Hello everybody!

I am new to this forum so I don't know if this is the correct place to ask these questions...

I just want to say I like the game so far, it is quite addictive. However, I have some questions about missing features, such as:

(1) ACCELERATE BUILDING. It is possible to simply "purchase" the construction with credits in order to accelerate the process?
(2) UPGRADING. Is it possible to upgrade an obsolete ship? If so, how is it done? I have not even figured out how to disband an obsolete ship, let alone upgrade it.

I would also like to add, how do you launch an invasion of another star system? In the 1st game, you had to option to "Attack System" but in this one, that option is not available.

Hello DLF2000 and welcome to the forums.

The came is currently in alpha stage and it isn't fully functional. There is no combat engine, no AI and it is impossible to attack a system. About the ship upgrading, our game has different classes of ships for eg. Cruiser I and Cruiser II so you can't upgrade an NX class to Constitution class, Constitution to Excelsior.... and scrapping isn't implemented yet.ž

Hope this helps, and thanks for the feedback.

And an option to accelerate production (NOT buy the item) is planned to be implemented.

Acceleration will likely be around 10% and it will cost credits, possibly even other resources. But like .Iceman said, it's not going to be an instant build option.

The final detail on this system is yet to be decided.

Oh, and if you find the build rates too slow, don't worry too much. The game hasn't been balanced yet. We will tweak the build costs and industrial outputs when the game is closer to completion.

It will probably work on a logarithmic scale with diminished returns and an upper limit of +100% build efficiency. The number of credits required for a unit of improvement will accelerate. In other words, getting a +10% efficiency increase may cost n credits, a +20% increase may cost 3n credits, and a +30% increase may cost 6n credits. The fastest build time will probably be half of the regular build time, though it will cost you a lot of credits.

It'll probably look something like this:

Will players be able to manually enter the amount of credits they want to spend on increasing build speed? Or will there be preselected credit amount selections based on the size of the build time reduction?

Preselected amounts would be a fairer system, since players would otherwise be putting random credit numbers in to see what effect it has.

Both ways have their cons.
The real problem with the first is it is very prone to MM (precisely because you'd want to see the effect of various settings, but that wouldn't be the bad part IMO).
The second does not guarantee any efficiency with the money you spend, so it's kind of unacceptable too IMO.
The ideal would be to have something like the second, but with the options being related to actual gains in construction time, like
-1 turn = 6k
-2 turns = 18k
etc
It should be limited to 3 or 4 options though.

I was gonna go with a slider...

Always going for the third option...

I didn't even think of that mate. But again, will the slider have predefined credit amounts in steps (Obviously calculated on how much work still needs to be done), or will it simply be a free slider with players choosing exactly how much they are going to spend on increasing the build rate?

As long as you're shown the construction time reduction too, a slider sounds good. Now, how about multiple items in the queue? Will it only work for the first, or will all items have its own slider? Ships too? Could get complicated UI-wise.

Yes, though the best we can do is show an estimate of the construction time. If the player signs a treaty and gives away all of his credits, he won't be able to maintain the credit infusion he originally planned for the build project.

It would have to be on a per-item basis, as more than one build item may be constructed each turn (provided there is sufficient industry left over).

Perhaps the slider should be somewhere below the structure image.

Ah, so the slider credit cost is per turn? I assumed it would be a one-off cost on the turn you give the order.

What happens if the player cancels construction? Transfer the industry Civilization-style? Or is it simply lost? What if credits have already been spent boosting the build rate?

Well, it's not an "instant buy" as in BotF, so we need to leave the option open to cancel a build project, even if it has been accelerated. Similarly, we need to account for a system that is lost to invasion/bombardment/etc. mid-production (the effect is pretty much the same). It's not very convenient to require all the credits up front, which is why I was leaning towards the continuous ("per-turn") investment.

How about having a clickable square (like those you used in the enhanced summary dialog pic you posted eons ago) next to each item in the queue which you can tick, and that accelerates production by x% when on (for the increased cost discussed above) - a toggle, that you can toggle on and off at your leisure.

Invasions/bombardment should halt all queues, losing the system should destroy all queues; shouldn't have any problems with the above.

I noticed that even in this alpha version of the game, it is hard to group ships into a fleet. Further more, I also noticed that one cannot take a group, click and drag over another group and simply push Ctrl-1 (or 2, 3, etc.) to make them "1st Fleet", "2nd Fleet," etc. I think this would make large fleet movements easier, especially if one has to mobilise 20+ ships to fight a Borg cube.

Also, in terms of training a crew, would it not be easier to have a player simply build a barracks+shipyard combo to give a ship's crew 1/5 or 2/5 experience (shipyard alone grants 0/5 experience) and then send them to a specialised training academy to get a maximum 3/5 experience? In BOTF, only very few races have training academies, it takes a long time to train them up, and even if they operate in large group and survive a battle with the Borg or a large rival fleet, they only gain 10 or 15 (on a scale of hundreds) experience points.

Good points. We will have to see how Mike has reworked that in the new release.

Even with the most recent update, the game does not allow a player to use multiple construction ships to build a station. As it is now, it takes far too long to build a station; 1% per turn and only one ship allowed to do construction means it takes 100 turns to build a station.

This is a known problem, DLF, and is just an issue of balancing. We need to both increase the construction rate and reduce the cost. You can actually mod your own game files if you want to sort the problem.

You should be able to utilize multiple construction ships by putting them in the same fleet.

The problem with the current stats is you would likely need several fleets, Mike.

Have you had any success with the TechObjectsDatabase.xml file I sent you? I've been trying to avoid modding it since I sent you the file, but Vjeko has done a little work on it and there's a few more things I want to do with it. I could easily bump up the build rates at the same time.

Please don't, not without thinking about it first.
The problem is not the construction rate per se, but the way the game works - again!
Construction ships have a Work Capacity of 50~60, depending on empire. That's the equivalent to 5~6 industry I facilities, or 1 industry VI; more than enough comparatively, IMO. The Feds have a construction ship II with WC 100. Now, the problem.
Outposts I cost 1000, IIs 3500.
Starbase I costs 10,000 , IIs 35,000. <- the problem.
Since there's no upgrade to the construction ships (except for the feds), SBs get screwed. Changing the WC of construction ships to a higher value will make Outposts really easy to build, so it's not a solution. Their cost is fine, comparable to a Shipyard once their costs are raised to account for the fixed military production - when it is fixed that is.

The solution(s) would be to have another construction ship for all empires (except the Feds), with say WC 150, AND lower the costs of SBs to say about half the current.
That, or scrap the upgrades of OPs and SBs. Let's see how useful they'll be in the game.

I'm with .Iceman on this one. The problem isn't with the mechanics; it's with the numbers in the game data. The cost difference between Starbases and Outposts is too high. We need to bring them closer together. Once that's done, we may (or may not) need to adjust the construction ships' work capacity. The way to approach this is to figure out what the relative construction times should be in a 'typical' scenario (moderate commitment of ships/resources). Then we can determine the appropriate build costs and/or work capacity to achieve those construction times.

For example (and only for example ):

1. A Outpost should probably require 2-3 construction ships to be built in 'typical' completion time; a Starbase might require 4-6.
2. An Outpost's 'typical' build time should be roughly equivalent to 4-5 cruiser-class ships.
3. A Starbase's 'typical' build time should be roughly equivalent to 8-10 cruiser-class ships.

I tend to think that each empire should have a Construction Ship II w/ work capacity increased to the point that a fleet of CSII's can construct a Starbase II in roughly the same amount of time as an equally-sized fleet of CSI's constructing a Starbase I. I'd also be fine if it took a bit longer to construct the level-2 stations, even with the same number of committed ships (also level-2). Maybe up to 33% longer? Definitely no more than 50% longer.

Well I can easily reduce the build costs then. You say 50% .Iceman, but that's with Construction ship II's. That means another 4 models for the Empires (Since the Feds already 1 have leaving 4), so to reduce the burden on the modellers for the time being lets just go for a pure construction cost reduction and add more construction ships and rejig the costs again later.

What sort of reduction would you suggest? 55%? 66%? 75%? And should the Feds get a smaller reduction since they already get a Construction Ship II?

It's the eras/upgrade system all over again. The techtree I'm working on will reduce "eras" to 4, mitigating this issue. It doesn't mean Mike will go with it, though.

Also notice that with the way ships are implemented, with large values for Range and Fuel, [and scanners too, with their large ranges] OPs and SBs will most likely be inefficient.
And Tiny maps, for example, will most likely be useless - unless you can start a 1v1 game, or choose the number of starting empires. Even so, mid and late tech will be overwhelming.

We shouldn't reduce the eras, they are one of the more important features. We should feature all five eras.

Well, the game's structure is more important And 4 is a perfect fit.

I don't see why.

It wouldn't be hard to scale fuel/sensor range with the size of the map. But since those values are all represented as integers (whole numbers), we'd have to adjust the map sizes so that there's a common denominator. Otherwise the values wouldn't scale uniformly. The fastest way to do this would be to scrap the 'tiny' size and adjust 'small' and 'medium' such that they are divisible by 20.

Old:

New: