WWW Link

Some hope ?

I think people should stop calling this inflation. It's not inflation, it's a bug. Costs suddenly jump multiple times right after researching a tech is not inflation.

How many posts will there be needed for kryo to understand that a hotfix or reverting back to the last beta is neccesary because the game isn't fun with this bug!

It's getting sheer impossible to enjoy a game when the AI isn't researching anything fasinating. While as a player you are hitting turn and hope on getting creative.

I was going to say that the inflation gave a new perspective to the game but it's annoying me to bits!

Kind regards,
Nick

80 Turns for Planetary Invasion now, with sliders at 80% Sience :/

Invasion was 15 Turns when I first could research it. This isn't inflation something is horribly wrong.

I've played some games when the AI were unable to develop any wapons at all way into the game. Last game I played was won with influence and the terran AI still hadn't a single point of military with around 12 planets and this was on Painful, large map.

On May, 6th, Frogboy wrote :


It seems they will stick to that plan, even when the game has been unplayable for one full month. Hard to believe it's still Stardock in charge.

I will probably get flamed for this, but the truth is that when a small company grows, it has to at some point start acting like a big company. Sooner or later things are going to get a little tighter and then Brad will have to decide whether his word to his customers or his bottom line are more important.

I just hope this isn't that time, because the wrong decision is being made.

Well if stardock has sold you a "broken" product and they haven't bothered fixing it for over a month, and complaints on the forum haven't got their attention, perhaps you should hit them in area's that will get their attention. Hitting their pocketbook and their reputation come to mind. You could reconsider your support for stardock products. Since they are also posting numerous links to game's review sites that are giving TA a glowing review, you could also go to all those sites and (if possible), write a less than stellar customer review mentioning the bug that makes the game unplayable and the lack of response from stardock. May not amount to anything but at least you'll be taking some action. Shame really since stardock has been so good in the past.

p.s. Who ever asked for research cost "inflation" anyway? There was nothing wrong with the old system. Another example of fixing something that ain't broken and making it worse in the long run?

I think the problem here lies in StarDocks' beta program. I've mentioned it before, but their system seems to be to get a beta version that works fairly well (not all bugs fixed), then add a ton of content and changes and then barely beta test it in house (how much beta testing can you do in house in a few weeks?) and then release it.

Beta testing is designed so that you can find and fix ALL the bugs before release. Then you release it. You don't redo everything again and then release it. That rather negates much of the beta testing, doesn't it?

The other problem is that StarDock relied on the beta testing program to weed out these sorts of things before release, and so they moved on to another project right away; apparently assuming that the release was stable and bug free.

Shame on you StarDock. This process needs some rethinking. I could overlook it easily if the bugs were patched within a week of release. I could look the other way if you at least acknowledged the problem and vowed to fix it. I don't see that happening though.

I was really looking forward to TA. Downloaded it the day it came out and tried a few games. I've had this happen in all 3 of the games I've played. This expansion really isn't ready for prime time. I have only one suggestion. Go back to DA until TA is a playable product. Not much of a solution, but for me it eases the frustration. Sometimes it hurts being 'bleeding edge'.

BTW, in all those 3 games, at some point (and I don't know why) the research cost returned to 'normal'. Can't be sure about this though. Just seemed that way.

I hate to spoil the party, but I have not noticed it.
I have played two games as the Korath, slightly modified. Gogantic map. Crippling. No tech pick. Normal research.
Research is slow, but no sudden jumps.

I definitely saw it in games played as Torian (1) and Human (2 games). In all 3 of those games I had devoted points to enhanced research ability. In my latest game as the Yor, with no ability points for research, the tech inflation was either much less or was missing. Since the tech tree was so different, though, I can't swear that it wasn't there. The techs I noticed the largest inflation on as Human aren't available to the Yor.

Very disappointing. I talk up Stardock all the time with my gaming buddies; never thought crap like this would occur. How the heck did such a wide-spread bug get into the final release?

Excuse my pointedness, but I believe I answered that question a few posts ago.

I've got a set of questions to those who feel the current system makes for a completely "broken" game.

1. Have you been building research labs in proportion to the expansion of your empire?

2. Have you designated one planet as a technology capital, built many labs on it along with the capital super project and the research coordination building?

3. Have you built any starbases around your technology capital planet to augment the research production?

4. Given you already know that the cost of techs will increase as the game progresses, have you made sure to occasionally research the next tech down the research lab tree, rather than going all military or whatever else and neglecting improvements in research?

5. If playing with tech trading on, have you traded techs with the AIs to keep up with other empires?

6. If the tech you were planning to research jumps up in cost, have you tried giving other techs your attention first and going back to it once your empire has expanded more?

7. When you notice that an AI is going to take "98" turns to research something, can you rule out that that AI may be focussing on military spending, or may just have played poorly in that game (eg never expanded beyond its own solar system)?

8. If, after trying suggestions 1-6, you stll aren't happy, have you tried increasing the research rate (eg change normal to fast)?

9. If after suggestions 1-7, you still feel that the game is broken, do you feel it's not good enough that Brad will be giving this his attention come early June(in approximately one week)?

10. Is it really impossible for you not to remain positive and at least try different game settings until the patch comes out?

If you can confidently answer YES to all of these questions, then feel free to bag Stardock about their "broken" game. If not, perhaps try taking a deep breath and experiment a bit more before spitting the dummy, demanding a roll back to the beta, and going off and playing Gal Civ 1 as a protest.

PS my numbering was off for questions 8 and 9 as I kept thinking of more ideas as I wrote. I hope you still get the idea.

1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Rarely do this- starbases get destroyed way too quickly the way I play. Besides, I'm playing the same way, so there shouldn't be a change like this given the lack of change in the variables.
4) Yes
5) N/A
6) Yes, but then it takes even longer to research sometimes
7) Yes
8) No
9) I understand why Stardock is not paying attention to this, so I can be patient. A lot of that is due to other games being more important for business reasons. The one thing I wish they'd do is offer a previous version patch before the problem came out. That shouldn't take too much effort I think.

A lot of the reason I can be patient is because Stardock has built up a lot of goodwill, which is helping the cause here. When customers trust the company, and the company is being upfront (Again, Brad told us why we're not getting a quick fix- if he had said nothing, I think the pitchforks would be sharper)- then it's a lot easier to be patient. Now, if this turns into July, in Nomine is problematic, and I'm bored- then yeah, pitchforks will be out. I don't think that will happen though.

10) I'm just going to be patient- again, because I have other games to play, and Stardock has proven that they believe supporting their games is profitable- so I trust them to fix the mistake. This is different then how many companies treat their customers- those companies I used to rant and rave about, now I just don't buy their games.

Also, one thing you guys do have to understand, though you don't have to and shouldn't like it. They're a business whose goal is to make money. If they don't get Political Machine out in time, they'll lose more money then they will by delaying a needed patch.
Yeah, they do deserve a hit for that, but they'll probably make it up at some point because they're Stardock. Also, the game did get delayed a few times due to additional content.

Haoh, I don't consider the game broken, I'm continuing to play it. And I do not care for those posting intemperate comments here. I would prefer to see the flames against Stardock stopped, and this thread devoted to attempts to isolate the cause of what we're seeing.

My answer to almost all of your questions is yes. Some of us have been playing this game since the OS/2 days. This is the first time in all of those years that I've seen research costs increase like this.

As I said in my first post, if this is a deliberate design change, I would like to see it made an option. If it is not deliberate, then I think it should be fixed.

As a very long time Stardock customer (of both Object Desktop and their gaming line) I trust them to address this issue as soon as they can. As a professional software developer, I understand the constraints that they are operating under.

I, for one, am willing to wait for a fix or an answer.

Good to see there are some level-headed responses as well as the rants. BTW I also agree that it needs adjusting, I just don't agree that the game is broken as it stands now. For those who are really unhappy, I would strongly suggest choosing fast or very fast tech rate in the options, it makes a big difference.
Will be interesting to see what Brad does with this when he gets the time. I can think of 3 reasons why he made this change in the first place:

- Many people complained in the beta that tech research was too quick and the tree could be fully researched, even on the slow tech rate options.
- To bring research in line with the slower developing economy and longer lasting games in general
- By making techs increase as you research them, trying to inhibit the player's progress (or strong AI Civ) and stopping them from getting too far ahead of the others.

Overall this kind of reminds me of when they adjusted the colonizable planets to be rarer across the board, which infuriated a lot of people. It is unfortunate on this occasion that the moment the game was released everyone had to be rushed onto another project.

I see you did not experience the bug. What happens is that ALL techs costs suddenly double. And it may happen several times in a game.
A week ago, I sent to Carielf a saved game one turn before the doubling (reproducible).



I think the cause is fairly isolated and several saved games have been sent.
And I don't think it is deliberate. Brad implicitly aknowledged it on May 6th when he
said that "There's a number of tweaks and changes I want to put in there such as the research cost algorithms".
Well, at least I hope so because playing games where all ships remain medium sized at most is not fun !



Yes, that's what I choosed in my present game (not finished yet). It may help indeed.

I certainly hope you do not view my comments as flames. I have not found this to be a game breaking issue for me, though there have certainly been some major headaches. I support Stardock, as I have for quite some time. I certainly hope that everything works out and the patch is released soon. The fact that I can even say 'the' patch at this point is a t estimate to StarDock's past efforts.

On the other hand, pointing out a development strategy that fell far short of expectations this go round might help to keep further issues from coming up in the future.

At any rate, can someone summarize what we have collected so far as to possible causes or triggers for this research time escalation?

Stardock has (rightly) received huge praise for their past efforts, why should they be immune from criticism? Releasing with this bug is the equivalent of a faux-pas. (Appearing to be) Doing nothing about it for all this time is unacceptable.

No, I wasn't referring to you.

Meanwhile, comparing my current game (as Altarian, with a considerable research bonus) to my last game (as Yor, with no research bonus), I'm seeing much more inflation, so perhaps it is related to the ability point research bonus. Very early in the game I saw Trade go from 103 to 110 (note that in this case it did not double as some have reported), and over a longer period of time Planetary Invasion went from 676 to 4721. Both games were at very fast tech.

I've observed that with a research bonus, you get an increase in tech costs with every completed tech. For me with a 5% Research bonus, I had a 5% increase in research costs every time I finished one. Perhaps someone else can measure it to confirm this. I've stopped playing.

This was in addition to the doubling that happens after you research selected techs.

You're mileage may very.

I've stop playing and now playing around with civ4. So I can't give any new feedback.

But even if the research inflation is paired with the bonus, why does it stagnate the AIplayer too? If it's a feature they'd better make an on and off button for it. Because it's starting too annoy me quite a bit. That I can't play the game with as much fun when i've played the beta.

Please stardock, hopefully you can atleast look into the matter and give some more responds!