Obscure, unintuitive and unforgiving

[bbq]

First let me say I have enjoyed many aspects of this game since I started playing a month ago. But I'm not posting about that, I want to share a major gripe I have in a constructive manner which I hope the developers will listen.

So what's the problem? Well, I really dislike part of the mechanics of the game, its lack of documentation and the unforgiving nature of the interface itself. Let me give an example.

In my most recent game I wanted to explore what it would be like to create new planets from scratch. So I researched all the Stellar Manipulation technologies. Now, I'm sure most of you know that there is very little information in the manual as well as the help file itself. It took me a LONG time to figure out that I need to build 41 starbases, load them with the materials and components before I make it.

So I bit the bullet and started building and building. It took me a long time to put it all together. Imagine my surprise when I tried to activate the component to create the Sphere World I was informed that there was "No Sun in sector". So I said fine, I'll make another ship and create a sun in that spot. But as you probably guessed, there was already a sun on the map elsewhere and it said I couldn't do it. Now, WHY THE HECK NOT? I have seen systems with more than one sun in it. So why can't I do that?

Furthermore, the component to create a Sphere World states that "it will create a sphere world AROUND a sun". Where does it say anywhere on the components or manual or help file that you need to create all the material ON the sun itself???

The notion that you can move a ship onto the sun and not burn up is bad enough. But why would anyone think that you need to build a pile of stuff ON the sun? Where does it clearly explain that?

So I have wasted hours of my time because such unforgiving and unintuitive mechanics leave me with thousands of kt of materials wasted in dead space. Obviously destroying the existing sun will wipe out all my work, but for some inexplicable reason I cannot create another star where I want.


I know many of you might laugh at this, but these 'undocumented features' as well as how unforgiving and exact things must be within the game design really turns me off. I have enjoyed many other aspects of this game, but I things like this makes me wonder if I should buy SE5 if it comes out. I mean, if something is obviously designed to take a LOT of time and resources to put together, shouldn't it be explained a little better than the way it has been?

[brianeyci]

Well seeing as how I have never created a sphere world either, thanks for the heads up =D.

Anyway the "around the sun" thing is a matter of semantics. Around to me means around the sun in a dyson sphere.

http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/dysonFAQ.html

I guess I watch too much Star Trek or B5 or Star Wars or whatever =D. Actually I only remember seeing a Dyson Sphere in Star Trek.

Brian

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Not being able to make additional suns is a balance aspect, otherwise crystaline races would have too much of an advantage and would allow too many sphereworlds in a high-tech, massive start. This is also the reason the sphereworld/ringworld is created in the same position as the sun, to use it up.

And, if you just want to create planets, all you need is an asteriod field and one ship with the right component. Note that the component will be destroyed, also a balance requirement and I think in the Last patch it can only be repaired at a shipyard. Stops empires from mass-producing planets until they have a lot of planet-making ships.

[Fyron]

Furthermore, the component to create a Sphere World states that "it will create a sphere world AROUND a sun". Where does it say anywhere on the components or manual or help file that you need to create all the material ON the sun itself???

A sector is a very, very large space (compared to the size of a ship). Pluto is only 6 SE4 sectors away from the Sun, yet it is many dozens of AU. The Earth is only 1 AU. Logically, it would have to be in the same sector. However, you never see planets in the same sector as a star... Sectors are a highly abstract unit. You can be in the same sector as a star and yet still far enough away from it not to burn up. The sector with the star has quite a lot of empty space. "Around the star" means just that, wrapped around the star. Stellar objects can only occupy a single sector, so the only way to accomplish this is by being in the same sector.


...how unforgiving and exact things must be within the game design...

What (real, complex) game is not like this? They are all exact and unforgiving. It is the nature of the beast.


narf poit chez BOOM said:
Note that the component will be destroyed, also a balance requirement and I think in the Last patch it can only be repaired at a shipyard.

Nope. Only emergency movement components (and maybe emergency supplies, but that was not a huge balance exploit, so I do not know...) require the presence of a spaceyard. Of course, a space yard is extremely easy to include in a fleet, or with a SM ship if it actually required one to repair...

[Karibu]

Bbq. The Space Empires IV has a lot of things like you have just encountered. Many of them is not mentioned in any manual, but on this board and patch release notes. First thing is, that you should read This thread (http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=153474&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1) . After that you are quite a lot more equipped to play SEIV and you face a lot less unpleasant surprises. Remember, that even when user interface is not complex, the game itself is.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Thought there was something about that somewhere.

[bbq]

Imperator Fyron said:
What (real, complex) game is not like this? They are all exact and unforgiving. It is the nature of the beast.



I can easily think of dozens of games that are better documented than this. Master of Orion 2, one of my favorite game, came with a manual that is much much more detailed than even the help file that was included in the SE4 CD.

But the thing is, I'm not even asking for that level of documentation. The developers KNOW that creating a Sphere World is a time consuming and resource consuming process. Is it really that unreasonable for them to put the text "This High-Density Cables component MUST be placed in the same sector as a star" on the component? No, I don't think so either.

[Mephisto]

bbq said:
But the thing is, I'm not even asking for that level of documentation. The developers KNOW that creating a Sphere World is a time consuming and resource consuming process. Is it really that unreasonable for them to put the text "This High-Density Cables component MUST be placed in the same sector as a star" on the component? No, I don't think so either.



bbq, you are right, that would be some helpful information. SE4 is just very complex and there are lots of ways one could do things in a way Malfador didn't expect it. Unfortunatley there will be no more patches for SE4 because if you had this problem while patches were still created I'm quite sure Aaron would have cleared the text up if so suggested. Be on board for SE5 and you'll see how much feedback Aaron will incorporate into future patches for SE5.

[Randallw]

I still learn things playing and I would describe myself as a veteran. I learnt that you need a sun in the system to make planets during a PBW game.

[Atrocities]

bbq, you really should thumb through the FAQ. It has so much valuable information in it that is has become the preferred manual for those who have pirated the game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Seriously, no game that I know of has ever had a manual that explains everything to you. In fact Moo3 shipped with one of the worst manuals I have ever seen in my life. Tribes shipped with a good manual but it did not tell you how to ski or sniped while flying. These were things that had to be learned.

Now we all agree with your furstration over having to learn things on the go, we have all been there, but you can benefit from our experiences by reading the FAQ.

SE IV really needs a strategy guide, and believe many have tried to write one. I am, or have been, working on one for over two years now. The problem is simply, to much info for my tiny little mind to encompus its self around and put into readable form.

That and a general lack of interest from the community.

Really it is the time consideration. The time it would take to sit down and go through the whole game and create a players guide is enormus to say the least.

Now I doubt you will read this post, but if you do, I hope you will also take the time and read the FAQ. Good luck and happy playing.

And yes, some things do need fixing for SE V. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif And Aaron has a huge list going already. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Arkcon]

Yeah, the fact that the sphereworld needs many starbases, built on the star was in the FAQ on Malfador's site long before it ever came up on these forums. You raise a fair point, the info should have been worked into the text descriptions by now.

This next statement may tick you off, but here it is anyway ... Everyone 'round here knows those rules already. It really isn't worth MM's time to redo it. You got a suprise -- that's all. An expensive one, to be sure. But that is part of the fun.

Someone somewhere loaded up his ships with Shields V, then met the Sergetti with the polaron beam battleships. Too bad for them, start a new game.

I suggest that for you as well. Start another game, you now know the tech tree, so it should be easier. Build a sphereworld around your home star, you'll see -- the game can be fun again.

P.S.
Don't try to board ships with a self destruct device that happens to have destroyed engines -- the description is a deliberate lie by alien engineers, your ship will blow up anyway.

P.P.S.
Play SuicideJunkies P&N mod: That way, when you lose all ships, and can't pay maintenance, and the game scraps some satelites in space as punishment, you won't get a silly message explaning it -- you'll get a well thought out message instead. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

P.P.P.S.
Ignore everything I've said if you play against humans, it will all profit you nothing.

[Atrocities]

Tip for success in an early game is Research and deploy MINES.

That goes for SP and PBW. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Enjoy.

[Ed Kolis]

But don't hang onto mines too long... if your opponent brings out mine sweeper III's (they sweep 3 mines per turn... EACH http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/eek.gif), it's time to abandon mines as a viable strategy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

edit: or is it really per "use" like in the description? what happens if you have a ship with a single MS III and you run into 2 minefields with 2 mines apiece in different sectors or belonging to different races? Does it sweep all of them or do you take damage from one of the mines in the second field? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/confused.gif

[Alneyan]

It is per sector and per component. However, if you are at war with ten Empires, and they have 100 mines each in the same sector, you will trigger the whole stack of mines at once. Unless you have the means to sweep 1,000 mines, you will suffer from *some* damage. *Chuckles*

[Timstone]

bbq:
If you have questions about the game that the manual of the faq don't answer. Just ask us.
Alfterall you were smart enough to post your complaint, but not seek a solution via the internet.
And discovering how a game works is one of the biggest funfactors in a game.

[Ragnarok]

bbq said:
In my most recent game I wanted to explore what it would be like to create new planets from scratch. So I researched all the Stellar Manipulation technologies. Now, I'm sure most of you know that there is very little information in the manual as well as the help file itself. It took me a LONG time to figure out that I need to build 41 starbases, load them with the materials and components before I make it.




bbq, one other thing to note is that you do not need to build 41 bases to make a sphere world. You only need 21. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif One for the sphereworld generator itself, then 10 for the cables and 10 for the plates. That is 20,000KT of cable components and 20,000KT of plate components.

Then for a ringworld you only need 11 bases. Or just 10,000KT of each component.

But as everyone else as mentioned it is a good idea to read through the FAQ. It is far more detailed then anything in the game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Arkcon]

Ragnarok said:

bbq, one other thing to note is that you do not need to build 41 bases to make a sphere world. You only need 21. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif



And another 20 space station shipyards to build each stellar manipulation starbase. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

At least that's how I do it, maybe people send in a dozen or so mobile space yard ships that were building stuff else where previously ... or they have a few stations build several several starbases. but ... for me, 41 bases + one mobile shipyard ... yeah ... seems about right at the end of the day just before the construct button is pressed.

[Ragnarok]

Arkcon said:


And another 20 space station shipyards to build each stellar manipulation starbase. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif



Ohhh...ok. I got it now. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif I guess I didn't think about doing it that way. I always just use space yard ships and build my bases from them.

[rdouglass]

That would be 42 - 21 SY's building 21 stations for SW components. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

However, echoing what others have said about the complexity of the game, I just have 2 comments:

1. To me, half the fun of a game like this is figuring out how everything works *without* delving in the manual except for the basics.

2. There is not a team of developers, just 1 developer (singular). As Atrocities mentioned, a strategy guide for this game is an incredible indertaking. For me, I'll take repeat playability over a slightly lower-quality manual / guide anyday.

SEIV is still by far the best game for my money I've ever purchased. Period.

</$.02>

[Ed Kolis]

Arkcon said:
And another 20 space station shipyards to build each stellar manipulation starbase. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif



Really? What I like to do is put the spaceyard components on the plate and cable bases themselves - you can find room if you use Master Computers, which I've inevitably researched by that point in the game. Then I only need one spaceyard ship to get the thing started, and construction proceeds exponentially! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif (Just remember to build the gravity field generator Last, because it's the most expensive, so you don't want to be paying maintenance on it the whole time! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)

edit: I wonder... when it says you need 20,000 kT of the plates and cables in the sector, do that have to be installed on a ship, or can they be installed on units which are launched in the sector? Something I ought to try in a mod is create a 2000 kT fighter size called "Stellar Construction Barge" and/or a 2000 kT satellite size called "Stellar Construction Satellite"; they would have a 99% requirement for cargo bays and no command/control requirement, and I'd give the stellar construction materials a dummy cargo bay ability. Then you could actually carry your building materials with you to the star on a large transport... yeah, I know I could just change the plates and cables to 100kT or something... anyone have any practical reason to do it this way? I think I did but I forgot... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

[boran_blok]

I have two strategies to build sphereworlds:
1: when I have plenty of resources I make 8 spaceyard ships
and have em construct like this:
1->3: 3xcables
4:1xCables + 1xplating
5->7: 3xplating
8: generator

the generator always takes 3 times as long as the cables and plating, so this always works out.

when I havent got much resources I place 21 spaceyard ships and have 10 build plating and 10 cables and one generator, but I stop every plating and cables construction at 0.1yr from completion. (or use a slower spaceyard than the max for those so that it comes about equal in timing with the generator)

[spoon]

bbq said:
So what's the problem? Well, I really dislike part of the mechanics of the game, its lack of documentation and the unforgiving nature of the interface itself.



Preach it, my brother. SEIV, despite its many splendors, can cause just as many headaches. I've been playing for years, and I still mess up on interface issues. Just wait til you lose a 100 ship fleet because you forgot to click Break Formation in some menu buried in the bowels of the Strategies tab...

I feel like an enabler in a co-dependant relationship. SEIV beats the crap out of me, but I still love her. Always will.

[Suicide Junkie]

Ed Kolis said:

Arkcon said:
And another 20 space station shipyards to build each stellar manipulation starbase. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif



Really? What I like to do is put the spaceyard components on the plate and cable bases themselves - you can find room if you use Master Computers, which I've inevitably researched by that point in the game. Then I only need one spaceyard ship to get the thing started, and construction proceeds exponentially! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif (Just remember to build the gravity field generator Last, because it's the most expensive, so you don't want to be paying maintenance on it the whole time! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)

Why not mothball the stuff until you've done all the retrofits and repaired all the new components? You'd need some serious resource storage in your empire, but then you wouldn't pay for any maintenance during the build operation.

[bbq]

By the way, thanks for everyone's input.

One thing that I still don't quite understand is *why* anyone would spend the time and resources to build a sphere world. If you have that much surplus, I'd assume you are either winning the game or are almost done. New planets are easily captured or created from asteriods, so why bother create it?

[spoon]

bbq said:One thing that I still don't quite understand is *why* anyone would spend the time and resources to build a sphere world.


I think it is one of those "becuase it's there" things. Some mods make them more feasible...

[Alneyan]

Imperial ego! Don't you want your own Sphereworld in your homesystem?

Ringworlds are a more realistic option, since they only require Stellar Manipulation V (against VIII for Sphereworlds), and they are cheaper to build. Their main use is to counter Star Destroyers, when these eventually become available. You cannot destroy a Ringworld, and saving your systems by building Ringworlds on important stars can be considered.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Well, for someone like me, I like to turtle and slowly expand. That means it might be turn 150 before I have real conflict and my war machine might only start grinding in turn 175-250.

[Roanon]

In NGC5, I have just completed my 16th Ringworld... they will probably never pay back what was invested in them because the number of enemies is decreasing fast, but it was still fun to build them... doing it just because it is possible http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Kamog]

I like to build sphereworlds, too. It gives me such a sense of accomplishment, to reach the technological and economic capability to do so. Especially those trinary star triple sphereworlds! I never build ring worlds because I want to wait until I've researched sphere worlds and get double the facility spaces. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif But I have never completely filled up a sphere world because it just takes too long...

[Roanon]

Problem, in a game vs. humans, it will end some turn, and it might be too late for sphereworlds. NGC5 has just reached turn 100 and its the first vote for game end now.
Against AI, where you can just continue to show off, sphereworlds are nicer than ringworlds, sure http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Karibu]

In RTH2 pbw game some player will undoubtly finish some sphereworlds before the game ends. I have over 12 sphereworlds in there and I am building them full as fast as I can. I can't wait to see how much it'll produce when filled with monoliths, Mineral scanners (+those 2 other bonus facilities) and system mineral scanners... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif

[Fyron]

Mineral scanners (+those 2 other bonus facilities) and system mineral scanners...

Mineral Scanners do not stack with Robotoid Factories (as far as the minerals bonus goes).

[Karibu]

That is true. But they do stack with system mineral scanner. And I my refference of those 2 facilities were into radioactives collider and hybrid farms.

[Ruatha]

Is it really econimical to build Monoliths on ring/sphereworlds?
Sure on planets where there are limited space, there I always build monoliths.
But on Sphereworlds you'll propably never finish filling the facility spaces.
I always build the other type of resource generating facilities on sphere/ringwords (farms etc).
I'm sure Fyron builds Monoliths but how about the rest of you?

[Alneyan]

*Points at the NGC5 game, and glowers at Ruatha* Do not expect to deceive me. You have been building Monoliths at your Ringworlds and Sphereworlds there! As such, your query can only be a ploy to trick me into revealing important intelligence about how I use the products of my imperial ego.

I would only build the basic resource facilities at any planet, including Ringworlds and Sphereworlds. Once the planet is filled up, I start scrapping one facility to replace it with a Monolith; it takes a lot micromanaging, but gives a decent resource production while waiting for Monoliths. At least, I ideally do that; more often than not I lack the patience to make such changes, and tend to leave my basic resource facilities.

Since Ringworlds take 120 turns to be filled (assuming Advanced Storage and one facility per turn), plus quite a few turns to build them, I will seldom come anywhere making the switch to Monoliths. But then, I mostly use Ringworlds to show off and to make myself secure from Star Destroyers, so.

[Renegade 13]

I always build Monoliths on all my planets, as soon as I have the tech for them...even on sphere/ringworlds.

*Pointing at NCG5* Ruatha, I'm offended! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif You closed the warp point I opened into your system! And here I was just trying to be friendly http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

[Karibu]

Ruatha said:
Is it really econimical to build Monoliths on ring/sphereworlds?



Think it like this. 1 normal resource facility generates 1000 units/turn. Monolith generates 2700 units/turn. Therefore, if you build monolith in 2 turns, you create more resource generating capacity per turn than building normal facilities. It would be different if planets could build more than 1 facility/turn, but they can't. It might be different in SEV. I am interested to see what it is like.

[Alneyan]

Renegade 13 said:
*Pointing at NCG5* Ruatha, I'm offended! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif You closed the warp point I opened into your system! And here I was just trying to be friendly http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif



Ruatha is such a mean player, and so reluctant to accept contacts with the younger Empires. Feel free to blame Ruatha for any wrong caused by the First Ones; however, the praises about the First Ones should be sent to myself. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

I have taken over the First Ones Renegade, and so I am the one guilty for that warp closing. Ruatha had nothing to do with it, unless you want to make him a scapegoat. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Renegade 13]

Alneyan said:

Renegade 13 said:
*Pointing at NCG5* Ruatha, I'm offended! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif You closed the warp point I opened into your system! And here I was just trying to be friendly http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif



Ruatha is such a mean player, and so reluctant to accept contacts with the younger Empires. Feel free to blame Ruatha for any wrong caused by the First Ones; however, the praises about the First Ones should be sent to myself. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

I have taken over the First Ones Renegade, and so I am the one guilty for that warp closing. Ruatha had nothing to do with it, unless you want to make him a scapegoat. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif



I knew that! I just forgot it for a while there... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif So you're the guilty one....grrrrrrrr....... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif