Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Has anyone tried to us the destroyed on use ability with the atmospheric conVersion facilities??

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Something which will probably never come: If combat replay in simultaneous games would show which components are damaged, I would become a collector of classic battles and never leave the house again. This would really help to understand what's going on in battles.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Anyone have any idea if there actually is another patch planned or just work on SEV?

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

SEV is a long ways off.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Actually, Tim Brooks (?) told me that the combat engine game would be out early next year and SEV would be out by the mid/late part of next year....

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

to use the vernacular, "w00t."

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Puke: Huh? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Other things I would like to see as an improvement to the human/computer interface:
1) The numbers in the empire menu line up properly and commas used to separate thousands and millions. This is a really easy fix.
2) Counter-intelligence projects in Empires/Intelligence/Counter-intelligence does not fail. If it is at the top of the list, it is "topped off". We shouldn't have to micromanage this.

Other thoughts:
1) Resource storage. Now, it is a all or nothing thing. I'd like to see the computer allocate temporary storage if there isn't enough "regular storage available". It could "charge" the ratio of temporary storage/regular storage for whatever is in "temporary storage." to cover rust, spoilage, theft etc because it is not a good storage facility. So a small amount in temporary storage (relative to permanent storage) would not be too expensive...but a large amount will be. For example,
-regular storage 100,000
-temporary storage 50,000
-Cost of temp/stor 25,000 (50,000/100,000)(50,000)

2) $$$$ Here we are in a sophisticated universe and we can only barter! I'd like to see a medium of exchange introduced. Some thoughts are:
-Populace can be taxed affecting their happiness
-Projects require money
-Minerals/organics/radioactives can be bought and sold on the open market with money. Maybe on a sliding scale...the more you buy the greater the cost per unit and the more you sell the less money you get per unit. So there would still be an incentive to contact other players [Edit: to] exchange resources for money.

[ August 29, 2002, 03:02: Message edited by: tbontob ]

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I couldn't agree more! In addition to having a money requirement for projects (maybe to speed them up? [within reason]) and open market for resources (how about little space bazaars scattered about the universe like ruins... and the person who colonizes/owns the planet gets a % cut of all tranactions), how about the following:

1) the ability to sell any technology to the "open market". Anyone can then buy the technology that has access to the open market, but you the seller get a royalty fee every time it is sold! Of course players may buy it and then choose to trade it to other races, enter galactic software piracy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

2) the introduction of Plug & Play components. That's right, introduce a component that is essentially a socket, into which you can plug specially designed components of the correct size. Then players can trade individual pluggable components to one another (or purchase with cash on the open market) that can then be integrated onto any ship with the correct socket size/type.
While this would require huge amounts of hard code change, just think of the possibilities!

-players that act as weapons and tech brokers (far more effective than trading whole shipsback and forth)
-players can get others hopelessly addicted to their components by flooding the cheap Version of their product, but then drop production (especially useful if you are the only one with the racial ability to make a certain product)
-by messing with the socket size/type of the component, you could regulate the use of the components you sell (player A only has Parallel ports, so you could cut him out by making all your components scuzzy, etc).
-You could also ensure that you sell an inferior product vs. the one that you actually use by increasing the bulkiness of the items you sell.

Just a few thoughts

[ August 29, 2002, 04:14: Message edited by: jimbob ]

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Oh, and one of the main reasons money even exists (besides being a universal replacement for bartering goods/services) is it's transferability. Resources are relatively bulky, and so difficult to transfer (you can even capture large quantities from retreating enemies) while money, especially once in the paper/electronic for is considerably more 'manouverable'.

So, I'd also like to see that resources are physically split between the storage facilities, and that the resources within the storage facility are captured when the planet is. Money on the other hand would not be a capturable commodity, or to a much lesser degree anyway.

Of course Money should just be one of the resources, not a universal replacement for resources. After all, when times get tough, ya can't eat gold!

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If you're a human. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

That sounds neat! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[quote]Originally posted by jimbob:

Quote:

2) the introduction of Plug & Play components. That's right, introduce a component that is essentially a socket, into which you can plug specially designed components of the correct size. Then players can trade individual pluggable components to one another (or purchase with cash on the open market) that can then be integrated onto any ship with the correct socket size/type. While this would require huge amounts of hard code change, just think of the possibilities! -players that act as weapons and tech brokers (far more effective than trading whole shipsback and forth) -players can get others hopelessly addicted to their components by flooding the cheap Version of their product, but then drop production (especially useful if you are the only one with the racial ability to make a certain product)

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

No! Don't introduce money! We already have 3 resources, and they represent money perfectly well as it is. If you want more resources and micromanagement, ask MM for improvements to supply and population. Let _them_ be your fourth (and fifth) resources. Here's my wishlist in that area:

-Limited supply generation and storage for facilities (instead of just the "quantum reactor" resupply depot we have now)

-Auto redirection of fleets and ships to supply depots if they can do so at no extra movement cost. (reduces micromanagement)

-Minimum population to operate facilities. If there's not enough population for all your facilities, you have to shut some of them down.

-Population keeps *all* of it's attributes when repatriated, not just the atmosphere it breathes.

-Facilities that can increase/ reduce the maximum population limit of a planet.

-independent migration of population. For example, population would automatically move from dangerous to safe planets & systems, from poor to rich, from settled to frontier - in extreme cases moving from one empire to another. (Economic/ political/ war refugees) This would move population managment from the realms of micromanagement into macromanagement, and make you empire feel more like a dynamic, organic society. Just imagine what it would do for roleplay and diplomacy, too...

-A more complex plague model. Not just level 1, level 2 etc. Perhaps have a "plague severity" percentage. I think I'll open a new thread on this...

-Maybe introduce other social problems too. Famine, Drought, Crime waves? Allow plagues and similar problems to spread from planet to planet, including allied planets. Could create some interesting diplomatic situations.

-Allow a planet to go beyond its maximum population limit, at the cost of reduced happiness and greater plague/ famine etc probability (think refugee camp)

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

We have the multi-add why not the multi delete

and view ship movements in this system only !!!!

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd suggest extended that idea so we "buy" supplies with resources; I know the game tries to model this with maintenance costs, but if we're going to limit the supplies available at a resupply depot, there needs to be a way to buy extra supplies. And maybe the supply generation should be tied to production - the more mins/orgs/rads you produce, the more supplies are available...

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Good idea. How about a facility a bit like the resource converter. Resources go in one end, supplies come out the other.
You'd need either a mix of resources to get supplies (ie 1000m+1000o+1000r=1000supplies) or even better, have it so that you can buy with any of the 3, but you get better rates on rads and orgs than you do on the others. Make those rads and orgs work for you...

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd suggest extended that idea so we "buy" supplies with resources; I know the game tries to model this with maintenance costs, but if we're going to limit the supplies available at a resupply depot, there needs to be a way to buy extra supplies. And maybe the supply generation should be tied to production - the more mins/orgs/rads you produce, the more supplies are available...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It certainly sounds reasonable for a Resupply Depot to COST a certain amount of resources to operate each turn. But you could just as easily reason that the maintenance costs of ships is precisely the resources cost of the supplies they use (along with replacement parts, etc.). So, it's kind of a "six of one, half a dozen of the other" situation...

[ August 29, 2002, 20:38: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Hi!
I am also not for introducing "money" as rescource. Money is the human expression of having an abstract trade medium. In SE4 there are not very many human societies. Most are Aliens. Its not at all sure that an alien society developes concepts like banks, stock exchanges or money. Thats why we should concentrate rather on "hard" resources which every race can see, feel, touch, swallow and use for warwarfe.

But I am for more different resource types. Why having a limit on 3 resource types? I think the amount of resources a game can have should NOT be hardcoded. It should be moddable. Then we could have rare resources for special components for example. ("hey lets trade 10000 organics against 100 polymorphus crystals because I wanna buy 5 hypercomputer III components for my new cruiser design")

IMO this would be an valuable addition to the existing resource system.

To the suggestions of dogscoff:

"-limited supply generation"

Oh yes this is a good idea. Additionally there should be the possibility to transfer supply points manually form one ship to another. The automatic transfer is not really satisfying.

"-Minimum population to operate facilities. If there's not enough population for all your facilities, you have to shut some of them down."

I am also for this, but the problem is that in the beginning the most planets have just 1 POP. this means that you cannot operate facilities ohn fresh planets. Thus I would suggest for not shutting facilities down if they dont have enough pop. They should rather operate at an lower rate (50% efficiency or so)

"-Population keeps *all* of it's attributes when repatriated, not just the atmosphere it breathes.

-Facilities that can increase/ reduce the maximum population limit of a planet.

-independent migration of population. "

This ideas are really good. They improve the game IMO much. I like also the social ideas of dogscoff.

Another things I would like to see

-short range fighters: cheaper fighters which cannot operate on the system map, just in tactical combat.

-space docks which are used only for building space units. (fighters, drones etc.)

-army camps which are used only for building ground units.

-more differenciated ground combat system. It should honor different ground unit designs but it should also be simple. (please no second "fading suns" or "space general")

-the possibility to get "rumors" of different parts of the galaxy. These rumors should be false or true. For example the message should be delivered in form of a lucky event, or in form of a special intelligence mission or in form of having automatic infos about operations of allies and neighbours. (because you have different own organizations - abstract- operating in the other territory. )

Sorry for my bad English

Klaus

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Klaus, I like your ideas. Some of them may be moddable now, the short range fighters being one of them. Just take out the small fighter engines and force the player to use afterburners. Add different levels of afterburners for different levels of engine tech.

Also, I love the rumours idea, and it might be moddable! A while back someone noticed that random events and intel projects were in fact based on the same code. Lots of people went away to add new intel projects based on the existing random events (destroy star, plague etc)

However I'm not if sure anyone tried to do it the other way around and create new random events based on the existing intel projects. If that worked you could get information about other empires as random events. This would be very very cool. I wonder if the other empire would get angry at you. I wonder if you'd get information about empires you haven't met yet. Even cooler...

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yup that would be a very cool idea!! Could make for some interesting games such as fighting over that one planet with some special resource or being forced to be real nice to the empire who controls a certain resource and then trading for it.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

If you're gonna be buying supplies with resources, I'd suggest a conVersion setup something like this:
</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">1 of any single resource type = 1 supply</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">1 of two different resource types = 3 supply</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">1 of all three resource types = 6 supply</font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This encourages you to use all three resources, but if you happen to have a stockpile of one specific type, you can convert just that resource into supply.
It goes without saying that extra resources that exceed your storage should automatically be converted into supply for you at the most favorable rate (e.g., an extra 100 minerals and 50 organics would yield 200 supply).

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

I like Dogscoff and Klaus's ideas alot, although i dont think im for the whole 'buying' or 'converting' supplies idea. i like micromanagment, but not that much, and i like the ability to ignore micromanagment if i want.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd suggest extended that idea so we "buy" supplies with resources; I know the game tries to model this with maintenance costs, but if we're going to limit the supplies available at a resupply depot, there needs to be a way to buy extra supplies. And maybe the supply generation should be tied to production - the more mins/orgs/rads you produce, the more supplies are available...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It certainly sounds reasonable for a Resupply Depot to COST a certain amount of resources to operate each turn. But you could just as easily reason that the maintenance costs of ships is precisely the resources cost of the supplies they use (along with replacement parts, etc.). So, it's kind of a "six of one, half a dozen of the other" situation...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yeah, my idea only has merit if we accept the idea that a resupply depot only creates X number of supplies per turn. There'd have to be a minimum number of supplies it can generate, but we should be able to "buy" more (just like resource conVersion). As Baron points out (and I pointed out in the original post), we're already paying a "maintenance cost" for each ship that theoretically covers the cost of supplies, but then again it takes a lot more to maintain a battleship that's actively engaged in a campaign than it does to maintain that same battleship on routine patrol. So, I'd contend that the built-in maintenance cost is for supplying a ship on routine patrol; during long campaigns, more supplies would be required. As the game stands now, those extra supplies just "appear" magically at resupply depots, but if a resupply depot has to store supplies and/or generate those supplies at some specified rate, there should be a way to force the generation of those supplies. I suggested tying supply generation to production because empires with large production surpluses ought to have the ability to produce more supplies than empires that are barely able to pay maintenance costs on the existing ships. And also as a way to reduce the micromanagement of converting resources to supplies.

I'd probably also recommend levels of "resupply" facilities, tied to the existing resupply research chain, so at resupply level 5 you'd get both a quantum reactor component and a quantum reactor facility. BTW - if we end up with a resupply depot that only produces a set number of supplies per turn, then bases would need to be changed as well...

I also think MM should have implemented the proposed feature (way back during the initial design phase of SE4) of being able to "buy" research - i.e., convert extra resources into research points (or even intelligence points) in an emergency. Unfortunately, the AI would never be able to use that properly...

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

"I like Dogscoff and Klaus's ideas alot, although i dont think im for the whole 'buying' or 'converting' supplies idea. i like micromanagment, but not that much, and i like the ability to ignore micromanagment if i want."
What a great excuse for a new Supply Requisition minister. Or, maybe, a new function for the Resupply minister...We all know how intelligent he is. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The original (1977) Version of Starfire had this. You put whatever letter represented your weapon inside [] on the control sheet. It cost extra, but then you could swap out weapons at no cost. That Version really had no campaign (well the "Starfire III: Empires" expansion, but not until 1980), just suggestions for how one might be implimented, but IIRC that is where the optional rule for this was, and it suggested that you could build the weapons separately and store them at planets. One thing we talked about doing was using Stellar Conquest as a strategic module for Starfire, converting each Stellar Conquest IU into some number of Starfiire McR, and otherwise following the suggested rules from the back of the STarfire manual. We never got around to trying it, though.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

You can give a resupply facility a negative amount of resource production. It does work. It's like maintenance for facilities. There owuld be a couple of wierd things though. If you can get past them though it will approximate what you are wanting I guess.

First of all, it would cost you resources every turn the resupply facility is in operation, not just when ships are refueling. And it wouldn't cost you any more to refuel a bunch of ships than it would to refuel one, so it wouldn't be a true "resources to supply" converter.

Secondly in a regular infinite resource game it would be cheaper to put a resupply depot on a low resource world than on a high resources one. Just as a resource extractor produces less on a low resource world, the negative production on the facility would be factored by the value of the planet. On a planet with all zeros it would be free to operate.

Thirdly in a limited resource game, the facility would actually improve the value of the planet it was on, just like a value improvement plant. But it would work on a fixed rate instead of a percentage like a value improvement plant does.

Geoschmo

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

You could give it the Solar Resource Generation ability with a negative number--but then binary and trinary star systems pay more. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'd never even considered modding the current game to include paying for supplies... sounds like my initial thought holds true, that it's fairly useless unless resupply depots are changed to produce limited amounts of supply. Which isn't likely to happen as a patch for SE4; but maybe for SE5 (which, if all the way-out ideas on the forum as a whole are implemented, could really be micromanagement hell... but we'd probably all still love it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

What i would like to see in the next patch is: (Print out) feature, when i finished setting up a game i would like to see everything on(setup) related to this. this way after playing 500 turns in a certain game, my memory is kinda Blank.

Ferengi Rules of Acquisition #97 Enough...is never enough.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

We all know (most of us - that is) by now -- that SE IV can be a micro-management nightmare.

One of those nightmares was upgrading a facility on a zillion planets. This is a breeze if you click on the Planet icon (upper left) and then click on Upgrade Facilities. Yahoo!

This doesn't help - though - for those inevitable 'lost' planets whom you (the emperor or whatever) has neglected to fill the build queue. Now you have to wade through a zillion planets to find the ones that have some slots open.

If there's a way of showing just the 'open-slot' planets -- I haven't found it yet. But wouldn't it be nice if you could set the list so that only undeveloped or partially undeveloped planets would show up?

Works for me! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

If you select the wrench (constuction queue menu) that lists all the planets - click on the heading "Construction Queue" - that will sort them by alphabetically order showing all the empty queues at the top.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">True that helps but still the ability to filter it and only show those planets with space available would be very nice.

[ August 31, 2002, 16:21: Message edited by: DavidG ]

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Just sort it by # of facility slots used.
Zip to the bottom and check on all of the planets with zero facilities built.

You can also scan the list to see if any planets aren't full of facilites, and doublecheck them.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

I would like the AI to check its current treaty status before it proposes one, and cancel the proposal if it already has that treaty with you.

I'm tired of getting Partnership proposals from my partners every turn.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well that is very strange: I never saw this!!
What Version are you playing??

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

In AI games, I almost always get the treaty proposal twice in a row. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

That is, I decline it, and then the next turn, it is proposing it again. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

1. I really want better analysis tools so i can see what i'm doing and where i went, Basically i could print out a bunch of stats and records from a 100 turn period and then analyze them to my hearts content.

2. A built in calculator, no buttons, would just ref to the keypad but a little window that responds to 1587/15 or whatever ftr/mine/invasion math you need to do without opening windows calc each time.

3. when you use a LR scanner on an enemy i want that ship added to my list of enemy designs, and then i want to be able to click on any ship of that class that i know what it looks like and WITHOUT a LR scanner see what it is. I don't like clicking back and forth when the computer could automate this and it woudl still be super fair. B/c i can't record the designs my LR scanners get i need to write them down http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif micro hell.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">A print out would be a nice feature. Would also allow a person to more objectively compare the games he played.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

I'd like to see in the next patch : Stronger
( Population minister ),and a setting to adjust this. On certain mods,most of the time the minister drops pop but stays there when the planet has only 2 bars. even see minister take from a low pop world?. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Skulky Wrote;A built in calculator, no buttons, would just ref to the keypad but a little window that responds to 1587/15 or whatever ftr/mine/invasion math you need to do without opening windows calc each time.

Reply ;Absolutly?, using all 4 of my brains is too hard, using paper & pen is a distraction.

Ferengi Rules of Acquisition #16 A deal is a deal...until a better one comes along.

[ September 01, 2002, 09:54: Message edited by: HEMAN ]

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But I mean queues that are unfilled or with slots open. Currently your method only shows which planets are building and which are not. It says nothing about unfilled slots.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

"It says nothing about unfilled slots."

Yes it does. There are multiple tabs on the left side of that screen, click the facilities tab and it will show you the number of facilities each planet has. You can also click on the # of facilties list (top part) and it will sort by that collum.

Phoenix-D

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, it is a rather odd situation: A PBW game in v1.49 + TDM-ModPack 2.0, AI vs Humans. The two "AIs" that keep sending the proposals are actually human-controlled empires that need a replacement player. (If anyone's interested, the game is "The Evil Within".)

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well!! Another du'oh moment brought to you by Mother Nature. Stay tuned for more!!

Thanks! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

[ September 01, 2002, 21:42: Message edited by: Elowan ]

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

I see a lot of good ideas on this list. Also a couple of bad ideas, but I'll just ignore them and hope they go away. My thoughts are regarding supply. For more realism, there really shouldn't be an arbitrary "supply" resource. Instead, ships should be forced to carry the same resources that you use elsewhere. For example, a human ship would need minerals for spare parts, which would be used up as time passes, and at an accelerated rate when moving, firing weapons, etc.; radioactives for reactor fuel, used much like minerals; and organics for food, used at a more or less constant rate. This would of course add complexity, but I think it would be cool. Obviously, this would also require physical movement of resources around the empire to make sense, but I like that idea anyway. Especially if you combine it with moddable resources like someone suggested. Or we could keep things simple.

Also, a question. I've created components for ships that produce intel points and research points, but I've never tested them. Do these not work?

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Good idea on the print outs... That would be nice... a nice spread sheet... with the info...

Love reports... and lots of them that are sortable...

But this unique naming system is driving me nuts...

As does the fact that names give away too much info..... If a player changes his planet name then only the player should see this not the rest of the players...

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Suicide Junkie (and others) have tried to get the intel and research components to work, but no luck so far. It has been requested as a patch improvement, but MM has not yet done the hardcode changes needed.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

I'd like to see an infinite research tree. Something one can pour excess research points into for marginal improvements of resource production, weapon damage, supply storage, armor/shield use, ect. The levels of course get progressively more demanding of research points and only provide marginal improvements, but it'd be something for a research based race to go on late in the game. A single mineral producing facility that changes production based on tech might be more appropriate than a separate type of facility for each level.

Sattelite and mine limits: Satellites should be limited by a matter of maintenance, not some arbitrary number. Mines should be a bit more abstract in use to easily allow more than 100. Stars! uses mines in a percentage chance of hitting mines based on speed. Minefields also decay naturally. Thus, mining an area shouldn't be a guarantee of destruction of the enemy, nor should a single minesweeper be guarentee of safety of a fleet.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

Speaking only on the topic of research, I'd like the following:
</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Make divide points not waste points when projects are near completion. Instead, pool extra points and redivided them. Same for the remainder in the case of uneven division. Hate having 10,000rp and dividing over three projects and getting 3,333rp in each. Unless I'm mistaken, doesn't the AI always use divide? This would help it out too.</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Set an option in Settings.txt or the game config screens that allows us to choose diminishing returns for research. In other words, the more rp you dump into a project, the less actual rps it gets. Just for example, using: RP * 0.95^(RP/10000) would yield a 5% loss for every 10000 rps in a single project (that is, 20000 rps would yield 5% less than 10000 rps).</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The ability to restrict a tech from someone with a racial tech. The existing value in the TechArea.txt file for specifying a racial tech could be used, just switch to flags instead of numbers. So instead of 1-5 for racial techs, use 1, 2, 4, 8 and 16. Then use 32, 64, 128, 256 and 512 for a racial tech restriction. So, if making a tech available to Organic is 2, restricting from those with Organic would be 64. Just add numbers together to get multiple restrictions/permissions (i.e., 992 would mean no one with a racial tech could access that technology).</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And if it isn't already possible (keep forgetting to check), make it so a racial techs can have a starting level, thereby granting said tech to only those allowed to access it in the first place.
  </font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's my quick list for reseach improvements.

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">AI research like humans - it never divide point equally. Regardless of how many projects you programed it to keep in research queue. MM get this aspect right. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Things we\'d like to see in the next patch
 

The first things that come to mind for me are:

1. Sticky options to start the game (drives me nuts to have to reset my favorite settings every time I start a game!)

2. Ability to select exactly which techs and levels we want to start a game with (as it was in SE3.)