A Possible New Vision of Distant Worlds

[Siddham]

I like the way the graphic symbols for units can occupy the same 2D space on screen.
I admit it can look a bit of a spagetti junction mess; but it has a lot of advantages
When I want to find a particular object I only have to click on the pile and I get a list of all the objects in it
and so I can choose the specific one I want
Works pretty good for me anyway

My main wish for the UI would be, a way to close windows without clicking on the little X in the corner

And I would like the WASD keys to replace the functionality of the Arrow Keys
...and to have the view level keys around them
I dont use any other Hotkeys; and the Arrow keys are on the wrong side of the keyboard for me
I guess they were set for a left-hander (perhaps by a left-hander)

[Tampa_Gamer]

Having played DW for several years now I am glad to see it was recognized as one of the great strategy games. In terms of "finishing" my games to the "win/lose" screen there are not many games that I do that with, but DW and Sword of the Stars I are pretty much tied with the greatest number of finishes since I am one of those OCD people that keeps track of such things.

In terms of my priorities for a DW II, I would rank the following:

(1) UI - reducing # of actions to accomplish goals; improving providing information I need to make a decision on same screen on which I am implementing my decisions

(2) Moddibility - keep expanding capabilities - DW:U is a fantastic start, but still not to level of others like SE4/5, etc.

(3) 2D/3D - yes, I like nice graphics - but at the same time not if we sacrifice the ability to easily add/mod ship graphics/UI buttons/components (e.g. Stardrive 2 suffers from requiring specialized programs to mod)

(4) Ground Combat - great direction/grand scale implementation so far, but would like to move to larger scale so units actually mean something (e.g. perhaps Kohan approach to building ground units so you would "build" an army with 5-10 "components" consisting of divisions of INF/ARM/SPF/PDU which would each add modify defense/attack/bonuses/transport size of the army. You would then simply control the army once its built and not have to worry about all the diverse elements that make up that army. Thus we would keep our ability to build specialized ground units as needed, but simplify management of them in-game and perhaps make each army more meaningful in the process (same scale as fleets).

(5) Space Combat - implementation of designated formations for fleets

[Siddham]

Hi Tampa_Gamer
You say you have enjoyed SotS.
I presume you are referring to the first one?
I have the game but never got around to it yet...but do want to some time soon
Can you say something about your experience with it?
And maybe how it compares to DW
not so much which you think is better, but more compare & contrast sort of thing
if you have the time and care to
Thanks

[Siddham]

I also agree with most that Spidey says
Something I would like is a Ledger - like in the Europa Universalis games
Also I find the Fleets screen and Ships & Bases screen are not ideal...
or at least they were not designed for the functionality I want when checking up on ships & fleets etc

But I am a new player so I may just be missing the point, or something
And I want to empahsise that in general I cannot say enough good stuff about this game

[Tampa_Gamer]

ORIGINAL: Siddham


Hi Tampa_Gamer
You say you have enjoyed SotS.
I presume you are referring to the first one?
I have the game but never got around to it yet...but do want to some time soon
Can you say something about your experience with it?
And maybe how it compares to DW
not so much which you think is better, but more compare & contrast sort of thing
if you have the time and care to
Thanks

I don’t want to derail this thread to compare DW to SoTS I (not II), but to answer your question in my opinion the games only similarity is that they are each a 4x space strategy game. SoTS is turn-based at the strategic level and real-time (pausable) in tactical space combat. There are no characters or ground combat modeled in vanilla SoTS, but it does have ship design and limited spying/diplomacy. Although you do colonize planets, expand your influence, allocate funds to research/infrastructure improvement/environment - the focus of SoTS is on primarily on tactical space combat between fleets and fleets vs. planets (which I think it does extremely well and I don’t think any game since then has come to close to knocking it off the top of the list in that area). It is slightly older in its development cycle than DW (having been patched/expanded numerous times over several years and effectively closed out). Although SoTS II was released, I could never get into it (tried several times) and couldn’t stand the cartoony graphics used. If you google the two games there are a great many reviews and comparisons between the games that do better justice than I just did and if you are interested SoTS I has been on sale on Steam for less than $5.00 for the entire package (normally $9.99) - so it is certainly worth trying out if you like 4x space strategy games at all.

[mordachai]

@Siddham - if you don't object, I'd answer some things about sots (prime):

* Its focus is on tactical combat and on forcing the player to have to be creative to deal with different strategic and tactical situations from game to game.
* It has a deep lore, and if you enjoy reading AARs or Lets Play type things, there are some fantastic ones on their forums and around the net (something awful used to have an incredible one)>
* ...however, the lore is mostly available outside the game proper. A bit like DW in that way: you can get into the races, and imagine / role-play it up for yourself or publish it as an AAR, etc. - but it isn't going to be overt (or no more so than DW:U) (there are hints everywhere... if you have an eye for it)
* Sots was designed around MP as a primary game design criteria. So, many choices are built around making things flow relatively smoothly for MP, rather than tons of details for a single player experience.
* The graphics - though a bit dated - hold up pretty amazingly well in my opinion. You can get some great epic space battles and the visuals to go with them.
* The details are all in the tactical battles - individual missiles & their "smoke' trails - individual turrets rotating to face the enemy ships & fire - per-polygon resolution of weapons fire impact
* A physics model that causes ships to recoil a bit from firing ballistic weapons, and their targets to gain some momentum from being struck by ballistics (whole tactics can arise from using that to knock your beam-wielding opponents around so that they cannot get a good bead on your ships).
* 2.5D battles: basically everything starts on a plane, but you can travel above/below a little as combat proceeds.
* Lots of different weapons systems. Ship design that is a lot of fun to try out various weapon / defense combinations.
* Deep thought into forcing the player to make trade-offs: there isn't a simple progression from least-powerful-techs to most-powerful. There are lots of great defense at cost of offense or cost of maneuverability or cost of fragility etc. Lots of "no easy choices" - but meaningful choices for the player to engage with and discover what works against whom in what situations.
* Modular ship design - choose "command" section + "mission" section + "engine" section to form a complete design (plus weapons to add, any armor / reflective coatings / etc.)

There are a few good mods for Sots prime. Some are mostly visual upgrades - race spacecraft skinning - hi-rez skyboxes, etc., while others are overhauls (ACM being the biggest one) with whole new tech trees and weapons systems and even new ships or replacements. I'm working on updating my mod to have a new tech tree - see the modding forum under Sots prime. There are still a few modders working on various projects.

I played Star Fleet Battles as a teen - loved it - and Sots is the closest any game has come for me to incorporating almost all of the detailed tactical combat available in that pen & paper tabletop game. It's ... brilliant, though - like DW:U, tons is going on under the hood - physics / per-poly-combat resolution, etc., but if you pay attention, it's pretty damn awesome.

The strategic is ... bare bones. It has a functional, decent strategic layer kind of like DW:U has a decent, functional tactical combat layer. They're both fine, but they're sort of opposites: DW:U has 99% of its smarts in the strategic layer; sots has 99% of its smarts in the 3D tactical combat.

Hope that helps.

[ehsumrell1]

Nice mordachai! I have SotS and between DW and SotS I chose DW first to delve into. Never have
yet even opened the game since I got engrossed by the Distant Worlds series and started beta
testing and modding it. But thanks for your more detailed insight and opinion into the game.
It looks like a fun game as a sidetrack to my DW pursuits!
[:)]

[Siddham]

Thank you Tampa_Gamer and mordachai for those reports
I will definitely be trying SotS
I have it installed but never played a game yet

[Raap]

Don't think I've ever seen a game transition to 3D graphics in its sequel without becoming worse in other areas. Space Empires 4 -> Space Empires 5 being the obvious comparison here; decent'ish 3D graphics upgrade, but the rest of the game suffered to the extent that the prequel was still the preferred game to play.

No, 2D is fine. It could definitely be improved a lot though. Starsector, which also uses 2D assets, manages to look significantly better than DW. That said, I think it's important to switch the game over to a real 3D engine(while keeping the graphics 2D) for the increased performance. Depending on the game logic code and how well it's separated from the graphical layer, this could probably be done at a reasonable cost.

Other than that, gameplay and AI improvements all the way.

[Colwolf77]

Some great replies here, I too don't want Distant Worlds to lose any of its character and playstyle if it were to have a graphics overhaul. Gameplay should always be at the forefront of development, I hope this game is supported for years to come and gets better and better. I do think the graphics could do with a bit of loving though

[Cauldyth]

2D is fine, 3D just becomes a distraction in terms of both development and UI. For any sequel which may be in the works, I'd be happy on the graphics front with just a usability overhaul (e.g. better font scaling, etc.). Spend the development time on reworking some of the mechanics (diplomacy and wars, for example) and you'll have me throwing my hard-earned money at you.

[Spidey]

Speaking of things to rework, one very nice addition would be more control over what stuff results in screen activity and what doesn't. I don't think I have ever actually taken pirates up on their "kind" offers, but all the same, I'm getting spammed with rubbish offers from them.

With ~15 pirate factions that all want to keep shouting at me and me having zero way of automatically telling them to sod off, the consequence is that the top right part of my screen is always occupied by the latest useless pirate nonsense of the day. It's a complete waste of screen space, on top of being somewhat annoying to look at, and it is absolutely hopeless to respond to each communication.

[Cauldyth]

I would love if, when appropriate, those message boxes have two buttons on them: a check box for accept, and an X for decline. Obviously that's not relevant to all of them, but it is to many. It would let me quickly sort through them without having to open each one up.

[Colwolf77]

ORIGINAL: Spidey

Speaking of things to rework, one very nice addition would be more control over what stuff results in screen activity and what doesn't. I don't think I have ever actually taken pirates up on their "kind" offers, but all the same, I'm getting spammed with rubbish offers from them.

With ~15 pirate factions that all want to keep shouting at me and me having zero way of automatically telling them to sod off, the consequence is that the top right part of my screen is always occupied by the latest useless pirate nonsense of the day. It's a complete waste of screen space, on top of being somewhat annoying to look at, and it is absolutely hopeless to respond to each communication.

Not 100% sure but I think there is a way of rejecting all pirate offers in the policy setup options.

[feygan]

ORIGINAL: Spidey

Speaking of things to rework, one very nice addition would be more control over what stuff results in screen activity and what doesn't. I don't think I have ever actually taken pirates up on their "kind" offers, but all the same, I'm getting spammed with rubbish offers from them.

With ~15 pirate factions that all want to keep shouting at me and me having zero way of automatically telling them to sod off, the consequence is that the top right part of my screen is always occupied by the latest useless pirate nonsense of the day. It's a complete waste of screen space, on top of being somewhat annoying to look at, and it is absolutely hopeless to respond to each communication.

To take that further it would be nice to have an option of general sod off. Kind of like the Civilization "do not bother me again" mechanic. That way you could have situations where you sever diplomatic ties.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Cauldyth

2D is fine, 3D just becomes a distraction in terms of both development and UI. For any sequel which may be in the works, I'd be happy on the graphics front with just a usability overhaul (e.g. better font scaling, etc.). Spend the development time on reworking some of the mechanics (diplomacy and wars, for example) and you'll have me throwing my hard-earned money at you.

Personally I'm fine with the 2D top down game we have now. I agree spend more time on the mechanics and UI.