Planets and Resources

Xrati · #1 March 15th, 2010, 12:29 PM

Let's talk going 'green' or 'red' planets here. Resources and planets go together!

Lets hear what you think!

Confused, ask here.

jars_u · #2 March 20th, 2010, 09:57 AM

I think there should be fewer Earth or otherwise species ideal planets and more emphasis placed on developing smaller bodies like moons and asteroids etc. Both strategically/logistically and from a empire management perspective I think it would be better for game play.

Xrati · #3 March 20th, 2010, 01:39 PM

It's preference jars_u. I think that the SL programmers will fit that into their game with a preference setup or mod capacity. Ask ten people how they like to play a game and YOU WILL get ten different answers...

jars_u · #4 March 20th, 2010, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xrati

It's preference jars_u.

True enough - as long as the setup options allow me to configure the game to be played the right way I'm ok with it...

Louist · #5 March 25th, 2010, 04:34 AM

Let me play the part of another one of those 10 people. While I'm not sure I want ideal worlds to be as rare as jars_u, I am with him in that I would like to see moons and asteroids in important roles, and not just hard or soft abstracted out. Whether to host small bubbled colonies, or secret laboratories where the really dangerous research takes place, I'd like to see them utilized.

I'd like to see variety and character in my planets, More like Moo2 and less like SE or Stars!. I'd there to be random goodies here and there to be found upon colonizing the planet.

I'd like to see some way to claim planets you cannot colonize, or at least some system to allow you to exploit them for resources.

Ah, yes, resources. I'm more of a fan of system used by SE/Stars!: a small number of different resources needed in variable amounts, and less a fan of the GalCiv/SotS/Moo2 system: planets pay taxes, and cash is the only resource.

Alternately, you could take it even further. Perhaps in addition to mining those ship-building resources, all that oh-so-precious star-ship fuel has to be refined from a gas-giants atmosphere as well.

On the other hand, it is certainly possible to take such things too far.

I think I can summarize it simply as: give us planets and resources with character.

Gregstrom · #6 March 25th, 2010, 05:53 AM

Now there's a set of interesting thoughts.

Secret asteroid research bases sounds nice. Asteroids or comets fitted with great big motors and aimed at planets sounds fun too. Domed mining bases on uninhabitable planets (with the option of accidentally releasing ancient evil presences trapped there aeons ago). Asteroid mining would be nice, for that matter. How about using super-technology to ignite and sustain a fusion reaction in a gas giant so you can create viable colonies in the outer solar system?

JThur · #7 March 25th, 2010, 07:30 AM

What about space ship colonies? I've always wanted to play a locust race in space strategy games where your race mainly live on ships and go from star system to star system and reap the resources as they go.

Game wise I guess it would be like a race with movable planets of varying sizes that either colonize existing planets and make them movable or build movable planets from scratch with lots of resources.
It would probably be a good idéa to give them organic or energy to matter tech so they can build some resources if they run out of resources to loot. Superb storage tech would also help to tone down the aggressiveness and blunt the damage if they get stalemated a bit.

InfStorm · #8 March 26th, 2010, 11:27 AM

Well, one think to ask, "What is the difinition of Planet?"

Is a planet one of those things that orbit only around stars, or do you include things like the "forest moon of Endor" or the "Pirate asteroids" as "planets" as well.

Then, do you have a colonize a planet to get resources off of it?
(can you build mining shuttles or the Red Dwarf style ships?)
Are you going to be able to grow food on your space ships/stations?
(Do we even care about tracking food?)

How many resources does the game have? Why someone would want a planet would vary greatly depending on the resources of the game.

What level of detail will you have on a planet?
Down to individual buildings, or build by 'cities'?

All these questions need to be thought of...

JThur · #9 March 26th, 2010, 11:49 AM

I would say a planet is where your population grow.

Resources is something you should be able to get from various sources. Shipwrecks, moons, asteroids etc.

Personally I'd like to be able to get resources from places without having to colonize them.

Food shouldn't be that hard to get. Growing food on ships, space stations or other places would be a nice feature.

If you have the level of detail for individual buildings on planets the scope of the game would have to be downscaled. Not something i'd like.

jars_u · #10 March 27th, 2010, 09:04 AM

I think in order to avoid being bogged down in any single aspect of a 4X game certain liberties will have to be taken to make the game fun. In that respect I actually like the SE4/5 model of only having a very small handful of resources to worry about - this is another aspect that can be "borrowed" from most RTS games that I think can work well in a turn based 4X game.