Tweet
At delphi forums Cory Nelson answered some questions about recent update.
Here is the raw list of Q&A in order of appearance:
Q:
Will the High Council leaders be corruptable as well as killable? Can you surround a rival emperor with a bunch of devious yes-men?
Cory Nelson:
Afraid not. They come about based on events and such.
Q:
Can you interact with the faceless leaders in any way, or are they more or less untouchable? Can they be targets for spies as well?
Cory Nelson:
They're untouchable and behind the scenes. It's assumed that someone is running the planet and that person is representative of your empire.
Q:
Do you guys have the design for the event system figured out yet?
Cory Nelson:
Event system is in and working. Events are created randomly based on your empire, size, cassus belli etc. A bunch of factors affect when they're introduced.
Q:
How is the Speech now affected with the loss if IFPs?
Cory Nelson:
Probably the speech will cost you money instead of IFP's (PR etc). We haven't looked at that one in detail yet but that would be my first assumption.
Q:
With the mods to the leaders, what does this mean for Fleet leaders? Will they all be bunched into the same 'High Council'?
Cory Nelson:
The high council will affect your entire empire. So one of them may be a rocking ship captain but he won't manually affect ship #2. Instead he would affect all your fleets due to his leadership. Think higher level, you don't see the grunts, you deal with the commanders.
Q:
So there is still fundimental and applied research, only applied research is automatically conducted by the AI rather than by a slider controled by the player? Just a little more clarification on this would be great!
Cory Nelson:
Yes. The applied part of the system has only changed by making the start of the projects automatic. All the rest of that system (including overruns etc) stays as is. The theoretical has only changed in that you control things on a grander scale (schools as opposed to individual fields). Tech's still show up randomly based on game, race etc just like before. The changes are just so that dealing with your technologies isn't a multi step process. It'll also give you a much clearer understanding of what's coming up through research.
Q:
What changes were made with the events system?
Cory Nelson:
Just answered this question in an earlier post in this thread. Check it and let me know if you have any other questions.
Q:
Doesn't say anything about changes to the strategic space battles though (as discussed in the thread with that name), about entering wide etc...
Cory Nelson:
I haven't read that thread yet although I plan to tonight. I've had a few folks ask me to go take a look. When I do I'll try to answer questions on that one as well although I don't *think* there are any changes that haven't been announced. Guess we'll see when I read it.
Q:
Does all of this mean that we can expect these High Council leaders to be "heroes" Ã la MOO2 (with fixed names etc.), or do they appear based on events but are still a "product of your society"?
Cory Nelson:
They'll be similiar to MOO2 leaders but are introduced through events. They'll be based on the backstory however and have much more of a story element to them. Some of their stats will be based on your society, some will be fixed because of their background. We're still working on the implementation for this one but the idea is a combination of our original leader design with the MOOII leaders. So you end up with all the cool stuff but have it in an area where the player doesn't have to hunt through screens to find the leaders that matter.
Q:
Again, I must ask, do monsters have any possibility?
I read that A guardian might be guarding one of the X's? (Not THE guardian I assume) So... does this signify their return?
Cory Nelson:
There are no plans at the moment to bring space monsters back. The guardians of the relics are the only plans at this time.
Q:
The big difference is that the applied part of technology will now be automatic.
This seems fine with me. However in the old research method there was the ability to keep certain theortical techs from becoming applied techs to decrease their chance of being stolen by someone else. Is this still in, or did it also go by the wayside with the applied becoming automatic?
Cory Nelson:
We do lose that ability but it was figured that the odds were pretty good that if you have a technology that you really don't want the other player to get it was probably juicy enough that you'd want to start using it right away. In MOOII for example how often did you research a building and then not immediately tell all your planets to start building it. The best defensee against spies is to keep security tight or to keep your tech levels high. Spies tend to go for the lower technology items first so they're not likely to get 'the good stuff' unless they already have the easier stuff.
Q:
But is their a (faint) possibility that any sugestion of ours be helpfull to the game design? I would not be amazed if all modifications now required complete involvement in the game, leading to an obvious no answer. But I suppose we can still try to give ideas, that could help maybe some of you.
Cory Nelson:
Idea's are always good. As with any project the closer to completion it gets the fewer ideas that will be included but you never know.
Q:
One major question that I do have regards the HFOG penalties for using macromanagement (broad policies) as opposed to micromanagement (running each planet individually). You say HFOG hasn't changed aside from the removal of IFPs. Are those penalties still in, then? Without IFPs, it seems as if such penalties would force the player to micromanage in an unnecessarily frustrating way, but perhaps I've missed something.
Cory Nelson:
We're currently deciding on those penalties. If they go away the problem is solved and the game really becomes play however you want to do. If those inefficiencies do stay in then they'll be most likely be less severe than I think you're thinking and we'll make sure that it's still more effective in the long run than it would be to micromanage. The jury is still out on the actual numbers but we're going to do everything in our power to make sure that you never feel forced to micromanage but still have the freedom to if you'd like.
Q:
So there's no way to choose to divide RP's between applied projects that are in the same 'school'? Or can there only be one project per school at a time, ala MOO1? Can I choose to cancel an applied project that I don't want to research, if, for example, I feel it's a waste of time, or I don't want it to contribute to the 'future shock' effect? BTW, is the future shock effect still in? Can we still make certain applied projects 'hidden', so that they're less likely to be stolen?
Cory Nelson:
Projects are always researched at 100% funding. If you end up with several projects becoming available through 1 school then they'll all become applied research projects. You can't stop projects from being completed, the shock effect therefore goes away. We'll still have different races which handle technology differently, through being more effective at research, having a better chance of not running into project overruns etc. Once items have been researched they can be stolen. The best defense against that is to have tight security or keep a technological advantage (spies tend to steal the easy stuff first).
Q:
Do the new changes mean that the primary way of establishing new colonies has again returned to player interaction? Or is it still going to be a feasable strategy to let population go its own way and colonise for us? If I missed something somewhere, please let me know, as I was most looking forward to not being forced to tell my people where to go.
Cory Nelson:
As your population grows their offspring will still move to other planets. That hasn't changed. The big change is that now your population won't go down for any reasons other than major events such as revolts etc. Your population will go up (and new planets colonized) more or less the same way it did before. The problem was that before there were alot of factors that could make your population go both up and down so it was harder to control and keep track of. We're also adding in a few other commands to make 'encouraging' population to move to specific planets easier.
Q:
So there is'nt a chain of command for leaders or army leaders,Fleet leaders,captains etc. I am dissapointed in this as i wanted leaders to work like real life not some leader who pops up and lives for 400 years like the #### moo2 leader system.
Cory Nelson:
And who said high council leaders live forever?
Q:
Another question, this one about the "run-of-the-mill" AI leaders. What do they do now? With IFPs gone, there's no point in assigning different AI to each leader--the player will just step in and micromanage any colony whose AI doesn't suit his/her tastes. Do they now give abstract bonuses like those of MoO2 leaders (albeit smaller)?
Cory Nelson:
In a nutshell what we've done is set all off the "run-of-the-mill" leaders to faceless leaders and setup the really interesting ones as your high council. The faceless leaders ability scores still affect things but they're more of a representation of your empire as a whole than an individual hotshot. To encourage your planets to build a certain way your best bet would be to tell all planets of type X to concentrate on research. That'll get you a better effect than micromanaging them and you can do it at the macrolevel.
Q:
In Moo2 if you found Orion - the guardian killed you. Will this occur in Moo3 for Guarded homeworlds? The reason I ask this is that with the starlanes system it would then be possible to be barricaded in to a dead-end starlane chain by one or more of these occurances. Unless of course - there are NO starlanes to these places.
Cory Nelson:
Hadn't thought about that but it would be pretty funny. Those systems do have starlanes, but when we create the galaxy we can make sure that doesn't happen.
Q:
So you can no longer influence the career of the leaders you like or don't like. How do you go about canning leaders?
Cory Nelson:
Sorry missed the second question on my first read through. The only leaders you really care about are the high council folks. The others exist but are of little concern so no need really to can them.
Q:
Since we can not "SEE" starlanes until we get to a system - can we trade star-lane maps with other empires in diplomacy. Can we learn about the starlanes through spying and trading fleets (ie - sigint and trader info).
Cory Nelson:
You can get them through trading. You can't currently through spying although that would be a cool effect I'll need to look into.
Q:
Leaders: It seems as there will be leaders for the very big issues. If there are no sector seats, there will of course be no sector leaders. But what is about the stellar systems and the planets? Will these kinds of Ai. be represented by a leader character or will it be abstract?
Cory Nelson:
Only the high council folks are represented. The others are now abstract.
Q:
Economics: An easy understanable modifier seemed to me the freighter system. I hope it will be considered. Another point in the economic system was the broade selection of "resources", like bioharvesting points, mineral units, manufactoring output (the so called cement), the testtube, the civil benefits, the military presence points, and some other like population units.
Do you think that this very rich and well reflected modelling has a chance to be implemented? Allow me to say this, the "economic system" is something you can really be proud on it.
Cory Nelson:
Again. Economic system is currently being looked at. Odds are it'll stay the same with a UI change but we'll announce that when decided.
Q:
There were a huge number of civilian technologies annouced. I don`t remember the exact number (maybe about 400). Are there any changes what the number of technologies concerns? If I understood you right, then there is no big difference in the "techtree" between the former and the actual design besides the reductions of steps in the process.
Cory Nelson:
The only changes to the technologies available will be caused by the changes being made. It's likely to assume a few tech's will either change or be removed simply because they don't make any sense anymore. Other than that though there shouldn't be any big changes in that area.
Q:
So, is the introduction of leaders a scripted game event? If so, what keeps us from getting hte same leaders over and ove rin new games? It just seems like that to me if they all have backstories and are part of the plot.
Cory Nelson:
No. They're not scripted. Their story backgrounds aren't associated with the story right this minute but more of the story of what has occurred. For example you may find a Mrrshan pirate that escaped their destruction and has some story based on that etc. It's mostly things to make you feel more involved and to bring out the backstory more.
Q:
I did not see it mentioned and I can't remember if it has every been answered, but are borders in? (This seems like the place to ask, however I shall understand if you do not wish to answer at this time.)"
Cory Nelson:
Borders were taken out a while ago. Mostly due to the fact that our galaxy is in a 3d map. Borders in 3d... possible but ewww is it confusing.
Q:
Is there actually currently anything about MOO3 that eliminates even the possibility of micromangement? I've seen games that give you the option of allowing the computer to control so and so... this is not what I mean. When I am playing against my brother and his friends on our LAN at home, will it be impossible for them to micromanage to their heart's content in order to get that little bit ahead? And no, I don't mean time limits. That rewards quick reflexes.
Cory Nelson:
Interest on your turn will help with that financially. Other effects are being considered.
Q:
How much control do I have over what I'm researching? Will I be able to order my scientists not to research something I find useless?"
Cory Nelson:
Check this thread.. there are a few responses to this one. Common question.
Q:
Is there any way to influence a relative priority among the active applied projects? I don't know how often multiple will come online in the same turn, or how many in a single turn, but I'm sure, at various points, there will be multiple active projects and that I'd care more about a particular one than others...
Cory Nelson:
They all have the same priority but based on the system we're looking at right now it won't be a binary problem. You'll end up with multiple projects at a time all funded at 100%. The 'funding' is considered as part of the theoretical. The applied portion is in order to cause a delay between figuring out how to do something and actually getting it to your people and in order to give the opportunity to cause overruns and problems during the project.
Q:
Exactly what do you mean by "we have removed the sectors"?
Do they still exist as an organisational layer, or did they disapera altogheter?
Cory Nelson:
Disappeared entirely.
Q:
I am worried about the "population advantage" a la "Birth of the federation" suggested in this thread. Can you make it not happen?
Cory Nelson:
I'll need to take a look at that thread. Been busy in this one most of the day.
Q:
About multiple buildings: if you remove this feat you will have to remove the zones too, right? I really hope you not to go for this otion.
Cory Nelson:
Not necessarily.
Q:
What about the races dependant on the cut features? Do you already have plans? (Evon, etc.)
Cory Nelson:
There are no races that have final stats. What's in there now are best guesses so we'll figure out some reasonable.
Q:
What do you mean by galactic pollution? Are we heading toward a CivIII-like pollution problem? I hope it is just an event. And in any case, production depend on how much money you pour into the funnel, so how do you control that? Can you still ovverride the funnel, or not?
Cory Nelson:
It was just an event example. In the current system you can override the funnel. But as mentioned the Economy system is still being looked into.
Q:
I still think the game will be excellent, but now I think it lost almost all the revolutionary features it was trying to show.
Is this what you wanted?
Cory Nelson:
That kind of goes back to the features for the sake of features argument. You can create the greatest game feature known to man, if it's not fun it doesn't matter in the slightest. Our first and foremost goal was to make the game fun. If we can make something revolutionary (which I think we still are) then all the better. But the first and most important thing is fun. :-)
Q:
Actually would we still know if a project was upcoming in a field soon. (can we 'see' its possiblity)
Cory Nelson:
You'll see what's coming up just as before you just won't to worry about fields.
Here is the raw list of Q&A in order of appearance:
Q:
Will the High Council leaders be corruptable as well as killable? Can you surround a rival emperor with a bunch of devious yes-men?
Cory Nelson:
Afraid not. They come about based on events and such.
Q:
Can you interact with the faceless leaders in any way, or are they more or less untouchable? Can they be targets for spies as well?
Cory Nelson:
They're untouchable and behind the scenes. It's assumed that someone is running the planet and that person is representative of your empire.
Q:
Do you guys have the design for the event system figured out yet?
Cory Nelson:
Event system is in and working. Events are created randomly based on your empire, size, cassus belli etc. A bunch of factors affect when they're introduced.
Q:
How is the Speech now affected with the loss if IFPs?
Cory Nelson:
Probably the speech will cost you money instead of IFP's (PR etc). We haven't looked at that one in detail yet but that would be my first assumption.
Q:
With the mods to the leaders, what does this mean for Fleet leaders? Will they all be bunched into the same 'High Council'?
Cory Nelson:
The high council will affect your entire empire. So one of them may be a rocking ship captain but he won't manually affect ship #2. Instead he would affect all your fleets due to his leadership. Think higher level, you don't see the grunts, you deal with the commanders.
Q:
So there is still fundimental and applied research, only applied research is automatically conducted by the AI rather than by a slider controled by the player? Just a little more clarification on this would be great!
Cory Nelson:
Yes. The applied part of the system has only changed by making the start of the projects automatic. All the rest of that system (including overruns etc) stays as is. The theoretical has only changed in that you control things on a grander scale (schools as opposed to individual fields). Tech's still show up randomly based on game, race etc just like before. The changes are just so that dealing with your technologies isn't a multi step process. It'll also give you a much clearer understanding of what's coming up through research.
Q:
What changes were made with the events system?
Cory Nelson:
Just answered this question in an earlier post in this thread. Check it and let me know if you have any other questions.
Q:
Doesn't say anything about changes to the strategic space battles though (as discussed in the thread with that name), about entering wide etc...
Cory Nelson:
I haven't read that thread yet although I plan to tonight. I've had a few folks ask me to go take a look. When I do I'll try to answer questions on that one as well although I don't *think* there are any changes that haven't been announced. Guess we'll see when I read it.
Q:
Does all of this mean that we can expect these High Council leaders to be "heroes" Ã la MOO2 (with fixed names etc.), or do they appear based on events but are still a "product of your society"?
Cory Nelson:
They'll be similiar to MOO2 leaders but are introduced through events. They'll be based on the backstory however and have much more of a story element to them. Some of their stats will be based on your society, some will be fixed because of their background. We're still working on the implementation for this one but the idea is a combination of our original leader design with the MOOII leaders. So you end up with all the cool stuff but have it in an area where the player doesn't have to hunt through screens to find the leaders that matter.
Q:
Again, I must ask, do monsters have any possibility?
I read that A guardian might be guarding one of the X's? (Not THE guardian I assume) So... does this signify their return?
Cory Nelson:
There are no plans at the moment to bring space monsters back. The guardians of the relics are the only plans at this time.
Q:
The big difference is that the applied part of technology will now be automatic.
This seems fine with me. However in the old research method there was the ability to keep certain theortical techs from becoming applied techs to decrease their chance of being stolen by someone else. Is this still in, or did it also go by the wayside with the applied becoming automatic?
Cory Nelson:
We do lose that ability but it was figured that the odds were pretty good that if you have a technology that you really don't want the other player to get it was probably juicy enough that you'd want to start using it right away. In MOOII for example how often did you research a building and then not immediately tell all your planets to start building it. The best defensee against spies is to keep security tight or to keep your tech levels high. Spies tend to go for the lower technology items first so they're not likely to get 'the good stuff' unless they already have the easier stuff.
Q:
But is their a (faint) possibility that any sugestion of ours be helpfull to the game design? I would not be amazed if all modifications now required complete involvement in the game, leading to an obvious no answer. But I suppose we can still try to give ideas, that could help maybe some of you.
Cory Nelson:
Idea's are always good. As with any project the closer to completion it gets the fewer ideas that will be included but you never know.
Q:
One major question that I do have regards the HFOG penalties for using macromanagement (broad policies) as opposed to micromanagement (running each planet individually). You say HFOG hasn't changed aside from the removal of IFPs. Are those penalties still in, then? Without IFPs, it seems as if such penalties would force the player to micromanage in an unnecessarily frustrating way, but perhaps I've missed something.
Cory Nelson:
We're currently deciding on those penalties. If they go away the problem is solved and the game really becomes play however you want to do. If those inefficiencies do stay in then they'll be most likely be less severe than I think you're thinking and we'll make sure that it's still more effective in the long run than it would be to micromanage. The jury is still out on the actual numbers but we're going to do everything in our power to make sure that you never feel forced to micromanage but still have the freedom to if you'd like.
Q:
So there's no way to choose to divide RP's between applied projects that are in the same 'school'? Or can there only be one project per school at a time, ala MOO1? Can I choose to cancel an applied project that I don't want to research, if, for example, I feel it's a waste of time, or I don't want it to contribute to the 'future shock' effect? BTW, is the future shock effect still in? Can we still make certain applied projects 'hidden', so that they're less likely to be stolen?
Cory Nelson:
Projects are always researched at 100% funding. If you end up with several projects becoming available through 1 school then they'll all become applied research projects. You can't stop projects from being completed, the shock effect therefore goes away. We'll still have different races which handle technology differently, through being more effective at research, having a better chance of not running into project overruns etc. Once items have been researched they can be stolen. The best defense against that is to have tight security or keep a technological advantage (spies tend to steal the easy stuff first).
Q:
Do the new changes mean that the primary way of establishing new colonies has again returned to player interaction? Or is it still going to be a feasable strategy to let population go its own way and colonise for us? If I missed something somewhere, please let me know, as I was most looking forward to not being forced to tell my people where to go.
Cory Nelson:
As your population grows their offspring will still move to other planets. That hasn't changed. The big change is that now your population won't go down for any reasons other than major events such as revolts etc. Your population will go up (and new planets colonized) more or less the same way it did before. The problem was that before there were alot of factors that could make your population go both up and down so it was harder to control and keep track of. We're also adding in a few other commands to make 'encouraging' population to move to specific planets easier.
Q:
So there is'nt a chain of command for leaders or army leaders,Fleet leaders,captains etc. I am dissapointed in this as i wanted leaders to work like real life not some leader who pops up and lives for 400 years like the #### moo2 leader system.
Cory Nelson:
And who said high council leaders live forever?
Q:
Another question, this one about the "run-of-the-mill" AI leaders. What do they do now? With IFPs gone, there's no point in assigning different AI to each leader--the player will just step in and micromanage any colony whose AI doesn't suit his/her tastes. Do they now give abstract bonuses like those of MoO2 leaders (albeit smaller)?
Cory Nelson:
In a nutshell what we've done is set all off the "run-of-the-mill" leaders to faceless leaders and setup the really interesting ones as your high council. The faceless leaders ability scores still affect things but they're more of a representation of your empire as a whole than an individual hotshot. To encourage your planets to build a certain way your best bet would be to tell all planets of type X to concentrate on research. That'll get you a better effect than micromanaging them and you can do it at the macrolevel.
Q:
In Moo2 if you found Orion - the guardian killed you. Will this occur in Moo3 for Guarded homeworlds? The reason I ask this is that with the starlanes system it would then be possible to be barricaded in to a dead-end starlane chain by one or more of these occurances. Unless of course - there are NO starlanes to these places.
Cory Nelson:
Hadn't thought about that but it would be pretty funny. Those systems do have starlanes, but when we create the galaxy we can make sure that doesn't happen.
Q:
So you can no longer influence the career of the leaders you like or don't like. How do you go about canning leaders?
Cory Nelson:
Sorry missed the second question on my first read through. The only leaders you really care about are the high council folks. The others exist but are of little concern so no need really to can them.
Q:
Since we can not "SEE" starlanes until we get to a system - can we trade star-lane maps with other empires in diplomacy. Can we learn about the starlanes through spying and trading fleets (ie - sigint and trader info).
Cory Nelson:
You can get them through trading. You can't currently through spying although that would be a cool effect I'll need to look into.
Q:
Leaders: It seems as there will be leaders for the very big issues. If there are no sector seats, there will of course be no sector leaders. But what is about the stellar systems and the planets? Will these kinds of Ai. be represented by a leader character or will it be abstract?
Cory Nelson:
Only the high council folks are represented. The others are now abstract.
Q:
Economics: An easy understanable modifier seemed to me the freighter system. I hope it will be considered. Another point in the economic system was the broade selection of "resources", like bioharvesting points, mineral units, manufactoring output (the so called cement), the testtube, the civil benefits, the military presence points, and some other like population units.
Do you think that this very rich and well reflected modelling has a chance to be implemented? Allow me to say this, the "economic system" is something you can really be proud on it.
Cory Nelson:
Again. Economic system is currently being looked at. Odds are it'll stay the same with a UI change but we'll announce that when decided.
Q:
There were a huge number of civilian technologies annouced. I don`t remember the exact number (maybe about 400). Are there any changes what the number of technologies concerns? If I understood you right, then there is no big difference in the "techtree" between the former and the actual design besides the reductions of steps in the process.
Cory Nelson:
The only changes to the technologies available will be caused by the changes being made. It's likely to assume a few tech's will either change or be removed simply because they don't make any sense anymore. Other than that though there shouldn't be any big changes in that area.
Q:
So, is the introduction of leaders a scripted game event? If so, what keeps us from getting hte same leaders over and ove rin new games? It just seems like that to me if they all have backstories and are part of the plot.
Cory Nelson:
No. They're not scripted. Their story backgrounds aren't associated with the story right this minute but more of the story of what has occurred. For example you may find a Mrrshan pirate that escaped their destruction and has some story based on that etc. It's mostly things to make you feel more involved and to bring out the backstory more.
Q:
I did not see it mentioned and I can't remember if it has every been answered, but are borders in? (This seems like the place to ask, however I shall understand if you do not wish to answer at this time.)"
Cory Nelson:
Borders were taken out a while ago. Mostly due to the fact that our galaxy is in a 3d map. Borders in 3d... possible but ewww is it confusing.
Q:
Is there actually currently anything about MOO3 that eliminates even the possibility of micromangement? I've seen games that give you the option of allowing the computer to control so and so... this is not what I mean. When I am playing against my brother and his friends on our LAN at home, will it be impossible for them to micromanage to their heart's content in order to get that little bit ahead? And no, I don't mean time limits. That rewards quick reflexes.
Cory Nelson:
Interest on your turn will help with that financially. Other effects are being considered.
Q:
How much control do I have over what I'm researching? Will I be able to order my scientists not to research something I find useless?"
Cory Nelson:
Check this thread.. there are a few responses to this one. Common question.
Q:
Is there any way to influence a relative priority among the active applied projects? I don't know how often multiple will come online in the same turn, or how many in a single turn, but I'm sure, at various points, there will be multiple active projects and that I'd care more about a particular one than others...
Cory Nelson:
They all have the same priority but based on the system we're looking at right now it won't be a binary problem. You'll end up with multiple projects at a time all funded at 100%. The 'funding' is considered as part of the theoretical. The applied portion is in order to cause a delay between figuring out how to do something and actually getting it to your people and in order to give the opportunity to cause overruns and problems during the project.
Q:
Exactly what do you mean by "we have removed the sectors"?
Do they still exist as an organisational layer, or did they disapera altogheter?
Cory Nelson:
Disappeared entirely.
Q:
I am worried about the "population advantage" a la "Birth of the federation" suggested in this thread. Can you make it not happen?
Cory Nelson:
I'll need to take a look at that thread. Been busy in this one most of the day.
Q:
About multiple buildings: if you remove this feat you will have to remove the zones too, right? I really hope you not to go for this otion.
Cory Nelson:
Not necessarily.
Q:
What about the races dependant on the cut features? Do you already have plans? (Evon, etc.)
Cory Nelson:
There are no races that have final stats. What's in there now are best guesses so we'll figure out some reasonable.
Q:
What do you mean by galactic pollution? Are we heading toward a CivIII-like pollution problem? I hope it is just an event. And in any case, production depend on how much money you pour into the funnel, so how do you control that? Can you still ovverride the funnel, or not?
Cory Nelson:
It was just an event example. In the current system you can override the funnel. But as mentioned the Economy system is still being looked into.
Q:
I still think the game will be excellent, but now I think it lost almost all the revolutionary features it was trying to show.
Is this what you wanted?
Cory Nelson:
That kind of goes back to the features for the sake of features argument. You can create the greatest game feature known to man, if it's not fun it doesn't matter in the slightest. Our first and foremost goal was to make the game fun. If we can make something revolutionary (which I think we still are) then all the better. But the first and most important thing is fun. :-)
Q:
Actually would we still know if a project was upcoming in a field soon. (can we 'see' its possiblity)
Cory Nelson:
You'll see what's coming up just as before you just won't to worry about fields.
Comment