Planet characteristics
In Beta 5, planets are managed in a very simplistic way. They have a name, a location, an owner, an associated picture, and it’s pretty all there is to say about them. However in a real universe, planets would be linked to way more complex parameters.
In order to reflect this diversity we have chosen to include some more characteristics which will define a planet and what will be possible to do with it.
A planet is first of all attributed a size and a class of environment which determines how friendly the planet is to life; both values therefore impact the availability of living space and building space.
The building space corresponds to the number of surface units on which buildings can be constructed (turrets, factories, and way more). It is linked to the planet size (the bigger the planet, the more building space is available) and the environment: a barren planet has a smaller building space compared to its size than a planet where life is flourishing.
The base living space of a planet is directly linked to the building space. Its value is added to the living space provided by housing buildings (such as arcologies) to calculate the actual living space of the planet. It should be noted that the living space and the “maximal population” are two really different concepts, as individuals from different species may need different quantities of it.
Do you think it will bring something interesting to the game to have more differences among planets?
Do you have concerns around the balancing problems which might arise from these new planet characteristics? If yes, how would you solve them?
Do you think the size and environment characteristics are adequate to make differences among planets? Can you think of others?
Dav:
i love this idea personally, it makes choosing were you core and such more complicated and interesting, at the start of rounds theres prob going to be alot more fighting between alliances for good planets etc.
also it just adds another demention to the planets that is lacking in beta 5
lucas
February 17, 2008, 10:18 amju:
The idea is to have both “good” and “bad” planets in each starting area for players so it shouldn’t bring too much fighting, but we’ll see about that.
February 17, 2008, 11:00 amTSeeker:
Hmmm, it will still bring a lot of fighting given the amount of planets player can now control ^^
February 17, 2008, 11:02 amCyliis:
It will be very nice to have variances besides simply the population and what factories have been built on a planet.
Is it possible for a new player to start with a barren planet rather than a decent one? If so, this could give an unfair advantage to those that start with a good planet. Unless the living size won’t really affect a new player due to their very limited initial growth options?
February 17, 2008, 12:24 pmTSeeker:
@Cyliis, at the start of the game, a player’s growth will be severely limited in any case; however, having someone start on a very, very bad planet (e.g. small + infernal) would indeed be unfair. The idea would be to balance the game so that this doesn’t happen (neither should a player start with a “huge + heavenly” planet).
February 17, 2008, 12:32 pmBuiltom:
Few things:
Will we be able to terraform a planet to a degree, so we move it up 1 or 2 spots in the list of Niceness? (Assuming you have the correct technologies)
This does somewhat creep towards the cookie-cutter build type game, whereby it goes “Get planet with X and Y, and build this. Get planet with A and B, and build this.” which in my opinion isn’t a very good thing.
February 17, 2008, 2:42 pmju:
Terraforming will be possible to a degree, yes. Topic will be described further at some point.
As for your second comment, I don’t see what you mean. Could you elaborate on that?
February 17, 2008, 2:45 pmBuiltom:
Ok. I may have misunderstood what you ment by the planets, but this is what I think you ment:
Planet type A does X, Y and Z. It influences M, N and O.
Planet type B does E, F and G. It influences P, Q and R.
What I’m worried about is cookie-cutter build will apear for each planet, and will eventually become a form of standard for that planet.
By cookie-cutter build, I mean that instead of thinking what to build, it will have already been figured out (this is a month or two after the round is open at most) and anyone who gets the planet will get to choose what they want to do, and then follow a specific build to maximize the effectiveness.
Hope that cleared it up.
February 17, 2008, 3:20 pmju:
What we mean is a planet has characteristics. It defines how it is, not what can be done with it.
February 17, 2008, 3:27 pmA planet has a size. It means only a certain number of buildings can be put on it and that it can only house a certain total population.
A planet has an environment. Because of its environment, the number of buildings which can be built and the population size it can house is further limited.
Neither parameter defines which buildings will be put there by the owner. It’s up to him to choose among available buildings.
Rendesh:
Couldn’t an aspect of trade be introduced into the game, that planets have resources (could be a wide variety of resources) that can be upgraded, combined to form better materials required for ship production, buildings and general level of happiness within the planet.
For instance, a planet could have coal as a resource, that would be shipped to a planet with iron, that would smelt the two together to make steel that could be used to build bigger ships. Another planet could have diamonds that could be a requirement for high optical laser technology.
This would mean although players may have the technology to build a ship they would have to get the resources to build them. Also it would mean that players would have to set up trade routes between planets as well, building trading vessels to do this job.
February 17, 2008, 3:57 pmju:
Resources other than money (in particular mineral, gases and refined products built out raw resources, to be used in advanced buildings and ships) is something which will be introduced in Beta 6. We’ll post a more complete description about that topic once we are clearer around that issue.
February 17, 2008, 4:04 pmHowever i don’t think having actual trade, with trading vessels, should be introduced. In my opinion, resources trading should be performed through a marketplace facility just as for planets and fleets in Beta 5 and a cost depending on source empire and destination empire could be added depending on the distance between them (absolutely not sure about that last one).
Rendesh:
The other option that I just had as an idea was to say that a player were to do something considered bad as such, like a WHSN. If that occured then the planets who were trading with that player would drastically increase their prices of goods, thus meaning that destroying a planet would have knock-on affects through the rest of the system.
February 17, 2008, 8:42 pmCyliis:
I hope that the WHSN technology, if it exists in B6, will be very restricted in use somehow. After its excessive use in B5-R1 , the round became stagnant.
A note regarding trade, or rather resource gathering. As was said, this is still in the brainstorming stage, so, here’s a thought. (my brain stormed ;)) Maybe planets each have different resources on them. They all have the basics, but some have specific rare materials needed to implement certain technologies, or build certain ships. These planets would not have a limited amount, but would rather have varying rates at which these resources could be mined. The planets would be prime targets during wars, once they were discovered. I really like the idea of trading materials between players through a marketplace forum or utility. Something I’ve always liked about LW, though I’ve only played in B5, is the amount of control that you have over things occurring.
February 18, 2008, 6:13 amju:
@Rendesh
We intend to set up an alignment system (a bit like what you find in role playing games but with different axes than good / bad or chaotic / lawful) which should do exactly what you suggest: influence of your past actions on the way the game reacts. Topic which will be presented later on. However I don’t think the price of goods on a simple marketplace should be too influenced by the game. I mean players want to set their prices. But we can haves taxes/price cuts on top of that which vary depending on relative alignments of players.
@Cyliis
February 18, 2008, 9:16 amWe’re not even sure it will still be there. I tend to say yes but of course the plan is to have it so that using it is really a last resort.
As for resources, something is being planned as i’ve already said. Various resources depending on the place they can be gathered is in store. We’ll explain in some blog post one day
LegacyWorlds Beta 6 » Blog Archive » Terraforming:
[...] presented in an earlier post, planets in Beta 6 have among others an environment characteristic. In the comments around this [...]
March 10, 2008, 7:40 amwiles9:
Do you think it will bring something interesting to the game to have more differences among planets?
More differences mean more thought, more strategies, more fun
Do you have concerns around the balancing problems which might arise from these new planet characteristics? If yes, how would you solve them?
Yes, you could end up with the worst bunch of planets or something. But from another thread, I cant remember who suggested it (Rendesh?) About migrating populations. I think with more technologies you should have the power to adapt planets to your liking ( More techy.. or more green… ) This will cost lots, and might not even pay off in the long run?? Depends on your plans etc.
So the solving part of what I was saying is, if you are lacking something at the start, you can develop it over time with a lot of money. Or just move planets..
Do you think the size and environment characteristics are adequate to make differences among planets? Can you think of others?
Planet orbits? Will they exist? If so. do we have Suns, and if a sun is destroyed by an enemy will it have negative effect on surrounding planets (yes of course). The orbits? Are they stable, can we knock planets of orbit causing some sort of havoc (either destruction of systems, or simply plays with weather systems)
About the trade: I would like trading vessels, hijacking and stuff like that ^^
March 12, 2008, 9:38 pmju:
Balancing issues: the idea is to have a equivalent set of planets (on the total original and after terraforming building space, etc. point of view) available for each player.
March 13, 2008, 7:27 amPlanets orbits will exist but we don’t plan on having them decay or on having the ability to destroy suns. It includes too many ways of destroying planets and these are bad unless insanely restricted (remember the map at the end of round 1 of Beta 5…).
Trade vessels: the suggestion is interesting and we thought of it but it is too complex to manage on a player point of view. It implies designing freighters, building freighters, loading cargo, sending freighter, unloading freighter at destination, etc. which is way too time consuming for the level of activity we target (30 min a day to be able to survive). Automating the process only brings complexity to the calculations with an effect similar to a simple marketplace where you sell and buy goods.