Twilight Imperium

Future games in need of testing and feedback
Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on: https://boardgamearena.com/#!bugs
User avatar
SilentNSly
Posts: 37
Joined: 14 April 2012, 09:37

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by SilentNSly »

GTSchemer wrote: 21 October 2025, 19:14 Once bug reports are handled, Nekro is the final base game faction to add. Nekro is complex and has a very high number of edge cases due to technology mixing, so I expect at least a couple of weeks to carefully program and test.
One stupid one is copying The Barony of Letnev's Non-Euclidean Shielding (When 1 of your units uses SUSTAIN DAMAGE, cancel 2 hits instead of 1.) and having a battle with two dreadnoughts each.

The most hits either side can do is two, which both can be cancelled by sustaining damage with a single dreadnought due to Non-Euclidean Shielding, resulting in a never-ending battle (unless one player decides to retreat)

I hope there is no limit to the number of combat turns a battle can have. Ha ha ha.

A more realistic case would be the two players bringing one additional fighter, as the fight will end if either player rolls all three hits, followed by another hit on the subsequent combat round. This results in a much shorter combat of about 21.8 rounds.
Last edited by SilentNSly on 22 October 2025, 05:20, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
GTSchemer
Posts: 1130
Joined: 09 August 2013, 03:26

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by GTSchemer »

SilentNSly wrote: 22 October 2025, 04:38
GTSchemer wrote: 21 October 2025, 19:14 Once bug reports are handled, Nekro is the final base game faction to add. Nekro is complex and has a very high number of edge cases due to technology mixing, so I expect at least a couple of weeks to carefully program and test.
One stupid one is copying The Barony of Letnev's Non-Euclidean Shielding (When 1 of your units uses SUSTAIN DAMAGE, cancel 2 hits instead of 1.) and having a battle with two dreadnoughts each.

The most hits either side can do is two, which both can be cancelled by sustaining damage with a single dreadnought due to Non-Euclidean Shielding, resulting in a never-ending battle (unless one player decides to retreat)

I hope there is no limite to the number of combat turns a battle can have. Ha ha ha.
The truly infinite case needs to be blocked per the FAQ (the attacker must retreat). Unfortunately some not-quite-infinite battles can run very long if players want to do that, yes.
User avatar
GTSchemer
Posts: 1130
Joined: 09 August 2013, 03:26

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by GTSchemer »

All known recent bug reports have been addressed. Thanks to all testers for your hard work.

In particular, the Civilized Society event has had some bugs fixed. I fixed a case where the game could incorrectly end early, and I changed the timing so that all objectives are now correctly revealed at the end of setup (instead of before map building).


I will continue to monitor bug reports as I start work on The Nekro Virus.
retam012
Posts: 2
Joined: 19 March 2023, 22:50

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by retam012 »

I can’t imagine the amount of work needed to implement this game.
Thank you for what you’re doing.
User avatar
SilentNSly
Posts: 37
Joined: 14 April 2012, 09:37

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by SilentNSly »

With the second expansion, Thunder's Edge release, two strategy cards, namely Construction and Warfare, were updated.

I am curious if you plan to update them like was done for the Diplomacy strategy card.
User avatar
GTSchemer
Posts: 1130
Joined: 09 August 2013, 03:26

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by GTSchemer »

SilentNSly wrote: 24 October 2025, 06:16 With the second expansion, Thunder's Edge release, two strategy cards, namely Construction and Warfare, were updated.

I am curious if you plan to update them like was done for the Diplomacy strategy card.

They might be an optional table setting one day, but unlike other cards they're not intended as a direct base game replacement, so they would not fully replace their counterparts.
User avatar
rekkless
Posts: 17
Joined: 06 April 2024, 23:22

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by rekkless »

Outstanding digital adaptation im really enjoying it thank you for making it available! A few minor suggestions to improve quality of life below.
1) If a race has only a single home planet auto assign the units instead of having player confirm their only choice
2) Trade could use a standard offer option that each player could opt into for x-1 to speed up play instead of waiting for answers once trade is actually popped not all tables are communicating in advance and it can be a significant delay
User avatar
GTSchemer
Posts: 1130
Joined: 09 August 2013, 03:26

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by GTSchemer »

rekkless wrote: 25 October 2025, 23:42 Outstanding digital adaptation im really enjoying it thank you for making it available! A few minor suggestions to improve quality of life below.
1) If a race has only a single home planet auto assign the units instead of having player confirm their only choice
2) Trade could use a standard offer option that each player could opt into for x-1 to speed up play instead of waiting for answers once trade is actually popped not all tables are communicating in advance and it can be a significant delay
X-1 is planned after all factions work, and yeah some sort of auto-assign for single planet setup might make sense later.
User avatar
erkademon
Posts: 5
Joined: 23 June 2022, 06:34

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by erkademon »

If this was abused, you should report that player to some moderator instead, there must be a mechanism for that.
I think implementing support for quicker notifications when doing transactoins is cruicial to make the game playable the way it was intended. So I'm hoping for that.
RicardoRix wrote: 21 October 2025, 13:55 If play does pass to another player like this at will, then players could abuse this behavior repeatedly when they are losing to try and stall the game indefinitely.
User avatar
GTSchemer
Posts: 1130
Joined: 09 August 2013, 03:26

Re: Twilight Imperium

Post by GTSchemer »

erkademon wrote: 30 October 2025, 19:07 If this was abused, you should report that player to some moderator instead, there must be a mechanism for that.
I think implementing support for quicker notifications when doing transactoins is cruicial to make the game playable the way it was intended. So I'm hoping for that.
RicardoRix wrote: 21 October 2025, 13:55 If play does pass to another player like this at will, then players could abuse this behavior repeatedly when they are losing to try and stall the game indefinitely.
Moderating a ton of TI4 games is not feasible given limited moderator time, and it is particularly not feasible in TI4 because it can last several months for a slow turn-based game. If someone is abusing you ingame, the other player being punished once the game ends and you can report does not help since it does not change what they are doing in that game. The only other alternative is a game being killed 2 months in, which is not good either.

For these reasons, the goal with TI4 is to give players the power to proactively defend themselves if someone is abusing trades, for example, by letting you block trades from a specific player.

My concern has been that if everyone can easily wake you up and waste a day at a time (international players and timezones) where you log in and do nothing but click "Reject Trade" on your turn, then it could lead to a broader trend of players turning off trades in general. This would severely impact games because trading is an integral part of TI4 and I want to avoid mechanisms which irritate players and drive them away from it.

There may be options for waking up in the future, but it will have to be monitored to see if it causes problems with the player base.
Post Reply

Return to “"Alpha" games”