4) The armchair game developers. These are the people who really could make a much better game if only they had the money and developers to convey their genius onto the screen. To prove their genius, they'll use terms like "broken" or "unusable" to describe anything that they consider non-idea. Whatev
"Therefore I am against changing it, since there is no need to do so." Other than the basic game design considerations I've already stipulated and which you've ignored. Very persuasive. I'm glad to find out that if I want 10 mp and 5 rp, I've got to build double that amount due to UI restrictions. What underlying reality is this attempting to capture that isn't already sufficiently modeled by the overall budget constraint? If I ha
You can decide to spend 15 instead of 10 though I intentionally chose the simplest possible example, and its still misunderstood. Exhibit 1A of my second point. If I have 10 mp and 5 rp, how exactly, with the current UI, do I spend 15? <TABLE cellpadding=8 width="95%" align
"but in the end you have the same amount of 'control' you just have to plan for it differently." Um, no. If I was able to decide to spend 15 instead of 10, I'd have more control than the present case. The instructions with the game say that each mp or rp utilized costs 1 bc. Any constraint on a player's decision to so utilize said mp or rp, or the charging of players for mp and rp not utilized, should arise from either play balanc
"The arguement that you will have 'more control' over production/research by decoupleing the sliders is also bogus, though the control from the decoupleing is more intuative perhaps." Its not bogus. An example: Say I have 10 MP's and 5 RP's. I'm restricted to spending at most 10 bc (in the case of choosing 100% spending, and a 100%/0% breakdown). If I'd like to fully fund everything, and pay the bills via, say, selling off techs,
"Wow. Just... just wow. I don't even know where to start in on explaining the arrogance and the ridiculousness of this perspective." One place would be attempting to understand where its coming from instead of jumping to the conclusion that its arrogant and ridiculous. Forthrightness connotes respect; if I didn't respect Frogboy (for BOTH the excellence of the overall game and his willingness to engage with players), I wouldn't bother writin
"They wouldn't be listening to you anyway, certainly not responding and wouldn't give a rats ass even if they heard. Give a margin of respect at least when you are in communication. All business works like this... or does your boss treat you like a serf?" Providing good service is a basic requirement of professionalism. If some hang-up about doing so is impeding one's professionalism, as it seems evident here in Frogboy's case (i.e. instead
"What I do feel strongly about is that if we're going to work with users on making the game even better, we don't want to be treated as servants." As long as you're not writing freeware, you don't have much choice in the matter. I earned that $45 by serving others, and if you'd like my next $45 and the $45 of the people I'll tell about this game, you'd do well to adjust the attitude. You're not exactly a monopoly provider. Thanks for taking the time to explicate your system
"Plenty of other games are not clear about htings, it's just what people are used to. They aren't "correct" any more than I'm "correct". We aren't debating facts. We are debating preferences." The only game that rivals yours' in sheer obfuscation is MOO3. If you want this customer to continue "preferring" your game over others, and the patience I currently have is a direct function of the $45 I just dropped on the game due to good press, I
"If you set your Military and civic spending to 40% each then 40% of all your production will go to military and civic and 20% will go to Research." What is this mysterious "production" quantity, and how do I determine it?
"So you have your spend rate -- the % of your industrial capacity that you want to make use of. Then the question is, where do you want that industrial capacity to go? There are 3 sliders that control how that spending is funneled. The three sliders allow you to decide how much to fund your factories and research labs. Military and social spending goes into your factories which produce more planetary improvements and build your ships. Research spending goes to your labs and is converted to
A PDF manual comes with the game. I think you can get to it via the screen that comes up when you start the game.
An example, I've just started a game with the default settings. Bought a factory for Mars, and built an entertainment center to boost growth and an economy center. I figure its too small for a starport. I've left my sliders alone. It says Mars is spending 25 bc per turn. On what??? It can't build ships or buildings. I'm getting 5 beakers. Shouldn't I be spending 5 (one per beaker as the docs say), not 25? This is ridiculously counter-intuitive and opaque for an early game. I can't for the life o
I'm sorry, but the economy is almost as counterintuitive as MOO3. The decoupling of revenue and expense is no problem at all, but the global slider with one denomination, and the local breakdown in another is needlessly complex and unclear. Some questions: The spending slider - 0-100% of what exactly? I know its not revenue, that's the other slider. I'm assuming the breakdown slider is percentages of the result from ab
GalCiv2 Forums