Suggest - Features and Improvements

[zolobolo]

7. Im worried about the warning I get about going above 99. Is that warning really something to take notice of with a medium end modern comp.. And yes, more empires would do the trick. Would be fun if even the marauders could start an empire though without the possibility to build colonization ships.

I have a relatively strong machine (not high end) and can play games between 100-200 stars withouth issues on turn 300 - suggest you go for 140 withouth a blink of an eye

Just insert some more opponents to balance it out

[fonzosh]

7. Im worried about the warning I get about going above 99. Is that warning really something to take notice of with a medium end modern comp.. And yes, more empires would do the trick. Would be fun if even the marauders could start an empire though without the possibility to build colonization ships.

I have a relatively strong machine (not high end) and can play games between 100-200 stars withouth issues on turn 300 - suggest you go for 140 withouth a blink of an eye

Just insert some more opponents to balance it out

Thanks, will really try it out in the next game.

[Jem]

Please ignore if any of below had been suggested.

1) Shift-Click the (>) button on Planets (on left Planet list pane too) to [Add/Pool] colonists from multiple planets, then send them to a planet.

2) Set population condition for planet to send colonists to specified planet. e.g. maybe use 0=No send, ##=Send when above, or -##=Send when above (max-##)

3) Set Rally point for built ships: own star system selected, right-click on another star system (within strategic range).

4) [Mass Scrap] option for selected ship with same design across the Galaxy.

5) [Abandon] own planet option, and [Destroy] neutral planet option.

6) [End Turn] in Battle using Spacebar.

7) Show population growth on left Planet list pane using 'Ring' indicator (clockwise) around planet, with color White=No Growth, Green=+ve Growth, Red=-ve Growth.

8) Add [Scrap All Science Stations] option in Science panel, after ALL science has been researched.

[Wyvern]

Reduced the frequency of several types of planet disaster events.

(Quote from the development changelog thread.)

Spent a bit of time thinking about this, and I'm not sure it's the right direction to go in. Disasters are already pretty rare; making them rarer overall seems like it would make them feel even more unfair to the player when they do happen.

Instead, I'd suggest that disasters should be similar to the current diplomatic events system: relatively common, relatively small, and with some degree of player-interactivity.

For example, in the current game, we have "Planet 'Fishsticks II' has experienced an earthquake, destroying all buildings". Boring, super-rare, and doesn't feel fun when it happens - especially given the 'super-rare' attribute; most games I don't see even one earthquake, so the occasional game where it, say, wipes out six farms on a supergrain world and suddenly my entire empire is starving, is exceptionally frustrating.

Compare to, for one possible example: "Planet 'Fishsticks II' has experienced an earthquake, damaging local infrastructure and threatening the lives of civilians trapped in damaged housing. Options: 1: Prioritize infrastructure repairs, resulting in the loss of a unit of population and -10 morale on Fishsticks II. 2: Prioritize rescue operations, resulting in the destruction of two farms. 3: Fund off-world support from the imperial treasury at a cost of 500, granting +10 morale on Fishsticks II."

I'd also suggest that disasters be mixed in with some positive events and some 'neutral' events that aren't purely positive or negative.

[zolobolo]

Show enemy fleet range when fleet is selected via the same dotted line only in red color so the player can determine how far the fleet can go

This would work the same way player fleet range works meaning: if there is a single ship with a longer range, that is ignored and only the ship with the shortest range is considered.

[bjg]

Could you add a "open the whole map" "cheat"? I was wandering if the Tinker opponent was generated after I've added the seventh random AI, but can't quickly check that.

[sven]

Could you add a "open the whole map" "cheat"? I was wandering if the Tinker opponent was generated after I've added the seventh random AI, but can't quickly check that.

If you create a file called 'show_hidden_options.bool' in your root Stars in Shadow dir, you can click on the Options title to get a pane of dev features and cheat options. 'omniscient developer' is one of them.

[bjg]

Could you add a "open the whole map" "cheat"? I was wandering if the Tinker opponent was generated after I've added the seventh random AI, but can't quickly check that.

If you create a file called 'show_hidden_options.bool' in your root Stars in Shadow dir, you can click on the Options title to get a pane of dev features and cheat options. 'omniscient developer' is one of them.

Thanks. Did not know about that particular one. And yes, Tinkers are there.

[akkamaddi]

If you create a file called 'show_hidden_options.bool' in your root Stars in Shadow dir, you can click on the Options title to get a pane of dev features and cheat options. 'omniscient developer' is one of them.

I'm sorry, but I seem to be momentarily afflicted with a bit of The Dumb, and I can't get it to work. Does this work with the Steam version of the game?

I created the show_hidden_options.bool file in ...Steam\steamapps\common\Stars in Shadow\, but did not see the developer option. I have even tried adding .lua and .txt to the file name, just in case that was the issue.

[Chasm]

Tinkers have the tech available *Docking fields* but have nothing unlocked by it or from it. Should it be removed from their tree like it was for the yoral?

[nweismuller]

With the increase in major factions in large maps from 7 to 8, I suggest that the default size of large maps increase from 85 to 95 stars to alleviate early-game crowding.

[Arioch]

You can adjust the number of factions on a map yourself if you feel that it is crowded.

[nweismuller]

I know. I'm just reporting that tipping stars up to 95 has seemed to result in 'better' games in my experience.

[zolobolo]

Generally it would be useful to see some some system info on galaxy map level like star-bases

But for the most practical and maybe easy implementation: an indication would be good to show which systems have not yet been scanned with an explorer ship

Otherwise the player does not know which systems need to be scanned, an activity that gets more important with more events and resources become available + maps getting larger

[akkamaddi]

Suggested tech: Archology Creche (A massive "insta-civ" colony arc)

The Arcology Creche would be a late-game, high level tech that would be a high-end replacement for the colony ship. It would have several prerequisites, including Orbital Construction, Matter Transport, and Arcologies. It is a high-end tech, unlocking the Arcology Creche ship, which has a high coin and metal cost.

The Creche can only be built on a planet with two orbital construction upgrades, and the dominant race must have five or more population units.

Once build, it embarks three (single race) population units. It acts as a colony ship at this point, including the disembark/embark options.

When used to colonize, the ship uses matter transports to disembark most colonists and equipment, largely eliminating shuttle and landing craft. At this point, the ship breaks into large pieces, which are designed to land. The Creche sections are then quickly transformed into small cities with pre-built industrial facilities. In effect, when an Arcology Creche colonizes a planet, it lands three (single species) population units and pre-builds a Factory improvement on the first upgrade slot.