something that has substantial worth to the entire game not parts of it or if you only play it in a certain way.

I say their time and effort are way better spent elsewhere.

I think the same goes for raw and processed resources... I wonder exactly what this would add to the game in terms of actual choice instead of just adding more resources instead which is way simpler and mean almost zero time to implement into the game.

There is no real point in adding complexity for the sake of adding complexity if it does not significantly add to the game experience or value.

I would rather see more cultural, political and diplomatic stuff added to the game so we can interact with the game in more complex ways rather than just declare war on opponents or deeper interaction with allies. Multi lateral diplomacy and forming federations of different kinds for instance.

[Miletkir]

I would say that just adding more resources... doesn't add anything, neither in terms of gameplay (at best, you just redistribute tensions, at worst, you remove some tensions for resource control) nor immersion (the more you have resources, the less significance each of them has).

What would a tiered economy bring? Layers of strategic complexity, an expansion of the research tree and definitely more immersion. Not only you need to protect your sources and transit lanes, but you have to make sure your distribution between raw and manufactured is efficient, and, conversely, targeting different stages of resource production when waging war can have very different effects on how it cripples the enemy. You also expand the whole aspect of quantity vs. quality, much more than with just raw resources of different values.

Some strategy games have tried that with more or less success (Anno, Stellaris to an extent) for these reasons.

All that being said, I'm leaning more and more towards an expansion of the ground combat mechanics + colony building and management... Of course, it should be balanced, not create micromanagement sinkholes.

[Bleek]

Unless it's just one planet, I don't really find colony management compelling. It turns in to a min-max, micro management hell.

I don't particularly enjoy the systems in Stellaris.

I much prefer the in-space stuff; exploration, resource strategy, economy and politics/diplomacy.

I voted for more factions. The flavour of 20-30+ races in DW:U (modded) is great.

[Hanekem]

Stellaris implementation is particularly bad and micro heavy and has issues stacked on issues
Which was why originally sectors were AI controlled things to keep the kludge of a planetary system from overwhelming even the most die hard player

I think a more in depth system can be had, not in the moo vein because it runs the same issue as Stellaris, if differently
Perhaps something closer to Dawn of Andromeda, which had a neat planetary interface, much more minimalistic and only showcasing the important bits

Admittedly it isn't some must have, but...