Terrain Wish List

from Sins Forums
Terrain:

1. Moons: Colonizable and of varying types, you build a mine on it either crystal or metal, but you can also add a ‘module’ to it. A military module provides tactical slots equal to a default asteroid planet, while a civilian one is essentially a research station and a little more money. The Military base should also be a missile launcher… or perhaps give it the missile launcher ability of the Sova. Moons would create a small bubble of gravity that swells from the overall well; this if aligned with a phase lane could be a good advantage for the attacker!

2. Nebulas/Anomalies: Make them thicker visually.

3. Asteroid Fields: Have resource asteroids here, and see outpost. Also their gravity well should be irregular.

Outpost Structure: Can be built by Colony Frigate; can be built in a non-colonized system; allows one constructor, and has one fighter/bomber wing and some very weak defenses. This can be built in asteroid fields to allow access to their resource asteroids or in nebulas merely to observe… so weak militarily as to almost not matter to any significant strike. Build limit of 1 per system, can be built in a colonized system perhaps to boost allegiance? Would use 2 logistics slots as well.

4. Gas Giants: See Moons.

5. Stars: Some stars should have a moon or two; also stars would have varying gravity wells, which would/could affect the distance of planets to each other. Thus a heavy star would have planets very close to it, in general. Stars could sometimes also be a nebula/anomaly and would have those effects there.

6. Phase Lanes: Occasionally some phase lanes would be special and go very long distances but be very fast, or artificially slow, or connect to other stars traditionally! These would represent wormholes essentially.

7. Pirates/Bases: When enemy trade stations and ships are destroyed and also some pirate ships… they should leave behind money for the attacker to pick up. Extra incentive for raiders; Pirate bases should have ‘loot’ to take from colonizing the planet, and have defenses. Some times a star should have two pirate bases, or new bases can be formed by a pirate fleet?

8. Planets: More variety on the regular types… not all desert planets need look the same!

22,981 views 19 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
oh well, I'll just drop some comments

1. yes, moons would be really cool, gameplay effect or not, they should be in. wasn't there some talk of "minor planetoids"? what was meant by that? in any case, lets think about it. moons are certainly good places for fighter bases, research labs, repair stations, etc.

the point is likely ... a sort of dead area was intended to give more variety. by making a planet not colonisable but giving it a number of moons that can each be colonised is countermanding that idea. maybe some planets have them. also ... if the gravity well is sufficiently large and the moons far enough away its quite different to having a regular planet, as travel time could be quite long and tactical structures just cannot cover the whole area.

in any case, if you leave it as it is, maybe we could have a structure called starbase in otherwise non colonisable systems. it could have a fighter wing, some cannons, and limited repair ability. it could thus serve as a fall back point if your attack is beaten back. but how to build it ... maybe it could consume a colony ship except for the ressources or if you use the capship, it binds the capship in the building process for quite some time. oh, and I think of it as a purely military installation, so no ressources no nothing. oh, and it takes so many logistics points that building it in regular systems is possible but not a very good idea. you could use it to as an early choke and control point to fortify an area for future expansion.

just an idea.

2. no idea, haven't seen them so far.

3. same as 2 + we already have the astroid "planet"

4. see 1.

5. physically speaking this is of course nonsense as any moon sizes object in the vicinity of a star would get sucked in. gameplay wise I'm not sure if its a good addition. need to sort my mouse probs out and play more.

6. well, some of them are longer, but yes, the wormhole type thing sounds interesting. it will however get a bit complicated if you add different speeds because you need to display that information somehow and I'm not sure it's that important to accept adding this layer of complexity.

7. interesting. how do you profit from this? you move your warships there? you have special cargo ships? it is automatically credited to your account when you destroy them?

still, that would be very nice to play pirate yourself and attack trade ships. maybe you could have those privateer ships, like buy ships from the pirates that have no id so you can move them around and attack without anyone knowing who it is.

8. well, it can't hurt, but that may already be in the works but just not as a top priority yet. I wounder how difficult a random map generator that would be.
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
Well- as to the starbase you mentioned, thats the same as my outpost idea. So we agree on it lol.

The trade ships carry a certain ammount of money, that money would exist as a debris box that is left when it is destroyed, if any ship flies into it, you get the money.... this would allow two forces to race for them. Also it would be a great way to boost the early game economy...

the economy is a known bottle neck, if you gained money by killing the militia forces this would alleviate the problem early on, but would not affect the mid-late game where things are more liberal.


The Moon around the star, would essentially be examples of the planet Mercury. They would provide variety, which in my opinion is always a good thing. They could be very crappy planets notably!

Displaying phase lane speed would be very very easy. ---hey my phase lane is glowing red, Red means Fast, Hurray! have some sort of indicator bubble at each end in icon mode in case your race color is red and you have culture there.
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top
3. Asteroid Fields: ...their gravity well should be irregular.


Yes, pretty please. Give us irregular gravity wells, please.


the economy is a known bottle neck, if you gained money by killing the militia forces this would alleviate the problem early on, but would not affect the mid-late game where things are more liberal.


Doesn't make sense and I don't think you should be able to make money this way.


As for gas giants. Please, add moons to them.
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top
We all know there is a money issue slowing the game down. The early stage of simple construction could be quicked by more money. You could of course have larger starting capital, but this would require the player to earn said money.

Its 'creeps' from warcraft III its the same thing. We fight militia to open up resources, gain experience, and if we add this, to gain some extra starting cash. But it disappears, its a leg up in the early game but it doesn't stick around to make things ridiculous later.

At the least the trade loot/pirate loot would just be plain fun.
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
Hmm... played some more and come to the conclusion, that idea isn't as bad as I thought. Money is now really more of a stopper (did something got changed? it feels slower now) in the early game.

So well, yes I agree. Giving a bounty on militia could help some with money problems in the beginning.
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top

Outpost Structure: Can be built by Colony Frigate; can be built in a non-colonized system; allows one constructor, and has one fighter/bomber wing and some very weak defenses. This can be built in asteroid fields to allow access to their resource asteroids or in nebulas merely to observe… so weak militarily as to almost not matter to any significant strike. Build limit of 1 per system, can be built in a colonized system perhaps to boost allegiance? Would use 2 logistics slots as well.


This defeats the entire purpose of "neutral" grav wells!
what was meant by that?


Asteroids

physically speaking this is of course nonsense as any moon sizes object in the vicinity of a star would get sucked in.


Mercury

It isn't the size of the orbiter, just how close it is to the orbitee -- closer it is, faster it has to orbit.
Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top
either way stars do not have moons, it has to do with their corona and massive gravitational and electromagnetic flucuations.


their only "moons" are planets.
Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top

either way stars do not have moons, it has to do with their corona and massive gravitational and electromagnetic flucuations.


their only "moons" are planets.


...huh?

You're right -- stars don't have moons. It has nothing to do with 'gravitational and electromagnetic fluctuations', though -- it's solely because of the (generally used) definitions of what a moon is! Either you accept that satellites orbitting a star (i.e. *planets* and planetoids) are 'moons' (the 'natural satellites orbiting a larger mass definition), or the more common definition that moons are natural satellites of planets (and planetoids), in which case stars are forbidden from having moons purely by technicality.

There is no *physical* reason a star can't have 'moon-sized' objects orbitting it. Our solar system happens to include a whole bunch of those things.
Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top


Outpost Structure: Can be built by Colony Frigate; can be built in a non-colonized system; allows one constructor, and has one fighter/bomber wing and some very weak defenses. This can be built in asteroid fields to allow access to their resource asteroids or in nebulas merely to observe… so weak militarily as to almost not matter to any significant strike. Build limit of 1 per system, can be built in a colonized system perhaps to boost allegiance? Would use 2 logistics slots as well.



This defeats the entire purpose of "neutral" grav wells!


ah, I thought as much myself. that's why I opted more for the military side, that way its still something different from a colonised system.


physically speaking this is of course nonsense as any moon sizes object in the vicinity of a star would get sucked in.


Mercury

It isn't the size of the orbiter, just how close it is to the orbitee -- closer it is, faster it has to orbit.


actually true if you think of it, its the combination of mass distance and orbital speed that determines whether it stays in orbit, crashes or is shot away.
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top
There is no *physical* reason a star can't have 'moon-sized' objects orbitting it. Our solar system happens to include a whole bunch of those things.

which are a far greater distance than the immediate gravity well, you just supported what I said thank you.

well, except you ignored the reason why.
It has nothing to do with 'gravitational and electromagnetic fluctuations'

oh yes it does
that and the corona.
ah, I thought as much myself. that's why I opted more for the military side, that way its still something different from a colonised system.

nah, I really like my neutral territories
Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top

which are a far greater distance than the immediate gravity well, you just supported what I said thank you.


Newp -- your assertion was that "either way stars do not have moons", not "either way stars do not have moons very close to them".

Even ignoring the asteroid belt/s and various KBOs/etc, Mercury is still smaller than some moons (though still more massive) in the solar system. It is *moon-sized* and exists.

An object smaller than Mercury (and, say, with the same composition) could maintain the same orbit without any more problem than Mercury itself -- its orbital period would just have to increase.


well, except you ignored the reason why.
...
oh yes it does
that and the corona.


Nah, I didn't -- your reasons were unworkable and without qualification. Maybe if you explained what you meant a bit I could guess at what you mean, but for there to be 'gravitational fluctuations', you'd need the mass of the objects to change significantly... or introduce a gravitational wave or something. I have no idea what you're trying to get at with the corona, but at Mercury's distance, we can already see those effects. Ditto for EM effects.

Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top
sorry


a planet orbits a star.

a moon orbits a planet.

so no moons orbit a star. with one known exception. the earths moon has a perfect orbit around the sun. it niether gets closer nor farther away from the sun. meaning that if the earth wasn't here the moon would remain on the same orbit it is takeing now. but since it also orbits the earth and is closer it is still a moon to the earth and not a planet to the sun.
Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top

sorry


a planet orbits a star.

a moon orbits a planet.


Yep, exactly. The only reason moon-like objects couldn't be in orbit of a star is because then, by *definition*, they wouldn't be moons.


it niether gets closer nor farther away from the sun. meaning that if the earth wasn't here the moon would remain on the same orbit it is takeing now.


The moon is orbitting Earth, and, therefore, varies in distance to the Sun by its orbital distance. I think you may be confusing this with the fact that the Moon rotates at the same period as its orbit?

In the absence of the Earth, the moons orbit would have to change -- the decrease in mass of the system would mean that the moon would have to fall towards a tighter (and faster) path.
Reply #14 from Stardock Forums Top

Outpost Structure: Can be built by Colony Frigate; can be built in a non-colonized system; allows one constructor, and has one fighter/bomber wing and some very weak defenses. This can be built in asteroid fields to allow access to their resource asteroids or in nebulas merely to observe… so weak militarily as to almost not matter to any significant strike. Build limit of 1 per system, can be built in a colonized system perhaps to boost allegiance? Would use 2 logistics slots as well.


This defeats the entire purpose of "neutral" grav wells!
what was meant by that?


Asteroids


physically speaking this is of course nonsense as any moon sizes object in the vicinity of a star would get sucked in.


Mercury

It isn't the size of the orbiter, just how close it is to the orbitee -- closer it is, faster it has to orbit.




You mean..........It's not how big it is, it's how fast? 


pek
Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top
"either way stars do not have moons", not "either way stars do not have moons very close to them".

they aren't moons, they're orbiting objects - planets.

the distinction you aren't making is between moons (swept within the gravitational path of larger objects) and planets (not so)
Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top
Im sorry, I simply think in game terms... if the game starts having objects classified as moons... they perhaps will be crappier than an asteroid.... I believe such an entity should/could inhabit the orbit of a Star, and represent Mercury type planets...

IE a planet so crappy that in game terms it equals a moon.


Ron, the Outpost would do nothing other than let you observe an area and look cool. It would hardly matter to neutral grounds.... as for the asteroid fields... well I thought it would be fun to harvest them in some form.

Meh not a big one for me.
Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top
The moon is orbitting Earth, and, therefore, varies in distance to the Sun by its orbital distance. I think you may be confusing this with the fact that the Moon rotates at the same period as its orbit?

In the absence of the Earth, the moons orbit would have to change -- the decrease in mass of the system would mean that the moon would have to fall towards a tighter (and faster) path.


I'm not sure whether you propose moons orbiting planets, or moons orbiting the sun. I'm not sure how a moon would look orbiting a planet since unfortunately, nothing orbits in the game at the moment which sucks. Unless the devs or a modder add in orbits, it'd look a lot better. Then the moon would be stationary around the planet.

Moons can't orbit the sun, because they orbit planets and that is what makes them moons. Without a planet they would become asteroids or planetoids, but those are already in the game.

Also for planets so crappy that they would be classified as moons would be good. I hope they add in more types and variations of planets, even inventing new ones unseen to humans before would add flavour to game.
Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top
....
as for the asteroid fields... well I thought it would be fun to harvest them in some form.



i agree.
Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top
How large are the grav wells?

Mercury at its closest to the sun is 46 million km away. Now if grav wells are only a few hundred thousand km or even a few million km (like 5 or 6 million km) out from the star, the chances of a planet existing in that radius go down dramatically (high solar wind would have blown the early material for a planet further away during the formation of a solar system). From a gameplay perspective, I'd say leave planets out of solar grav wells. It provides a good neutral middle ground for pure fleet battles without defenses for either side.