Expansion Suggestions

[solops]

1. Get rid of 90% of diplomacy. Have three states available - war, neutrality, alliance (allowing limited trade)

2. Get rid of ground combat completely. Either glass the planet or have it automatically surrender when space-based defences AND ships are eliminated.

3. Delete espionage - interstellar espionage between alien races is absurd. Replace it with limited R&D boosts given by Electronic Surveillance and discoveries by salvaging alien wreckage.

These changes should make not only a better game but, more importantly, a much more competetive AI.

Another possible but potentially destabilizing feature is a pre-game race editor for no-brainer race customization. You figure out how to make sure it balances

[Nedrear]

This would mess the game and immersion up.

1. A doover to include more options and taking out exploits like the tech trade to make it into a tech "gift" to friends would be much more efficient. Taking it out nearly completly is against every logic.

2. A planet does not surrender because you are in a sky. Unless you take "bombing to dust" as the normal response to a no. That is absurd!

3. Its true that a hostile and blocking race should be harder to spy or sabotage on as they kill every non "bug" into meat, but if you got open trade without sanctions or other things these are always possible.


A pre game race designer is possible with a lot of effort right now. Making it ingame IS possible too, but the amount of digits you would need to input yourself are quite insane or if simplified to general questions "main focus on offense in war and distance combat" etc. will only prove a lot of hassle to balance automatically for the designer. I am against it. We need more important features. There are a lot of race mods out here.

[Harrs]

sarcasm?

[Brainsucker]

Well, OP just want to change this game to an RTS game like Starcraft, it seems.

[MartialDoctor]

Is this a joke post? Those three things would ruin the game [:'(]

[solops]

I detest Starcraft and games like it. "Reach for the Stars" and "Stars!" are the classics. Moo2 and modded Moo3 were ok, but bogged down in the planetary conquest and diplomacy areas. So has DW. I stand by my suggestions and contend that they would increase SINGLE PLAYER immersion and would greatly simplify the coders' task in creating a more competitive AI....and a planet of aliens blasted well better surrender if you totally control the system or they should expect extermination. Nothing else makes sense to me. This is not war on earth or a game like Risk or Scorched Earth or Diplomacy or Civilisation. It is supposed to be in space between aliens. Aliens are....well, alien. Make it play so. While I love entertainment like Star Trek, Star Wars, Babylon 5, etc. I find them completely implausible with regard to what I would expect to happen in reality when alien races meet.... an even more nightmarish version of Cortez and the Aztecs (note that they even had the same number of limbs and ocular detectors) should be a happy fairy tale compared to alien races making contact and trying to co-exist. Heck, just read the papers and see how we humans do with each other. REAL Aliens?....if alien races are going to be allowed to play nice, make it HARD.

Get rid of the implausible stuff, simplifying the strategic and tactical decision making stuff for the AI and make a better and more competitive game. Leave the multi-species polities in the movies.

[Nedrear]

Sometimes I am glad to be part of the majority paying for every expansion because that did not happen...

There is no immersion in bombing a planet no matter what. We got different goverment types. How do you propose a totally green utopian goverment destroys a whole biosphere because one inhabitant race denies a surrender?
How do you propose a human planet should follow another without force just because you blew up the star port? Great Britian does not bow to Brasilia just because they destroy all ports... and Brasilia will not exterminate them with nukes. Forcing that as a "have to" is totally wrong and far from immersive.

Different political attitudes and goverments would react differently to alien races. Some might try to find common ground or differences leaving colony A to them for its dangers to human life while asking to get that nasty oxygen world they can't use properly. Or they might exchange technology or resources. Yes many people do not "hug" every tree they see, but some people protect the survival of species like a molerat and such... these do not look particular human OR beautiful either. So how is total extermination an immersion?

And I already told you how spying follows up on trade agreements and diplomatic missions.

Immersion is created through:

A good background story
(in some cases it could be evolved...)
A complex mechanic to show your influence with heavy consequences on a system through different decisions
(well we make 4X, that is there but could be increased through new areas of interaction and more permanent relations - let them remember my betrayal and shooting down that freighter instead of forgetting)
Atmosphere
(not the gaseous one)

What does destroy immersion:

Balance
(well it is needed for most to enjoy...)
Reduced player influence
(for example taking out the whole xenophobic racial diplomacy part)
Easter Eggs and Gimmicks
(breaks the immersion)

For the developers reading this: He is for these changes, I and some others are against. Please follow the majority who do not want a simplified 4x game. Otherwise it would rather be called a 2X and would be swallowed by its competitors offering graphics and speed instead of complex scripts.

[Noble713]

ORIGINAL: Nedrear

Sometimes I am glad to be part of the majority paying for every expansion because that did not happen...

For the developers reading this: He is for these changes, I and some others are against. Please follow the majority who do not want a simplified 4x game. Otherwise it would rather be called a 2X and would be swallowed by its competitors offering graphics and speed instead of complex scripts.

Quoted for the MOFO TRUTH.

To the OP:If you want a game that features ruthless nuking from orbit and anemic diplomacy features, play Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain.

[Cauldyth]

So your idea for an expansion is that it removes features? That should give the marketing department the challenge of their lives. [:D]

As for what you're proposing they remove, those are 3 of my favourite features of the game. What I want in an expansion is exactly the opposite - fleshing out of all three of those features. Remove those features, and my interest in DW would drop to near zero.

[ehsumrell1]

ORIGINAL: solops

1. Get rid of 90% of diplomacy. Have three states available - war, neutrality, alliance (allowing limited trade)

2. Get rid of ground combat completely. Either glass the planet or have it automatically surrender when space-based defences AND ships are eliminated.

3. Delete espionage - interstellar espionage between alien races is absurd. Replace it with limited R&D boosts given by Electronic Surveillance and discoveries by salvaging alien wreckage.

These changes should make not only a better game but, more importantly, a much more competetive AI.

Another possible but potentially destabilizing feature is a pre-game race editor for no-brainer race customization. You figure out how to make sure it balances

In fairness to Solops, ALL OPINIONS ARE VALID!!!! So please lets not flame!

Although I fully disagree with Solops opinion about the game, I respect his option to voice it
in this forum. As I would any others as long as it's reasonable and not derogatory.

With that said though, most miss the real point. The game developers vision.
What did Elliot Gibbs the developer envision. Certainly ANY idea cannot encompass ALL directions
and satiate all viewpoints. SO IN MY OPINION, there is only ONE that counts. That is Elliot's.
From that perspective, I then choose whether to buy his game or not and take the risk that it
will match my desires. For those that don't know what Elliot's vision of Distant Worlds was,
read here: http://truepcgaming.com/2011/10/28/4x-space-odyssey-distant-worlds-interview/#more-2580

[:)] Hopefully one can then understand the game better, after understanding Elliot's dream.

[ASHBERY76]

Get the new DW expansion that new features include even less features.[:D]

In all serious this game is about the immersive galactic sim experience and not just about making a bland game design ala Galciv2 that an experienced player would beat anyway.

[unclean]

ORIGINAL: solops
These changes should make not only a better game but, more importantly, a much more competetive AI.

Your complaints are completely about the theme, honestly, and saying they'd lead to a better game is kind of disingenuous I think.

If they were actual complaints about gameplay it would be fair enough, but as it is I think you just need to accept how Distant Worlds does things or find a game that's more to your liking. Like Nedrear said removing the diplomacy, espionage and ground combat would completely ruin the game.

[solops]

[font=calibri]OK, it is obvious that no one loves me. However, I must insist that you read all of what I wrote, well most of it anyway, before skewering me. I do NOT want to eliminate diplomacy, planetary conquest or intelligence operations from the game, which is what many of the respondents seem to think. I do think that as part of play balance and the creation of a more competitive AI these elements should be reinvented and I like the suggestions I have made for doing so. And I want to emphasize this:  If all the factions in the game were human I would withdraw all of my suggestions other than where AI competitiveness is concerned. But these factions are aliens…SPACE aliens.You know…from Outer Space!  And I think the diplomacy and trade are too easy and flexible for dealing with aliens. Spy versus spy stuff is a bit of a reach; however you might want to justify it, in an interstellar, interspecies situation. My suggestions sound more plausible to me. And planetary conquest by ground troops is a time consuming sub-game that seems implausible and silly. And talk about role-playing immersion! I disagree with Nedrear’s narrow definition of immersion. If those nasty aliens sitting on that valuable planet I want cannot read the writing on the wall and surrender when I control not only the high orbitals but the entire system…..well there should be no surprise when my plasma/nuke/bio weapons exterminate them. I cackle just thinking about it. Interstellar troop invasions??? Implausible and unnecessary. These things as currently implemented all add to the complexity of the system the AI has to deal with. I contend that changing them will make the game play better and offer an opportunity for the AI to fight back more effectively, resulting in a better balanced game, making each decision even more important. So, HOORAY for diplomacy, planetary conquest and intelligence operations! Let’s just find a smarter way to implement them that results a better, more plausible and realistic fantasy space game with imaginary aliens and made up technologies and weapons![/font]

[solops]

BTW, I'd also like to have more races, bigger maps, a very small, advanced bit of expensive and marginal terraforming, but only if the AI can be made to handle it.....which it probably cannot
And some on screen revisions/pop-ups that explain trade, R&D points, fuel and power requirements a bit better.

[Brainsucker]

I think now that I understand what OP want. But before that, let's me explain this.

When PC games were not as advanced as today, we know about 2 different type of games; Arcade and Simulation game. Arcade was about action, they ignored the realism feel for the action and maybe competitive game. While Simulation is a game that simulate the environment of the what the game represent. At that time, We usually played arcade in a console like Nitendo or Atari, while computer usually more about the simulation.

So now, I, as a gamer prefer the simulation game more than Arcade. Because what I seek from a game is the experience that the game represent. As the head of a space faring creature, I want to interact with my surrounding. Including Aliens and monsters. I consider that the fleet should be like a real fleet, not just a group of units joined together to make our control easier. That's way when I played as Klingon in Picard Era Mod, I named my fleet with "House of Mortok", "House of Koloth", etc. Not just 1st Fleet, 2nd Fleet, etc; and when I design ship, I prefer to make it diverse starship classes, big and small, rather than a single size ships with all tech gathered together. That's why, I love simulation game more than Arcade.

The idea that the OP offer is to change this game to more arcade. Well, it is not a bad idea for people who love that; But it will destroy the experience of interaction in this game. It will definitely change the nature of this game to it's core. So I guess, I don't like it. But maybe the developer can give options for both group of players. They can make an option of Arcade and Simulation; with Simulation give players more detail while Arcade just let the player fights their way to beat the AI.

[ehsumrell1]

ORIGINAL: Brainsucker

But maybe the developer can give options for both group of players. They can make an option of Arcade and Simulation; with Simulation give players more detail while Arcade just let the player fights their way to beat the AI.

This has been a very interesting thread. I would like to reiterate one thing though. Again, I refer
back to what I said in post number 10 above. Everyone seems to be forgetting an issue. What did the
developer want this game to be?

Imagine a car designer. He designs and develops an automobile. He puts four standard hubcaps on the
wheels of his new design and puts it on the market. Now imagine a car accessories designer. He designs
and develops a new style of hubcap/wheel cover that 'spins' (I know those of you in the US have seen them).
Now understand that just because some folks may perceive that the 'spinners' make the car
'look' fantastic and more stylish, the car designer knows that they are NOT in his original concept.
Also, they don't affect the intended operation of the car. It is a persons choice to buy or not!

Elliot developed and designed Distant Worlds as he dreamed it should be...in HIS eyes. Speaking for
myself only, I can't expect that just because I ask, Elliot would even consider DE-constructing his
game to suit MY visions of what it should be. Just like modders are the car accessory designers, Elliot
is the car designer. Do you want spinning wheels or not? But fortunately, I'm grateful that Elliot's
design allows the opportunity to apply 'spinning wheels' and the car still operates! Okay, enough of
that analogy!

In closing, I again just want to point out that any ONE game, once developed, is what the original
designer(s) usually intended whether by dream, vision, blueprint, etc. It may be in red, but I like
blue! I have the right to ask if it can be in blue. But I will understand if I never see a blue one.
I didn't donate a dime to the creation of the red one. Okay, that analogy done as well!

I love Distant Worlds the way it is and I look forward to WHATEVER Elliot's idea for its next phase
to be. I'll either like it, or not. Like everyone posting in this forum, I again say, ALL OPINIONS
ARE VALID! Whether there's a demo, or not, multiplayer, or not, space creatures that can kick a
fleet's butt, or not, it's all up to Elliot. I respect that. Most importantly though, I also respect
that he is open minded enough to provide opportunities (such as the master and modders wishlists) that
allow all of us players to interject what WE would like to see in the game as well. I'm done here...
enough said! Enjoy the game everyone!

[:)]
P.S. It's not that I'm Elliot's PR man, relative, or anything like that.....
I JUST LOVE DISTANT WORLDS!

[solops]

I'd also like to have wormholes as an option you could toggle on or off in the game set-up. It would be interesting to play on a big map with short colonization ranges enforced but have wormholes possibly available to be discovered as a way to "jump" out of an area. Other times I would dislike having wormholes, perhaps if I wanted long colonzation ranges or just to have compact empires due to short colonisation ranges. A good optional feature!