View Single Post
  #2  
Old August 16th, 2002, 02:03 PM
dogscoff's Avatar

dogscoff dogscoff is offline
General
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,245
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
dogscoff is on a distinguished road
Default Re: New ideias / concepts / problems in / for SE4 GOLD after 1.78

Good ideas in there, including some I haven't seen before. I think a lot of the ones you list should be low priorities, but any improvement is an improvement=-)

BTW, universal colony components are already possible they're just not in the standard game. Play Devnullmod, that has unicolonies.

I'd like to add to the list:

-Route-finding code will automatically divert ships to pass through a friendly resupply depot if that can be done at no extra movement cost. This will help both AI and humans.
(Flags in Empire options to turn this on/off for own/allied depots?)

-Intel Project success probability modified by:
--Presence of own/ friendly race on target planet.
--Anger level of target planet. (collaborators.)
--Presence of target race in own empire. (brainwashed agents=-)
--Experience level of target ship.
--Any other relevent factors I've forgotten.
Percentage modifiers moddable in one of the text files.

-Ground combat modified by terrain: Rock planet race at a disadvantage on an ice planet, for example. Percentage modifier moddable in one of the text files.

-"Modify ground combat" ability for facilities, and maybe even for (friendly) ships.

-Allow retrofit, scrap, mothball and analyse to be added to order queues (ie move to planet, mothball.)

-Bring back the Halt command from SE3. Effectively a command that says "Don't move for remainder of turn" and can be added to order queues. (Two of them in a row should mean halting for 2 turns.)

-contextual rather than immediate calculation of "nearest", so that repair/ resupply at nearest can be meaningfully added to order queues.

-ability to re-arrange and remove items from order queues like you can with build queues.

I have many other suggestions, but these are the ones I think could be implemented comparitively easily. Small changes, but I'm going for a high "bang for buck."

EDIT: typos, crapnesses. Need sleep...

[ August 16, 2002, 13:21: Message edited by: dogscoff ]
Reply With Quote