Suggest - Features and Improvements

A forum for chatting about in-development game features.

Moderator: luciderous

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:34 pm

Increasing range of Ion cannon (small PD, medium as well as Heavy) would make it a viable option compared to Lasers with Rapid Fire mod

Currently, laser is clearly better then Ion PD as:
- It can be researched earlier
- Can be equipped with AP mod
- Min damage with RF is 2X higher then that of Ion PD

The above mostly goes also for Heavy Laser vs Heavy Ion

In case of Railgun, Heavy Ion performs particularly bad in both min and max damage as well as in range efficiency and shield penetration
In case of heavy Ion cannon, shield penetration could be increased so it is viable against both Railgun and Heavy Laser

nweismuller
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 2:33 am

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby nweismuller » Tue Dec 19, 2017 4:02 pm

At the moment, blockaded planets do not provide food surplus to the empire, cannot take advantage of food surplus at the imperial level, and cannot have production hurried. All well and good. I suggest also that blockades deny the trade capacity provided by the planet and its markets, as, obviously, a hostile fleet in orbit is likely to be an impediment to interplanetary commerce.

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Sat Dec 23, 2017 11:07 am

So I was wondering: Missiles often have different visual in the delectable components list then on the model itself - see attached example

I was wondering just the other day: wouldn't it be cool to see the amount of missiles a hardpoint will release per turn on the visual representation of the weapon itself (like in case of Ion cannons)? - and then I released there is already a representation of the two missile variants in the selectable components they just get reduced to one when placed on the model itself :)

So can't these images be used instead, when two missiles are mounted on a single slot?
Guess it wouldn't be so easy for the 4 missiles/hardpoint variant but it would look really cool if there was a visual representation of that as well
Starbases offer 4 missiles per slot for example, but it is exactly there of all places where the single missile image is shown in the selection list odd right :)?

The above would work for both nuclear and fusion missiles
EP and anti-matter warheads are tricky as they are already using the same component image which does not show the amount of missiles
The single missile image could be duplicated or put 4 times beside each other on a rack for these cases resolving both their identical image and look cool doing so
Attachments
Missile amount.JPG
Missile amount.JPG (181.12 KiB) Viewed 2346 times

User avatar
Captainspire
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 8:30 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby Captainspire » Wed Dec 27, 2017 2:57 pm

1. Is the shield for a human carrier with two force fields just supposed to be 360?

2. Do the human battleships seem too under powered? For such a large ship, it only has two heavy weapon slots that are x1. Most other battleships have at least one x2 heavy slot.

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:27 pm

I know this is probably far fetched but just to put it out there:
Would it be possible to have a layer in Galaxy View, for example on the second most highest level, which enables the user to draw on the map?

It could be a free draw function with limited color palette and no formatting but would enable people to "draw" up their own sectors and markings like:
- Harpy infested DM Zone
- Core Worlds
- Or the classic: Here be dragons ;)

akkamaddi
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2017 5:11 am

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby akkamaddi » Thu Dec 28, 2017 1:12 am

zolobolo wrote: Would it be possible to have a layer in Galaxy View, for example on the second most highest level, which enables the user to draw on the map?


I think that's brilliant.

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:44 pm

Make food stock and production visible for other empires on the diplomacy menu similarly to their credit and metal storage and production values

This would be a minor improvement that could server two purpose:
- AI performance analysis
- Help to identify possible trade partners to acquire food from.

Admittedly I never trade to trade for food from the AI but the option is there and some players might use it, would mostly use the first point myself to identify how well each empire is doing.

Though generally I think trade in diplomacy is a dead end, there are a few exception such as food trading as it can have far reaching effect on an empire if food runs out which makes trade a vital function when needed (and not just there to exploit the AI). Golden example for such a system is 7 Kingdoms where food production became increasingly difficult during wartime (as peasant drafted into military fell out of production but increased consumption). The basic elements are already here, just need to make food trade deals more streamlined in both directions and increase food consumption for war effort (maybe crew could also consume food?)

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:30 am

Orbital stations are in a bit of a strange place currently:

Military stations are fairly effective against early Marauder and Harpy incursions as well as against AI attacks but cost a ton of metal thus player can find more effective defense and AI is slowed down by these as they are producing tons of such stations instead of ships.

Now for the AI, producing more then two military stations is less then effective as:
1. One is enough to repel Harpies and Marauders as mentioned above, and two are overkill (waste of their resources).
2. The AI will still produce two military stations for each of their front line planets to "defend" them but this is neither cost effective nor enough to stop a Human lead invasion force as concentration on Railgun pretty much counters the stations

Thus I suggest that all military stations are limited to a single instance per planet and if we are already on it, have the rule be valid for all types of stations which are:
1. Space stations / Mobile Base / Asteroid Base (Commercial)
2. Shipyard (Commercial)
3. Starbase (Military)
4. Fortress (Military)
5. Stargate

As visible above, there would be still a ton of personalization options with the above, especially if Stargates would also occupy one of the two available slots to make the decision building them more meaningful: 14! to be precise (+ the flexibility of adding Construction modules or Research stations to military bases and Bomber squadron to commercial ones)

This would:
1. Prevent "Fortress worlds" with two Fortresses: waste of resources and boring for the player to mop up (There is nothing wrong with the AI building bases but should invest in fleets as well). More resources left for the AI = more ships defending their systems
2. Also forces the AI to build more sensibly as no duplicates allowed
3. A bunch of the above options cannot be duplicated already: for Shipyard does not make sense, for Stargates not an option
4. Prevent also the player to turtle in too heavily

A further bonus of limiting all base types to just one per planet is the increased weight for each build:
1. If faction specific stations would be introduced, they can be done on the first military level: for the Starbase, and limiting their number to just one per planet would prevent obvious exploits as well as balancing issues if the Starbase of one race is less capable in defense and geared more towards commerce (Phidi). As there can only be one aesthetic value increased of the new art as well as any relative disadvantages as well as faction specific advantages provided by the layout can be kept in check.
2. Forces a more dynamic build approach for the first tier military base, as there cannot be any other further military base until Fortress is researched

Incidental I would also advise assigning a hefty upkeep cost for Fortresses to further emphasize their circumstantial role and deter Fortress spamming all over the galaxy, even if reduced to a single base per planet ;)
Last edited by zolobolo on Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

orvarth
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2017 12:06 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby orvarth » Sun Dec 31, 2017 2:22 pm

replace "interstellar currency" by private corporate mining , market generate +3 ore .

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Sat Jan 06, 2018 10:30 am

Suggest to add an additional effect to "Science Stations" module: increase scanning range by 1 parsec (the difference between normal drive range and Warp Line Amplifier)

Reason: this would make them a natural fit for Scouts and help early game detection eliminating scenarios where a scout retreats from a system because of Monsters/Pirates and then the fleet scaring them off becoming invisible. Player then either send in others ships thinking there is nothing there, or needs to undo actions to see what the fleet composition was.
The player could of course memorize the size and composition of these fleets but does not provide additional value so would rather streamline it like this

Combined with two other suggestions I have already made would make Scout ships or at least Science Stations relevant even in the endgame:
1. Having a late game tech that considerably increases the science yield of Science Stations for example to +10 units (and increase base production without it form +2 to +4 as well). This would put their yield to the minimum of basic labs and with the late-game tech to the max of advanced labs, so they would always be slightly less efficient as labs in each era making them a tempting module choice even for large ships and even stations!
2. Fix issue that Science Stations do not yield science when assigned to trade pool (in case of Phidi they would be a perfect module to use on Trade ships)
3. Increase upkeep of Science Stations: Current upkeep of Science Station 0 - lending itself for exploit, while upkeep of a lab is 1 Coin
If we were to have 1.5 Coin upkeep per turn for a Science Station (thus 2.5 for a standard scout ship), that would already prevent exploit until at least mid-game
4. Increasing upkeep cost for an Improved Science Station to 3 Coins per Turn would do the same form mid to late game (player can choose to produce a bunch of destroyers with only Science stations, but that will pretty much cripple the economy). I would also always research the advanced Science Stations when playing a somewhat pacifist empire, or at least one that does not constantly attack everything around it, as it would make some of our ships do more then just sit around and hog space.
To prevent abuse of the system (spamming destroyers with only Science Stations and nothing else), only the upkeep needs to be increased so that one such module costs more to maintain then a lab.

Note: the advanced Science station would still be worth it though as it produces more then double the research while only doubling the upkeep cost

With the above changes, Science Stations should even be a default module for Scouts as:
- They are available early on (this might be an issue as the required tech needs to be researched first - can we adjust the base design depending on available tech...?)
- AI keeps producing Scouts for no apparent reason: no problem as each scout would yield +4 Science!
- Their new ability: increased sensor range synergies perfectly with the function of the scouts + improving quality of life of player

The above would also eliminate current and future exploits of the Science Stations (both via ships and via outposts), and due to the above upkeep costs, the player is incentivized to pack several Science stations into a single hull instead of spamming destroyers with this module to make use of the benefit (one destroyer hull + Science Station would cost 2.5 Coin upkeep while a Phidi Cruiser with two Science Stations stations just 4.5 while also serving as a somewhat capable combat vessel). Currently, science stations yield to low benefit to be even considered on any other hull other then the smallest destroyer
Last edited by zolobolo on Sat Jan 06, 2018 5:06 pm, edited 6 times in total.

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Sat Jan 06, 2018 3:38 pm

Suggest to decrease shield recharge rate from 25% to below 20%

Regenerator module would also become useful when doing so

Attached the current description of the module: as visible, there is already 25% regeneration available without the module which is a huge amount
This make ships with large shield capacity practically impenetrable for a long time and even after shield is depleted they regenerate so fast as to make the equipment of shield a must and recharge modules a waste of hardpoint

Instead of the existing, how about this?:
0: 10%
1: 20%
2: 30%
3: 40%
4: 50%
And so on...

Expected effect:
1. Ships with large shield capacity can be penetrated much more easily after wearing the initial shields down making Battleships, Fortresses and Stewards a more reasonable foe that can be easily engaged with masses of destroyers and some heavy destroyers if they do not have escorts to help them out
2. Investing into the first Recharge module is worth it for large ships and in some cases for specialized Cruisers (such as boarding)
3. Investing into more then one Regenerator module is also worth it, but there will be no ships running around that can effectively regenerate 50% of their shields in a single turn
4. As shields would get a debuff to their base regeneration rate, armor would become more important as heavily shielded ships would need to invest into the Shield module + better Reactor + Regenerator module. Building ships with heavy armor is not a viable alternative as they are: Cheaper + have more free hardpoints making them better for offense or for missile support
Attachments
Recharge values.GIF
Recharge values.GIF (8.47 KiB) Viewed 2146 times

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Sat Jan 06, 2018 10:34 pm

Asteroid base should have an additional weapon hard point

Currently these bases ave two advantages:
1. Cheaper then regular base
2. Armored

The problem is, that the first one does not affect much (e.g.: Ashdar colonials already start with a Starbase so they do not need to build any additional), and the second benefit only comes into play during combat

This means, that the second benefit does not matter if a construction module is used in the design - so its either:
A: A cheaper base
B: A defense structure
But not both

As mentioned it cannot really be used as a Space Station due to the above + Debris Rings do not crop up at other planets to make use of them
This leaves us with B: Defense structure: Since there is only one weapon that can be mounted on it is a considerably weak option at that. Basic Light carrier has 7 fighters the base has 8. Admittedly, the Asteroid base is much cheaper but a Light Carrier has + 1 System and + 1 Light weapon slot. Thus ultimately, as a defense structure it is not worth the orbital slot it is occupying

User avatar
Arioch
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:56 am
Location: San Jose, California
Contact:

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby Arioch » Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:00 am

zolobolo wrote:Suggest to add an additional effect to "Science Stations" module: increase scanning range by 1 parsec (the difference between normal drive range and Warp Line Amplifier)

Seems like an ability more suited to Deep Space Scanners rather than Science Stations.

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:21 am

Arioch wrote:
zolobolo wrote:Suggest to add an additional effect to "Science Stations" module: increase scanning range by 1 parsec (the difference between normal drive range and Warp Line Amplifier)

Seems like an ability more suited to Deep Space Scanners rather than Science Stations.

Yep, but mostly from a naming perceptive: The Deep Space Scanner does not have any actual scanning range effect currently correct?
The issue mentioned regarding disappearing Pirates and monsters would also be solved right off the bat...

But then you wouldn't have any incentive for the player to use them until they discover the Research perks. Most would just shrug the Module off - unless they can be integrated into the default ship designs once researched... then the module could be put into the default Scout design right after it is available.

I was thinking along the lines of actual exploration ships: large hull but equally useful in combat as outside of it.
If the scanning range effect is segregated from the research bonus, both modules would need to be present on a ship to have both befits.

So, yeah I always imagine the Deep Space Scanner as a: "Random Loot Generator" module and Research the Science Station first thing to get "actual" Scouts/Exploration ships

But have to admit, naming wise is better to give the bonus to that module and it would resolve the issue faster, and have to admit: would make the Deep Space Scanner to be considered as an actual scanner/sensor that brings more to the table then just detecting hidden bonuses, might be even packed onto later designed then...
Just functional wise, it would even make more sense to give the bonus to the Warp Lane Amplifier though (if we concentrate on removing the discord between travel and scanning range) that is even further off naming wise

zolobolo
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Re: Suggest - Features and Improvements

Postby zolobolo » Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:41 pm

This is a minor one: is it possible to display the endless production icon next to the quick overview pane as seen below?

Admittedly it does not add much in the large scheme of things
Its just that automation is already visible via the asterix which is very neat - maybe the endless sign can also be added via the same function?
Attachments
Production.GIF
Production.GIF (9.56 KiB) Viewed 2118 times


Return to “Testing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests