removing low quality worlds (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> Design and Modding



Message

Evrett -> removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 12:33:07 AM)

Is there a way to force the galaxy creator to not create worlds under 60% quality. Nothing is more annoying than nice planets in great locals I cant colonize. I dont like to be forced to cheat.



ehsumrell1 -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 1:17:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Evrett

Is there a way to force the galaxy creator to not create worlds under 60% quality. Nothing is more annoying than nice planets in great locals I cant colonize. I dont like to be forced to cheat.

If you mean not having ANY colonizable planets (Continental, Marshy Swamp, Etc.) created at galaxy
startup with quality from 0 to 60%, no.



Unforeseen -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 2:10:54 AM)

It is highly annoying, i wouldn't mind it at all if the AI were to have some sort of programming to utilize them as outposts.



Tehlongone -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 6:05:10 AM)

I wish there'd been some sort of terraforming/facilities to make use of bad planets. It bothers me when a WATER planet with ISLANDS is completely useless, it would have to be a very extreme environment to make it completely useless.

Also that anything under 50% is guaranteed to never be profitable no matter how high tech you get, anything above is a net profit from the start.

It'd be awesome if techs unlocked buildings that increased planet quality up to 50% at max tech so eventually all planets would be useful, allowing 100+% quality planets would be fine with me. It'd mean that a high tech civilization could generate higher revenue by virtue of being very advanced. Makes sense to me.



Mansen -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 7:22:25 AM)

A true terraforming facility would have been neat for sure - High maintenance cost for those few planets that you just -have- to make habitable for an outpost or such.



joeyeti -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 7:34:38 AM)

All of this is also for performance reasons - if nearly any planet were colonizable and playable in the game, the game itself would grind to a halt.



Mansen -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 7:50:19 AM)

That's never a good enough reason from a modding perspective - It should be up to the community to push the limits of the engine, not hardcoded restrictions as such.

Besides you could simply turn down the number of stars and planets if performance was an issue - you don't see me complaining about slowdowns on a abundant 1400/15x15 map [8D]



joeyeti -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 8:10:12 AM)

I only know that the engine itself is quite old by today's standards - and with that it brings many many restrictions that we got used to throughout the years of DW existing...

These would be questions for DW2 then.



Dd_01 -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 12:07:05 PM)

+1 to Evrett. It's a pain to see precious, nice-looking and totally useless world.
Well, I can suppose that Desert planet has no atmosphere at all; this Volcano world is filled with radioactive dust; Ice moon consists of frozen methane; water world is filled with toxic liquid. But in the same time they can support organic life (organic resources), and every Continental or Marshy planet is 85+ quality. That's not fair [:(]



Hannable -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 2:35:31 PM)

Well, you do have to wonder how steel is being produced on an uninhabited volcanic planet that is too low quality to colonize.



joeyeti -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 2:40:45 PM)

You use your imagination and stretch a bit...
Say there is a huge steel mill constructed there, but a large settlement would not be feasible... whatever.



Dd_01 -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 2:48:33 PM)

quote:

Well, you do have to wonder how steel is being produced on an uninhabited volcanic planet that is too low quality to colonize.

Well, at first there's a mining station on the orbit. Station may excavate iron ore by itself or send down mining teams. Ore then can be refined at the station and smelted into bars.



Mansen -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 2:59:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hannable

Well, you do have to wonder how steel is being produced on an uninhabited volcanic planet that is too low quality to colonize.


I like to think they just don't want to colonize something so hostile to mass colonization. You're not just landing a couple hundred colonists, but an entire Earth or more (in time)

Maybe the fields are too barren to grow crops on their own? The air is filled with something you can't breathe. Doesn't stop you from deploying robots and machinery and remotely excavate what you need. :)



Tehlongone -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 4:57:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: joeyeti

All of this is also for performance reasons - if nearly any planet were colonizable and playable in the game, the game itself would grind to a halt.

If that was the case the solution could be to just reduce the amount of habitable planets to compensate, I don't care how many barren planets there are.

The argument weren't that barren planets should be made colonizable, it was that low quality ocean/desert worlds should be made terraformable or somehow able to matter as anything more than outposts (which the AI doesn't make use of btw)
.



Unforeseen -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 5:00:45 PM)

The planet quality is a good simulation of various aspects that would prevent settlement. For instance, take a Mars and give it a breathable atmosphere for Humans. It is still farther from Sol than Earth. This means that it will be colder and thus the living conditions will be harsher and lowering it's "quality". This isn't properly simulated in Distant Worlds because the generator does not factor Distance from Star in planet generation.

There is also the question of geography. We have think about how the actual landscape and how suitable it is for colonization/settlement. Not even Earth is a 1OO% quality planet, we have deserts all over the place which are not exactly ideal places to live. Even in the case of an ocean planet we need to think about what that ocean is made of and if all of it is made of the same thing. A portion could be acidic for instance. The islands could be volcanic or undeveloped.

Another condition is atmosphere. How thick is the atmosphere, can it protect from harmful sunlight, is it breathable in all areas planet wide? Perhaps their is no ozone layer, or there is one but it does not properly cover the entire planet?

The generator should have been programmed to consider position in relation to the sun when determining the types of planets it was going to generate. Terraformation should have been added to the game with restriction on where it could be used. Not being able to terraform an ice planet into a continental planet for example, but being able to raise the quality of a planet...albeit slowly. The CPU AI should have been given the intelligence to utilize low quality worlds as outposts, as well as terraform them to higher quality. There should have been two terraforming techs. One ship bound, and the other a planetary building with enchancement techs to improve the rate in which they do their job.



Tehlongone -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 5:05:47 PM)

That's only a problem at our current tech level here on earth. For a civilization capable of casual space travel there need to be a significant reason why a planet would never be profitable. Stuff like our deserts are actually perfectly fixable if we had an abundance of energy and the will to make use of it, especially when we are more advanced.



Unforeseen -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 5:07:39 PM)

Right thats why i'm saying that basic terraforming should be in the game, the planets should never start out at a 1OO% quality and surely many should be very very low.



Shark7 -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 5:16:44 PM)

On this issue, every planet out there isn't going to be suitable for colonization. This is what the quality setting does. Now that said, you CAN colonize those worlds, but they end up costing you in extra resources.

Think of the quality setting as more of a guide to how expensive it would be to tame the world. Lets say humanity goes to the stars and finds a nice juicy continental world...there is a catch though, it is covered in very large, very voracious predatory animals for which humans are the perfect size for an afternoon snack. So...is it worth trying to eradicate all those predators, or do we just find a better colony world? When you think of it in these terms, the quality setting makes more sense...some planets just aren't worth the trouble.



Unforeseen -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/10/2014 5:24:31 PM)

Yeah but what your missing Shark7 is that these worlds are worth more than just as colonies. Such semi habitable worlds are ideal for outposts, research stations military installations etc etc. It would be similar if we landed on mars and built some basic buildings, sent a team there and used it as a research outpost.



ehsumrell1 -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 1:25:44 AM)

Now THESE are the kinds of discussions that I'm certain Elliot and Erik love to
read and consider as ideas for Distant Worlds 2.

I certainly do. Good discussions people. Please keep these coming!

[sm=happy0065.gif]



Unforeseen -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 1:28:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ehsumrell1

Now THESE are the kinds of discussions that I'm certain Elliot and Erik love to
read and consider as ideas for Distant Worlds 2.

I certainly do. Good discussions people. Please keep these coming!

[sm=happy0065.gif]

How bout a race policy setting that lets me specifically enslave Atuuk and exterminate all insectoid races but no one else? :]



ehsumrell1 -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 1:40:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Unforeseen

How bout a race policy setting that lets me specifically enslave Atuuk and exterminate all insectoid races but no one else? :]

We can ALMOST do that now. Using say, a combination of Race Event that occurs during change cycle and Periodic Change Interval setting combinations (as an example Race Event 11 - Xenophobic riots and 26 - Death Cult).
What we can't do yet though is specify the settings toward 'specific' races or race families.
This is the kind of thought Unforeseen to put in the Modder's Wishlist. Which I feel Erik should
start a new one from here (Universe) going forward.

[sm=character0267.gif]



feygan -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 10:09:48 AM)

I would love terraforming in DW but it would need careful implementation to make it work. Too many 4x games simply involve drop a bunch of terraformers down and either higher tech, or more terraformers makes it go faster. Add to that they simply take your uninhabitable planet and magically turn it into a new Earth.

Most of my space 4x game is now taken up by Aurora and it has a wonderful system (although still obviously toned down from a real world scenario), it works as follows.

1. All species are either oxygen or methane breathers
2. All species have ideal world levels that are equal to their homeworld. So Humans like to have a 20% oxygen atmosphere, with 1g and a temperature of around 14c.
3. All species have a tolerance range where the ideals can vary by a + or - amount.
4. Outside of these tolerances are considered non "earth like" worlds and thus have limits on the population they can sustain.
5. Terraforming involves adding or subtracting various gasses to try and get as close to Earth as possible. Each gas added increases atmospheric pressure, and thus raises temperature. subtracting gasses does the opposite. Safe greenhouse/anitgreenhouse gasses can also be used for the sole purpose of controlling temperature as they have a 10x effect.
6. Gravity is an unchangeable constant and thus always a limiting factor.

There is more to it than that but for the sake of something like DW I cannot see how it could be implemented in any way. but this method means it is impossible to have an end game empire full of Earth copies and some worlds are just too hostile to ever be ideal. This means you have to think about which worlds are worth the effort to terraform. You could spot what you think will be a perfect forward base only to work out that it is going to take you 1000 years or more to completely terraform. This forces you to rethink your strategy.

I think the hardest part of transferring something like this to DW is the issue of gasses, but perhaps it could be done through the use of the existing resource system. You could have space bound systems like construction plants on ships that are tailored for specific gasses. These could then have specific resource needs for each type of plant. Plants can only produce a set % each year and thus you either need more plants or tech advances to make them more efficient.



Solarius Scorch -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 12:52:21 PM)

Is this a feature request thread now? :)

Then i would like to see a new ship design system. DW probably has the worst ship design tool I've ever seen, next to Master of Orion 3: it's counter-intuitive, boring and purely text-based.
Can't we have something a little more exciting and creative, like for example the GUI mod from StarDrive? You get a 2-D grid of the ship, which you fill with various components. Perhaps even modify the grid itself by adding hull components.
I know people who disliked DW mainly for this, and I completely understand them (though I disagree).



Dd_01 -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 1:46:47 PM)

quote:

DW probably has the worst ship design tool I've ever seen, next to Master of Orion 3: it's counter-intuitive, boring and purely text-based.

Ypu definitely must play Aurora [;)]



Solarius Scorch -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 2:00:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dd_01

quote:

DW probably has the worst ship design tool I've ever seen, next to Master of Orion 3: it's counter-intuitive, boring and purely text-based.

Ypu definitely must play Aurora [;)]


From Dwarf Fortress forums:

quote:


Aurora - The Dwarf Fortress of 4X Games


Now I'm really interested. :D



ehsumrell1 -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 6:34:48 PM)

People please!

This thread is about removing low quality worlds. True that discussion about terraforming is leaning
a bit away from the OP's question, but it is at least 'relative' concerning low quality worlds.
I myself even got caught up and guilty of this as well earlier about race policies
(in my haste to respond to inquiries), and I apologize to the OP for that. We're all, or mostly, except DATA....Human.

Please be respectful and not hi-jack the thread into talk about ship design (or as I did, Race Policies).
Your opinions about that are valid, as are all opinions, but start your own thread on that topic please and don't misdirect the OP's.

And again, to Evrett, I apologize! [:(]

Thanks!



Tehlongone -> RE: removing low quality worlds (6/11/2014 7:48:06 PM)

Well failing an implementation of terraforming (which while awesome I don't expect) I would like an option similar to the OP's question.

Basically at game start choose to not have any non-barren planets at below 50% quality, so that all non-barren planets would be of at least some use.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.296875