zolobolo wrote:... If there are 3 or more empires in the system, the name is segregated into three or four segments. As there can only be max 4 planets in any system, the mechanic could not be brought to its limits, as it only needs to accommodate maximum 4 colors and there are no system names with less then 4 characters.
Why would other empires have a negative impact towards the player because of this, though? There's no logical reason why someone would become so upset about it. If there's any drawback, it should stem as a direct, logical consequence of having a Phidi population: A population that will react negatively to any anti-Phidi actions in the future and will, as their numbers grow, start asking for pro-Phidi things, essentially becoming a Phidi invasion from within.zolobolo wrote:For the same reason: Recommend to change the Phidi exchange pop event so that it gives the player a negative impact towards all other empires to offset the bonus pop with high money generating capability. Otherwise there is no need not to accept the incoming free pop and feels like a handicap for the human event though not needed
username wrote:Why would other empires have a negative impact towards the player because of this, though? There's no logical reason why someone would become so upset about it. If there's any drawback, it should stem as a direct, logical consequence of having a Phidi population: A population that will react negatively to any anti-Phidi actions in the future and will, as their numbers grow, start asking for pro-Phidi things, essentially becoming a Phidi invasion from within.
blazenclaw wrote:zolobolo wrote:... If there are 3 or more empires in the system, the name is segregated into three or four segments. As there can only be max 4 planets in any system, the mechanic could not be brought to its limits, as it only needs to accommodate maximum 4 colors and there are no system names with less then 4 characters.
Might have some trouble with custom names (if player renames a system P1, T1, M1 or so on), but yeah, I've never seen more than 2 different empires sharing a system.
Also, Tyl exists (albeit with 2 planets) so there is at least one system with <4 letters; implies possibly more?
zolobolo wrote:Does it make sense to set production to 0 when assigning project?
Sure, the production is converted into another resource which is hence increased, but production technically stays the same...
From a player perspective it does not have added value to set it to 0, as it is already visible via a nice picture what is being produced, but it would help seeing what the actual production is even when a project is ongoing so that the player can evaluate if it would make sense to produce something else (e.g.: if manufacturing output is high enough to produce Transports or battleships instead)
Arioch wrote:zolobolo wrote:Does it make sense to set production to 0 when assigning project?
Sure, the production is converted into another resource which is hence increased, but production technically stays the same...
From a player perspective it does not have added value to set it to 0, as it is already visible via a nice picture what is being produced, but it would help seeing what the actual production is even when a project is ongoing so that the player can evaluate if it would make sense to produce something else (e.g.: if manufacturing output is high enough to produce Transports or battleships instead)
If you view wrenches as "labor" rather than production (which I think we should do), then it makes less sense to zero out the value when a non-production task is set.
The "potential" production value is what's shown in the Planetary Report, if that's what you want to see.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 65 guests