Author Topic: Suggestions for changes to the game - discussion thread  (Read 32310 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anony

  • Video Pinball Wizard
  • *
  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #210 on: September 08, 2008, 03:44:26 pm »
I really didn't think I was going to end up agreeing with most of you about space.  I think most of the complaints about the other stages are absolutely wrong.  I love tribal, cell, and the other little runts.

But space, sheesh, there is some work to be done.  I just don't understand it.  The punishment for not knowing really what to do is very harsh and very permanent.

So here I am, making it my goal to perpetuate peace in the solar system, so I'm doing a quest for some jerks I just met to make them happy.  They send me into a planet that I guess is filled with hostile guys, since I was imediatly attacked. I assume I can safely defend myself, but no!!  For some reason blowing up a guy that is attacking you sets you to war.  Then I spend the rest of my game at my homeworld because it appears I'll never quit getting attacked.

I really don't think people should be allowed to strike you without regard, but if you do anything your at war.  People should only attack you if your actually at war.

And after all that it seems the quest would of just been impossible to do.  I eventually get a moment to go back before the quest timer (get rid of the timers, it's too frantic up there even without them) and my scanner won't tell me where these so called "infected people" are.  I assume at last, that since the empire I'm hovering over is just 2 small towns, that maybe everyone is infected?  With just a minute or 2 left to make my decision, I start blasting the town.  I die of course.

I just don't understand what in hell I'm supposed to be doing, and it's really no fun at all.

People are NON STOP calling me up and demanding money, saying I'm worthless unless I pay.  There's just no breathing room.

And missions that are going to set you at war really need WARNINGS on them.  It should be one of the rejection methods "Sorry, I won't do missions that will spark intersolar incidents"

Also, don't make the giant monster that eats you if you DARE try to enjoy flying over the water, the same monster on every planet.  At least give me some eye candy during my unfair death.

Oh, and come on.  The first time I take a relic from another planet it's just fun and games.  Why in the world is it theft?  If they wanted it they'd of taken it. 

But of course putting it gently back on the ground doesn't do anything, your still under attack!

Anyway, even though I have nothing but high praise for the other stages, and I'm sure I'll go over then over and over again, Space really makes my blood boil.

This was the first complaint post I've made about the game, and I'll try not to make many more in order to not trivialize the value of my feeback.  I suggest anyone else complaining also try to keep your comments to mostly constructive things and then to back off and hope for the best.

Offline DarkDragon

  • Final Fantasy Fanatic
  • *****
  • Posts: 6501
    • View Profile
Re: Spore save system needs an auto-save (vaguely tool spoiler)
« Reply #211 on: September 08, 2008, 04:00:38 pm »
Oh come on, you do all that (which takes hours) and don't bother to save on a game that you know is new and has a lot of potential bugs or crashes... then come here and complain about it?  :D
DarkDragon's Minecraft Survival Server (use this as the IP):

gamingsteve.dyndns.org

- The server uses a whitelist, if you're not on the whitelist (can't connect), PM me your minecraft name.

Offline Atarr

  • Atari Combat Vet
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #212 on: September 08, 2008, 04:18:37 pm »
I haven't seen this mentioned so...

At the moment the only way to end a war without conquering all their worlds is to pay my enemy a lot of money. What I'd like to see is the option to threaten them with a planet buster on the contact screen. If that fails then hitting them with the planet buster should stop them attacking my colonies. The only time I used one on an enemy world two things happened, 1) my enemies got angrier and 2) my allies severed their alliances. Neither of those results are worth the 5,000,000 price tag for the thing (just looking cool doesn't justify it either).
I'm not saying they still can't be mad at me. I'd like to see them attack me only when I go into their space after hitting them with the PB, and leave my empire alone. Or maybe not even attack me then out of fear, but at the same time having all the diplomacy/trade options greyed out. I mean, what's the point of having such a terrifying weapon if it fails to terrify anyone?

Edit: Also, colonies should have more than one of each ufo tool for sale. It's a pain in the arse having to travel between planets to get a decent number of colony packs (once you have the money for it of course).
« Last Edit: September 08, 2008, 04:25:36 pm by Atarr »

Offline Rusted

  • Battlezone Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #213 on: September 08, 2008, 05:24:41 pm »
You paid 5m for a planet buster!  Rusted's galactic bargain guide was not read ;P
http://www.gamingsteve.com/blab/index.php?topic=14284.msg608137#msg608137


@anony:  When you have the "infected" mission make sure your "radar" is on.  It's the first ufo tab (blue tab) and it should be highlighted yellow if it's on.  Once in awhile you have to turn it off, then turn it back on.  If at first you don't detect anything fly at a higher orbit, the first time you hear a ping/see the white cone, you want to lower your altitude, the "beeping" becomes more frequent as you get closer.  Usally the creature will be visible on top of a little green puddle.  Frequently they're snakes or some tiny creature and you may just have to laser spam the area.

With regards to enemy missions etc, it is imperative that you make colonies fast, not terraform, but just make an "outer shell" of T0 outposts.  The more systems you have the less attacks, less likely to get into war etc.


Some other stuff, like ignore pirate attacks helps.  I did a write up that I thought was useful, but the forum doesn't agree might help:
http://www.gamingsteve.com/blab/index.php?topic=14147.0


If it's any consolation it gets easier, it seems that if you don't know exactly what you're doing right off you generally have to spent 3-4 hours fighting out of a hole.  Playing it through a couple more times it's much easier, I can usally get about 10-12 outposts up and running before I get my first attack.
Terraforming. 
Turning dirt, forming.
Turning dirt; forming.
Terraforming.


Rusted -Sporepedia Name and Link
PM if you add me, I'll return the favor.

Offline Praetyre

  • Space Invaders Junkie
  • *
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #214 on: September 08, 2008, 05:44:04 pm »
Good ideas.

Combat as a minigame: I've added an idea that is a bit different from yours, but along the same lines.

Tech tree in Civ game: I considered this, but the problem is that the typical Civilization-like tech tree of bronze age to future as you suggest is awfully earth-centered. Other races might take a completely different path. To quote the Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy movie: "a race with fifty noses, and the first to develop the aerosol deodorant before the wheel". This is why I didn't include it yet. For tribal it should be doable, as there is only a limited amount of technology to work with, but for Civ this is significantly more problematic. If anyone has any good ideas for this that don't constrain you to Earth's history I'd love to hear them.

What about a system akin to the Creature phases, with technology cards gained in some fashion (or technologies sold among cities)?

Also, just to make it clear (since the wording was kind of ambigious) what I'm proposing isn't to actually make the units waaay bigger visually. It's to adopt a scale (e.g. 1 hp on a vehicle unit is 1 vehicle of that type, 1 attack point is equivalent to one of that vehicle, 1 HP is 10 men, etc) and adjust units to an algorithm to account for that (higher tiers being unlocked as techs, since supply systems wouldn't be advanced enough to support 1,000,000 men in a civilization using spears and stones, while numbers are subtracted from city population). That way, you can have units with realistic numbers (even in the Bronze Age, they had battles with tens or hundreds of thousands of men on certain occasions, and Kursk had thousands of tanks) without needing an engine that makes the Total War series look like a picnic.

However, it would mainly be infantry that necessitate this. Vehicle battles already work pretty well and realistically if you assume 1 hp=1 vehicle.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2008, 05:50:36 pm by Praetyre »

Offline darkov

  • Lunar Lander Leader
  • *
  • Posts: 91
  • Sporepedia - Arrozal
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #215 on: September 08, 2008, 08:07:18 pm »
I just lost 4 hours of victory in the space stage to some bull**** "Spore has stopped working" window.

I know I should've saved more often, in fact I'm going to start after every planet but this is pretty ****ing crushing. I had just started taking the fight to the other aggressive Empires around me, everything was going sweet.

Maxis?

AUTOSAVE FEATURE IN NEXT PATCH PLEASE.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2008, 09:53:10 pm by Danzik »
"It's an experience that is not often had but it's very memorable. When you've sat back and thought about the meaning of life or your place in the universe or are there aliens out there or did I evolve from pond scum or whatever it is, that kind of range of questions is the domain of Spore and everybody in some sense has asked our own set of those questions." -- Will Wright

Offline Judhudson

  • Pac-Man Maniac
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
    • View Profile
    • SporePrograms
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #216 on: September 08, 2008, 08:11:46 pm »
Heh, I agree with you bud :)

But here is a tip that my 3D modeling instructor left me:  SOS (Save often, Stupid*!)



*by no means was that an insult to you :)
Owner of SporePrograms & SimPrograms
http://www.sporeprograms.com - http://www.simprograms.com

Offline Rusted

  • Battlezone Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #217 on: September 08, 2008, 09:18:26 pm »
I just spam Ctrl-S a lot.

I've had two "error savegames"
Terraforming. 
Turning dirt, forming.
Turning dirt; forming.
Terraforming.


Rusted -Sporepedia Name and Link
PM if you add me, I'll return the favor.

Offline starshard0

  • Mystery House Madman
  • **
  • Posts: 203
  • I'm waiting for Spore to come out, don't bug me.
    • View Profile
    • Starshard0's Super Blog
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #218 on: September 08, 2008, 09:19:53 pm »
Autosave can just as easily mess you up, since there are not multiple saves.
Maybe they could have a little window that pops up every so often (maybe you can adjust the intervals) reminding you to save.
Bored? On the internet? Probably not, but if so, check out my blog.

Offline FalconNL

  • Atari Combat Vet
  • *
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #219 on: September 08, 2008, 11:02:39 pm »
Good ideas.

Combat as a minigame: I've added an idea that is a bit different from yours, but along the same lines.

Tech tree in Civ game: I considered this, but the problem is that the typical Civilization-like tech tree of bronze age to future as you suggest is awfully earth-centered. Other races might take a completely different path. To quote the Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy movie: "a race with fifty noses, and the first to develop the aerosol deodorant before the wheel". This is why I didn't include it yet. For tribal it should be doable, as there is only a limited amount of technology to work with, but for Civ this is significantly more problematic. If anyone has any good ideas for this that don't constrain you to Earth's history I'd love to hear them.

What about a system akin to the Creature phases, with technology cards gained in some fashion (or technologies sold among cities)?

Also, just to make it clear (since the wording was kind of ambigious) what I'm proposing isn't to actually make the units waaay bigger visually. It's to adopt a scale (e.g. 1 hp on a vehicle unit is 1 vehicle of that type, 1 attack point is equivalent to one of that vehicle, 1 HP is 10 men, etc) and adjust units to an algorithm to account for that (higher tiers being unlocked as techs, since supply systems wouldn't be advanced enough to support 1,000,000 men in a civilization using spears and stones, while numbers are subtracted from city population). That way, you can have units with realistic numbers (even in the Bronze Age, they had battles with tens or hundreds of thousands of men on certain occasions, and Kursk had thousands of tanks) without needing an engine that makes the Total War series look like a picnic.

However, it would mainly be infantry that necessitate this. Vehicle battles already work pretty well and realistically if you assume 1 hp=1 vehicle.

Personally I'm not a very big fan of the card system, as the direction you take is decided by chance instead of yourself. Suppose you have decided to play a ground-based militaristic civilization but the only cards you find are things like jet engines and air-to-surface missiles. This robs you of creative control. For the cell and creature phase it's somewhat realistic, but I don't think it will work for Civ phase.

As for the battles: obviously seeing thousands of troops on the battlefield would be more realistic. However, there are very few games that do this, mainly for technical and to a lesser extent gameplay reasons. Hence my suggestion for armies of up to about 50 units (not an absolute limit, just a rough indication). This is roughly the amount you'll see in most RTS games. It's high enough to have different groups of reasonable size (say 10 artillery, 25 tanks, 10 infantry, 5 helicopters) but low enough to be able to clearly identify and manage them. Basically my proposal comes down to a faster-paced Advance Wars.

Offline Rusted

  • Battlezone Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #220 on: September 08, 2008, 11:20:32 pm »
So I was saying to my self, "Self... eliminating pirates and eco disasters would kill a lot of game play, and remove the significance of a lot of civilization abilities, yet what can be done to fix this error."  An hour later deep into World War Z it occurred to me.


Surrounding allies should greatly reduce the risk of attacks on your colonies, and possibly there is a chance that they will solve eco problems for you, as you do for them.  Maybe this is even enhanced against pirates if they're Knights, or against eco disaster if they're Shaman.

That would also place more significance on allies as well, cause as it stands getting 1 ship in exchange for constant colony maintenance just isn't cutting it.
Terraforming. 
Turning dirt, forming.
Turning dirt; forming.
Terraforming.


Rusted -Sporepedia Name and Link
PM if you add me, I'll return the favor.

Offline Praetyre

  • Space Invaders Junkie
  • *
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #221 on: September 09, 2008, 12:08:04 am »
As for the battles: obviously seeing thousands of troops on the battlefield would be more realistic. However, there are very few games that do this, mainly for technical and to a lesser extent gameplay reasons. Hence my suggestion for armies of up to about 50 units (not an absolute limit, just a rough indication). This is roughly the amount you'll see in most RTS games. It's high enough to have different groups of reasonable size (say 10 artillery, 25 tanks, 10 infantry, 5 helicopters) but low enough to be able to clearly identify and manage them. Basically my proposal comes down to a faster-paced Advance Wars.

Ah, but I'm not proposing to literally have that many troops, as I said. I'm proposing to have it represented statistically through an algorithm for types of units. For example, Civilization A makes Tier II Mainline Tank A, which (assuming the scale is 1 HP=1 tank, and, that the baseline attack is 10, and the HP is 100 as the result of adjustment by the algorithm, 100*10=1000 attack). It appears exactly the same as Civilization B's Tier I Mainline Tank on the field, but it's statistics are dramatically different- Civ B's tank has 10 hp and 100 attack.

It's purely algorithmic, and requires no more units on the battlefield then there already are. Basically, it would be similar to the system used in the Heroes of Might and Magic games, but in the same real-time environment of vanilla Spore.

Offline FalconNL

  • Atari Combat Vet
  • *
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #222 on: September 09, 2008, 12:50:28 am »
Ah, but I'm not proposing to literally have that many troops, as I said. I'm proposing to have it represented statistically through an algorithm for types of units. For example, Civilization A makes Tier II Mainline Tank A, which (assuming the scale is 1 HP=1 tank, and, that the baseline attack is 10, and the HP is 100 as the result of adjustment by the algorithm, 100*10=1000 attack). It appears exactly the same as Civilization B's Tier I Mainline Tank on the field, but it's statistics are dramatically different- Civ B's tank has 10 hp and 100 attack.

It's purely algorithmic, and requires no more units on the battlefield then there already are. Basically, it would be similar to the system used in the Heroes of Might and Magic games, but in the same real-time environment of vanilla Spore.

Ah, ok, I see your point now. So n units with stat x are displayed as one unit with stat n*x. But doesn't that hide any visual sense of strength in numbers? Let's your you tanks as an example.

Civilization A send out one Tier 2 Tank.
Attack score: 100
Cost: 5000

Civilization B sends out 10 Tier 1 Tanks.
Attack score: 20
Cost: 700

What it will look like on the battlefield:
1 Tier 2 Tank (Att 100) vs. 1 "Tier 3 Tank" (Att 200), with the only difference being that unlike a real Tier 3 Tank this combined tank's attack value will drop as it suffers damage (sub-units get destroyed).

In the system I'm proposing you would see one big tank face off against 10 small tanks, which apart from being a lot more visual about the difference in quality/quantity also allows for more strategy: The big tank's gun can only be pointed in one direction so be sending 5 units to each side you gain a strategic advantage and will lose less units.

Offline Praetyre

  • Space Invaders Junkie
  • *
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #223 on: September 09, 2008, 01:00:54 am »
Ah, ok, I see your point now. So n units with stat x are displayed as one unit with stat n*x. But doesn't that hide any visual sense of strength in numbers? Let's your you tanks as an example.

Civilization A send out one Tier 2 Tank.
Attack score: 100
Cost: 5000

Civilization B sends out 10 Tier 1 Tanks.
Attack score: 20
Cost: 700

What it will look like on the battlefield:
1 Tier 2 Tank (Att 100) vs. 1 "Tier 3 Tank" (Att 200), with the only difference being that unlike a real Tier 3 Tank this combined tank's attack value will drop as it suffers damage (sub-units get destroyed).

In the system I'm proposing you would see one big tank face off against 10 small tanks, which apart from being a lot more visual about the difference in quality/quantity also allows for more strategy: The big tank's gun can only be pointed in one direction so be sending 5 units to each side you gain a strategic advantage and will lose less units.

I actually hadn't thought of the dropping attack value, myself, but that's a good idea. The main reason to adopt a more statistical than visual system is because the latter would make it nigh-impossible to get numbers that don't seriously suspend disbelief (1000 men occupying a whole planet, for example). In all honesty, with a 50 unit or so limit, you still wouldn't have anything close to what real battles are like (Kursk, as mentioned, involved thousands of tanks, for an upper limit, and that's just on vehicles. There were battles in feudal China with hundreds of thousands of men), and thus my idea is an attempt to get realistic numbers without having to have a godlike computer to run it.

The formation idea is interesting, though.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2008, 01:09:21 am by Praetyre »

Offline FalconNL

  • Atari Combat Vet
  • *
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: Attn Maxis: Suggestions for changes to the game
« Reply #224 on: September 09, 2008, 01:45:55 am »
In all honesty, with a 50 unit or so limit, you still wouldn't have anything close to what real battles are like (Kursk, as mentioned, involved thousands of tanks, for an upper limit, and that's just on vehicles. There were battles in feudal China with hundreds of thousands of men), and thus my idea is an attempt to get realistic numbers without having to have a godlike computer to run it.

Correct. Then again, we don't have anything approaching a realistic number of cities or inhabitants either. If we want realism we need billions of creatures, tens of thousands of cities and armies numbering thousands. This isn't happening anytime soon. Even in Civilization, which is slightly more realistic in scale, a full planet would have maybe 100-200 cities. I think somewhere between 0 and 200 units per side, with an average battle involving ca. 100 units (the 50 per side figure I used) strikes a reasonable balance between realism and playability.