-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
4X Dominus Galaxia - MoO 1 Spiritual Successor
- Thread starter Jeff Graw
- Start date
Citizen
Guest
NO. Leave my strategies alone, you space freaks.
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 2,754
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
So... I'm sitting here at 7:20AM, unable to sleep since my brain is wired from suffering several eureka-ish moments in a row.
But first, since I haven't provided an update in awhile I guess I should fill you in:
Here's the situation: KS is coming in the next couple of months, three at the absolute tops. This isn't the first time I've said something like this, I’m totally aware of that. It's probably not even the second, third, fourth, or fifth time. But in this case there's nowhere left to go. I'm at the very edge of my financial resources and there's nowhere left to push things back to. My desire not to put something that is hardly perfect out there for the world to see is now running up against hard physical reality, and reality always wins in the end.
The plan for KS is to put out the most recent version of the full, entire game as a free title, albeit plastered with KS links. My thoughts here are twofold: First, it's a lot easier to get attention with a free game than it is with yet another KS. Second, I fully expect that the final release will exceed the free version by large enough of a margin to avoid cannibalization.
After the KS completes, assuming success, backers (at least at a sufficient tier level – still up in the air whether or not to make it universal) will get beta keys that grant them the latest development version. The free release will only be updated if major bugs are discovered.
Another recent-ish development is that lately I’ve found myself as more and more of a solo dev. It’s always been the case that I’ve borne the majority of the workload, but recently the other active contributors have all had real life issues, some degree of burn out, or both. It’s been a pretty long development cycle, so I think this is totally understandable. AiL has shifted to working on Gladius, and has largely stepped back from DG. As a result, the AI hasn’t done the best job keeping up with new features and so there’s a big tension between enabling those fun features and having a competent AI.
Which brings me to the first eureka moment. Often times as a programmer when you’re dealing with designing big systems, things come to you subconsciously over time. When you eat, when you sleep, when you take a shower… if something is on the back burner for long enough the pieces tend to eventually come together until things click. Well, the main issue I see with the AI currently is that fleet manipulation hasn’t adapted well to starlanes (optional feature) or capital capturing (not optional). The fleet manipulation AI is also almost completely brute force and performance-inefficient, iterating through planets inside iterating through fleets, not looking at the big picture but trying to find the best course of action for each fleet as an individual unit based on a whole lot of expensive tests.
In any case, I think all the pieces have come together in my head so that I can rewrite this into something much improved in a few days time, maybe a week tops, and this could easily double the AI's skill level.
Besides that, there’s another contributor, Dr. Arpad Keleman (who is also our most skilled tester), whose speciality is AI, who has intimated he wants to step up to the plate to help out with AI. By the end of the year, I think it’s more likely than not that we’ll have a full, top-to-bottom AI rework. The fleet AI alone is around a third of that already.
My other big eureka moment was finding a solution to the tech trading conundrum. You see, tech trading is great in terms of game feel, but it’s always been exploitable. A player will trade as many techs with as many other players as possible. If, for example, he trades 5 techs with 5 empires he gains 25 items, but those empires only gain 5 items, putting the player at an enormous advantage. In a world with tech trading then, a competent, liberated AI should trade techs whenever possible just like a skilled player would. But then the ultimate result of that is everyone is trading techs all the time and everyone ends up with the same techs… which obviously sucks. Typically, the solution here is to sacrifice AI on the altar of game feel.
Now, I’ll be the first to admit that DG’s current diplomacy implementation isn’t the greatest. In fact, it’s probably the aspect of the game I’m least proud of. Lack of tech trading certainly isn’t the only thing that makes diplomacy rather ‘meh,’ but it is a significant aspect. So how to eat our cake and have it too?
There’s a simple enough solution: Assign an opportunity cost for tech trading. For instance, make both sides need to pay some credits (not to each other, but to be lost to the ether) based on the level of the technology being exchanged. This cost can even increment each time a technology is traded, so that that cheesy promiscuous trading strategies have a substantial cost. So now we can implement tech trading without ruining the design of the game.
I hope that this update doesn’t sound too bleak, because honestly I’ve never been so motivated about the game. I’m looking forward to getting a lot done leading up to the KS release, and tight concrete deadlines are always excellent motivators. The goals for the KS build are to improve performance and AI, and combat, and implement spying, improve diplomacy, and generally tighten as many odds and ends as possible. Oh, and maybe throw in a random event or two for good measure (Brent’s goal). If we can get half of that, I’ll be pretty happy. Either way, it’s going to be a busy couple of months
But first, since I haven't provided an update in awhile I guess I should fill you in:
Here's the situation: KS is coming in the next couple of months, three at the absolute tops. This isn't the first time I've said something like this, I’m totally aware of that. It's probably not even the second, third, fourth, or fifth time. But in this case there's nowhere left to go. I'm at the very edge of my financial resources and there's nowhere left to push things back to. My desire not to put something that is hardly perfect out there for the world to see is now running up against hard physical reality, and reality always wins in the end.
The plan for KS is to put out the most recent version of the full, entire game as a free title, albeit plastered with KS links. My thoughts here are twofold: First, it's a lot easier to get attention with a free game than it is with yet another KS. Second, I fully expect that the final release will exceed the free version by large enough of a margin to avoid cannibalization.
After the KS completes, assuming success, backers (at least at a sufficient tier level – still up in the air whether or not to make it universal) will get beta keys that grant them the latest development version. The free release will only be updated if major bugs are discovered.
Another recent-ish development is that lately I’ve found myself as more and more of a solo dev. It’s always been the case that I’ve borne the majority of the workload, but recently the other active contributors have all had real life issues, some degree of burn out, or both. It’s been a pretty long development cycle, so I think this is totally understandable. AiL has shifted to working on Gladius, and has largely stepped back from DG. As a result, the AI hasn’t done the best job keeping up with new features and so there’s a big tension between enabling those fun features and having a competent AI.
Which brings me to the first eureka moment. Often times as a programmer when you’re dealing with designing big systems, things come to you subconsciously over time. When you eat, when you sleep, when you take a shower… if something is on the back burner for long enough the pieces tend to eventually come together until things click. Well, the main issue I see with the AI currently is that fleet manipulation hasn’t adapted well to starlanes (optional feature) or capital capturing (not optional). The fleet manipulation AI is also almost completely brute force and performance-inefficient, iterating through planets inside iterating through fleets, not looking at the big picture but trying to find the best course of action for each fleet as an individual unit based on a whole lot of expensive tests.
In any case, I think all the pieces have come together in my head so that I can rewrite this into something much improved in a few days time, maybe a week tops, and this could easily double the AI's skill level.
Besides that, there’s another contributor, Dr. Arpad Keleman (who is also our most skilled tester), whose speciality is AI, who has intimated he wants to step up to the plate to help out with AI. By the end of the year, I think it’s more likely than not that we’ll have a full, top-to-bottom AI rework. The fleet AI alone is around a third of that already.
My other big eureka moment was finding a solution to the tech trading conundrum. You see, tech trading is great in terms of game feel, but it’s always been exploitable. A player will trade as many techs with as many other players as possible. If, for example, he trades 5 techs with 5 empires he gains 25 items, but those empires only gain 5 items, putting the player at an enormous advantage. In a world with tech trading then, a competent, liberated AI should trade techs whenever possible just like a skilled player would. But then the ultimate result of that is everyone is trading techs all the time and everyone ends up with the same techs… which obviously sucks. Typically, the solution here is to sacrifice AI on the altar of game feel.
Now, I’ll be the first to admit that DG’s current diplomacy implementation isn’t the greatest. In fact, it’s probably the aspect of the game I’m least proud of. Lack of tech trading certainly isn’t the only thing that makes diplomacy rather ‘meh,’ but it is a significant aspect. So how to eat our cake and have it too?
There’s a simple enough solution: Assign an opportunity cost for tech trading. For instance, make both sides need to pay some credits (not to each other, but to be lost to the ether) based on the level of the technology being exchanged. This cost can even increment each time a technology is traded, so that that cheesy promiscuous trading strategies have a substantial cost. So now we can implement tech trading without ruining the design of the game.
I hope that this update doesn’t sound too bleak, because honestly I’ve never been so motivated about the game. I’m looking forward to getting a lot done leading up to the KS release, and tight concrete deadlines are always excellent motivators. The goals for the KS build are to improve performance and AI, and combat, and implement spying, improve diplomacy, and generally tighten as many odds and ends as possible. Oh, and maybe throw in a random event or two for good measure (Brent’s goal). If we can get half of that, I’ll be pretty happy. Either way, it’s going to be a busy couple of months
Last edited:
disagree, fun features are more important than competent AI. Good AI is the one that use large amount of game features, even if its suboptimal choice.
From reading users posts, devs can get an assumption that, AI that kicks your ass all the time, is what make the game great, its a thing that everybody wants. I would said that there is always more poor/mediocre players than advanced ones, but only the hardcore's are complaining, because pros get bored with predictable AI. If player dont suffer from "competing" (its a game for one's pleasure after all), he can always grant handicap for AI.
================
Tech trading come from peace (nations sharing with each other instead fighting). Fighting is fun, but it cripple your eco. Being at war should boost your research / nation development OR rather: not being at war (not suffering from enemy attacks) should numb your nation discoveries and economy. Call it "corruption growing during good times".
its self balancing mechanism: you need to wage war with some nations, to not get rusty (hinder researches), this limit amount of available partners for free techs from trading, cause damage to your planets, its fun (you can use your military-toys more often). If player decide to be friendly with everyone, more aggressive races will overtake him, and the "free trading techs" would give him an edge to stand against stronger nations.
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
I think you misread me. I agree with you, but what I was saying is that in it's current state the DG AI plays better with fewer features enabled. It's something I'll need to rectify.
Most importantly, the AI plays much poorer with starlanes than without. Over the next few days I'm going to rewrite the fleet movement AI (imho the weakest part of the AI, and also the one that takes the longest to process) which I suspect will reverse that, but should also handle free movement better as well.
That's an interesting thought, although I have other ideas to encourage (and create tension between) the war and peace state which could make your suggestion redundant. I'll keep it shelved in the back of my mind for later in case I need it though.
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
INFO DUMP INCOMING!
It's been too long since I've posted any updates! Basically, I found a bit of money that I forgot I had, and pushed back the KS date. That's all used up now, and I'm furiously final touches on the KS build.
I'll fill you guys in regarding recent developmets (Eg. stuff that exists in the current beta build), as well as what I'm working on for the upcoming build.
The two big two areas of recent improvement are several changes to the combat system, as well the inclusion of various special devices.
For space combat:
All of this together looks something like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/he7ejf805e9dui6/rectangular%20combat.png?dl=0
Regarding specials, most are implemented now. The specials system is about 90% complete, only missing a few of the more specialised (heh) behaviours for things like teleporters. The special system itself is pretty awesome, and exposes a bunch of fun properties. Better yet, all of the specials are data-driven and loaded from text files. It's super easy for potential modders to add new ones, and they can get really creative with it.
For example, you could easily make a special device that can be fired every three turns, but can only be used 10 times, generates a shockwave up to three hexes away that expands for two hexes, which has a 30% chance of disabling both friends and foes that it touches for one turn while dealing 20-100 damage, but also reduces the shield strength of the equipping ship by 2 points. Now, I wouldn't recommend anyone to make a device with this much stuff going on, but it goes to demonstrate how flexible things are that you can add this sort of content without touching a line of code.
It's been too long since I've posted any updates! Basically, I found a bit of money that I forgot I had, and pushed back the KS date. That's all used up now, and I'm furiously final touches on the KS build.
I'll fill you guys in regarding recent developmets (Eg. stuff that exists in the current beta build), as well as what I'm working on for the upcoming build.
The two big two areas of recent improvement are several changes to the combat system, as well the inclusion of various special devices.
For space combat:
- There are now additional terrain tile types in space combat:
- There is slow nebula, which costs an extra movement point to pass through. Firing through slow nebula reduces accuracy by one point per tile.
- There are debris tiles. These block movement but can be fired through, with an accuracy reduction. A percentage of missiles and torpedoes travelling through debris will be destroyed, similar to MoO 1.
- And there are asteroids, which aren't new at all, but I should mention them again. They block movement and attacks, and can be destroyed. Now when they're destroyed they leave behind debris.
- There is slow nebula, which costs an extra movement point to pass through. Firing through slow nebula reduces accuracy by one point per tile.
- The old retreat condition of "Wait three turns and activate warp drive on a border tile" was a bit (OK, a lot) too restrictive. Now, you can warp at any time from any tile, but to the extent that your warp drive isn't fully spooled up you may lose some of the ships in the retreating stack.
- 1v1 encounters now take place in a smaller, rectangular arena. This is more reminiscent of MoO 1 and 2, and generally feels better for these encounters. In the event that more than two empires are involved in a combat event, the old, large, hexagon-shaped map is used instead.
- Turning during movement now costs movement points. In practice this means that you can move further forwards than backwards, increasing the focus on positioning.
- (In the future, I'm definitely going to experiment with firing arcs, which could complement the above.)
All of this together looks something like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/he7ejf805e9dui6/rectangular%20combat.png?dl=0
Regarding specials, most are implemented now. The specials system is about 90% complete, only missing a few of the more specialised (heh) behaviours for things like teleporters. The special system itself is pretty awesome, and exposes a bunch of fun properties. Better yet, all of the specials are data-driven and loaded from text files. It's super easy for potential modders to add new ones, and they can get really creative with it.
For example, you could easily make a special device that can be fired every three turns, but can only be used 10 times, generates a shockwave up to three hexes away that expands for two hexes, which has a 30% chance of disabling both friends and foes that it touches for one turn while dealing 20-100 damage, but also reduces the shield strength of the equipping ship by 2 points. Now, I wouldn't recommend anyone to make a device with this much stuff going on, but it goes to demonstrate how flexible things are that you can add this sort of content without touching a line of code.
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
Regarding stuff that’s in development, well, that’s all the new diplomacy and spying stuff. First, a bit of context: The plan for crowdfunding is to release a free build at the same time as the campaign to entice potential backers. In the current climate, I think this will be a great help. People are pretty skeptical nowadays, and rightly so. To be honest, even by the standard of game crowdfunding as a whole the history of 4X crowdfunding campaigns is a sad one. I wish I could go back in time five years and raise a couple hundred thousand dollars without even trying, but that’s not realistic anymore.
(I’ll admit that I do feel a bit of resentment towards certain groups who raised large sums of money in the golden age of KS and never delivered, poisoning the well. I know I shouldn’t, and that it’s petty, and even absent some of the worst offenders the landscape would still probably be fairly bleak, but still…)
To my knowledge no one has built out a demo anywhere near as featured as ours in crowdfunding history, so perhaps we can buck the trend. Fingers crossed! In any case, I won’t set the goal too high, the main issue being that if we just scrape by and barely meet our goal, we’ll probably need to go into EA sooner than I want to. It’s not always the case, but long EA periods seem to have a habit of significantly draining energy from the actual release. And everyone I’ve talked to who has experience in the area seems to agree with that sentiment.
Anyway, where was I? Right. Diplomacy and spying. Diplomacy is getting a rework and spying is finally seeing the light of the day. To be honest, I’m totally kicking myself for deciding to finish these off before finalizing the KS build. The recent space combat improvements happened rapidly, but these items have taken a pretty long time in comparison and it’s put me in a position where:
a) I need to get the campaign out really quickly, and
b) I won’t have much of a safety margin in the event that the campaign fails, and
c) I'm stressed out because I'm living on credit.
At the same time, I’m just putting the finishing touches on things and it will feel very nice to have these two items out of the way. After all, I’ve been procrastinating adding a spying for a long time!
Diplomacy and spying are pretty intertwined mechanically, but I’ll try to break things up as much as possible.
Diplomacy:
Spying:
(I’ll admit that I do feel a bit of resentment towards certain groups who raised large sums of money in the golden age of KS and never delivered, poisoning the well. I know I shouldn’t, and that it’s petty, and even absent some of the worst offenders the landscape would still probably be fairly bleak, but still…)
To my knowledge no one has built out a demo anywhere near as featured as ours in crowdfunding history, so perhaps we can buck the trend. Fingers crossed! In any case, I won’t set the goal too high, the main issue being that if we just scrape by and barely meet our goal, we’ll probably need to go into EA sooner than I want to. It’s not always the case, but long EA periods seem to have a habit of significantly draining energy from the actual release. And everyone I’ve talked to who has experience in the area seems to agree with that sentiment.
Anyway, where was I? Right. Diplomacy and spying. Diplomacy is getting a rework and spying is finally seeing the light of the day. To be honest, I’m totally kicking myself for deciding to finish these off before finalizing the KS build. The recent space combat improvements happened rapidly, but these items have taken a pretty long time in comparison and it’s put me in a position where:
a) I need to get the campaign out really quickly, and
b) I won’t have much of a safety margin in the event that the campaign fails, and
c) I'm stressed out because I'm living on credit.
At the same time, I’m just putting the finishing touches on things and it will feel very nice to have these two items out of the way. After all, I’ve been procrastinating adding a spying for a long time!
Diplomacy and spying are pretty intertwined mechanically, but I’ll try to break things up as much as possible.
Diplomacy:
- The “love nub” is back, but instead of representing how the AI feels towards you, it represents the general state of affairs between both parties. The value of the love nub changes based on various events. Fight the enemy of my enemy, and our love nub improves. If we both have little space for expansion, then it begins to reflect that state of tension.
- The love nub value (we’ll just call it LNV from now on) drives various secondary effects. Most notably, the lower the LNV the more difficult it is for both empires to spy on one another. Higher LNV values on the other hand, help trade and research treaties to yield better. This creates novel strategic tension, and is also intuitive.
- Presently, the way the LNV moves feels a bit erratic. The underlying system is fine and all, but the implementation is a bit shaky. This is something that’s likely to require a fair amount of trial and error to get to the point where it feels just right. Depending on time constraints, it might not be perfected for the KS build, but should at least be serviceable.
- Whichever party makes a proposal can offer an incentive in credits if their initial offer is rejected (with one exception listed below), but there is no haggling back and forth after that. I think this is a good compromise where a more abstract or open implementation (Eg. a trade table) could be extremely difficult to code the AI for.
- You can’t just spam proposals while incrementing each incentive offer by a few credits though. Like in MoO, if you bug an opponent too much they’ll recall their ambassador. The exact amount that you can bug an AI is somewhat random, but reasonable, and while this slightly violates the tenant of AI liberation (being a rule the AI is forced to follow), it’s an easy and obvious way to stop an exploit.
- Like with RoTP, you can also recall your ambassadors from other empires so that they can’t message you anymore.
- In the event that either party recalls their ambassador, the LNV will experience downward pressure.
- Trade treaties, like before, mutually reveal up to date intelligence of colonies inside the partner’s logistics range. What’s new is that they now impart a moderate bonus to sabotage rolls. So, while both sides gain some financial benefit, they also become a bit vulnerable to one another.
- Research treaties previously shared the same detriment of revealing colonies, but this has been removed. They generate research points and enable tech trading, but have some upkeep and reveal all of your discoveries to one another. In addition, both sides gain a moderate bonus to espionage rolls.
- Non-Aggression Pacts work as before, except, you guessed it, they make both sides a bit more vulnerable to one another’s spies.
- It’s now possible to form alliances. Allies share vision and also logistics coverage, but are once again more vulnerable to one another’s spy rolls. Members of an alliance can call on the other party to declare war on any empire that they are themselves at war with. While it’s possible to refuse this request, doing so automatically severs the alliance and drastically diminishes the LNV of other empires (except the guys you you would have otherwise declared war on). I may change these up a bit or add more detrimental effects to refusing an alliance obligation.
- It’s now possible to share map data with one another.
- Tech trading is now possible. We left it out before since this is a mechanic that seems like it's always exploitable. For example, if I trade with six other empires, I get six techs and they each only get one. Therefore the ideal tactic is to trade technologies as often as possible. If the AI does this, everyone ends up with largely identical technologies and the player is forced to use the same tactic to be competitive. This isn’t very fun, and that’s why in other games with tech trading the AI never seems to make good use of it. But the concept of trading technologies has some narrative richness, and removing it makes things a bit less interesting in the normal cases. So, the solution here, which somehow took me four years to think up, is to add a cost to whichever party is proposing the trade. Ideally, you still want to trade techs as often as possible, but you also want to propose as few of those as possible. If you propose too many trades, you’ll likely run out of credits which are needed elsewhere. This may not be completely perfect, and might require some trial-and-error to get the balance right, but the end result should be significantly less exploitable (and strategically deeper, as well as mechanically more interesting) than the traditional implementation. Here’s a video from back in June showing how tech trading works in a hotseat environment: https://www.dropbox.com/s/eam4zienz262mip/tech%20exchange.mp4?dl=0
- As an aside, I’m very proud of the new dialog system I designed for conferences. The previous system was extremely hodge-podge, basically at the level of implementing each choice independently. The new system is pretty cool in that each choice uses the same class which can then link to other objects of the same type, or generate new instances procedurally. For example, tech trading involves generating choices procedurally for the techs you own, which in turn generate choices procedurally for the techs that you don’t own, which in turn invoke delegates (assigned at runtime) when they are accepted or rejected by the other party. There's no special edge case for, say, presenting techs after a trade is accepted, like is shown in the video. Player-player, player-AI, and AI-AI conferences all go through the same system. The actual dialog you see from the other speaker is data-driven, where you can provide multiple possible dialog options for each race, and for various LNV levels.
- The AI system for diplomacy has similarly seen leaps and bounds in terms of elegance.
- Basically, outside of perhaps a few tweaks, everything above is implemented and ready to go.
Spying:
- Defensive spending is divided between prevention and detection. Prevention makes it so that ops against you are more likely to fail. Detection makes it more likely that you correctly identify the perpetrating empire.
- Offensive spending is done on a per-empire basis. There is no toggle between hide, sabotage, and espionage like in MoO 1. Espionage and sabotage is done concurrently. There’s a dial that you can use to shift the focus towards espionage and sabotage, the catch being that each tick towards one side provides less benefit than is taken away from the other.
- Your spies passively (and gradually) acquire intel on the colonies of your opponents (which can also help peel back the fog of war) as well as which technologies they possess.
- There’s also a “status” screen where you can see the strength of your contacts across multiple dimensions. Eg. “Who has the biggest fleet?” and “Who has the greatest population?” The big change from MoO 1 here is that this information isn’t perfect. There are error bars. The stronger your spy network, and the more you know about each category, the smaller those error bars become.
- Every once in a while you’ll get the opportunity to create a spy mission on an enemy planet.
- As of this moment, I only have the standard “steal stuff” and “blow stuff up” built out. But the system is fairly robust and flexible. More mission types will be coming in the future … I just don’t really have the time to do much more with it right now.
- Missions have multiple options. For example, the “blow stuff up” mission generates an option for every destructible building at runtime. This isn’t super exciting in and of itself, but there’s nothing really stopping me from building missions with more interesting choices, such as ones that could have interesting and/or opposing effects.
- Missions take time. You’ll see an estimate range, such as 8-12 years. You can invest credits to reduce this time (currently capped at halving it). Every year there’s a chance that the mission fails. And when a mission succeeds or fails there’s a chance that the deed is tracked back to you. There’s a “sneakiness level” that you can set, which reduces the chance of being discovered at expense of the odds of success. Lastly, you can choose an empire to attempt to frame, which also serves to makes the mission more difficult.
- Out of all of the above stuff, I’m basically just putting the finishing touches on the interactions between stimulus, sneakiness, and frame target. After that, I just need to hook up some UI and pray that nothing is too broken
- In the future, ship design intelligence will be a thing, so that you learn more about enemy designs by interacting with them and by spying. Maybe you find an unfortunately exposed exhaust port and gain +20% critical hit chance against a certain enemy design? Perhaps you can throw a spanner in the gears for a new ship design as it is still being built out so that its eventual stats come out weaker? Maybe you can planet a bug in a planetary defensive network to take it out of commission at an opportune time? The idea for the future is that spying is a first class citizen that touches every single piece of the design. But even in the current state, it should be significantly more interconnected than you're used to.
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
Besides that, Brent has been working on special effects. His words:
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
Well, I hope this has been an entertaining read, or at least helps to show that I haven’t been sitting here twiddling my thumbs the entire time. I’ll be sure to post more updates as the crowdfunding campaign draws near!
Sorry for not giving more gradual updates and doing this all at once. I look forward to the many and justified tl;dr reactions
Sorry for not giving more gradual updates and doing this all at once. I look forward to the many and justified tl;dr reactions
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
0.7.0.0, with all the features discussed in the last few posts, is live for testers. Too exhausted to write anything more right now!
Last edited:
Naraya
Arcane
Is it possible to get it somewhere (for testing)?
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
Check your PMs
Trans-Financial-Man
Arcane
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2018
- Messages
- 999
I too would like to test the game. Also if you need writers, I can PM you my portfolio to see if it's something you'd be interested in.
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
Some new coverage thanks to the guys over at eXplorminate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jwG4D-fCsg&t=3354s (there are a few oopsies here from Rob that I are pointed out in the pinned comment)
https://explorminate.co/2019/09/26/jeff-graw-developer-of-dominus-galaxia/ (I think I sound a bit autistic here. I'm just going to say that it's the editing)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jwG4D-fCsg&t=3354s (there are a few oopsies here from Rob that I are pointed out in the pinned comment)
https://explorminate.co/2019/09/26/jeff-graw-developer-of-dominus-galaxia/ (I think I sound a bit autistic here. I'm just going to say that it's the editing
)
Last edited:
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
KickStarter along with free demo build launching Oct 6th:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/starchartinteractive/dominus-galaxia
Be sure to sign up for notifications!
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/starchartinteractive/dominus-galaxia
Be sure to sign up for notifications!
Last edited:
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
Last edited:
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
Does it crash every time? And if you haven't, can you try restarting your PC (I've noticed recently some instability for certain graphics drivers in general if the system has been left on for awhile)?
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
Jeff Graw
StarChart Interactive
We're sitting at 15% funded, but the error bars are huge this early. I guess it was too much to hope for that the game would get hundreds of backers on the first day so I could sit back and relax. Stress filled days incoming I suppose
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.