.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

The Falklands War - Save $7.00
War Plan Pacific - Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Star Legacy Development Group > Star Legacy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 27th, 2010, 11:20 AM
Xrati's Avatar

Xrati Xrati is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Outter Glazbox
Posts: 760
Thanks: 12
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Xrati is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

In a game aspect, there are probably millions of asteroid fields, small planets and other entities. Strategically, they are unimportant and only important planets and places are brought into the game.

For every space station built, there is a great increase in trading and economic activity that occurs in the area of the station. Same with planets and some larger operations. It is not the case of some far off mining outpost! Positions of interest are brought into play for game mechanics.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old March 31st, 2010, 09:59 AM
Urendi Maleldil's Avatar

Urendi Maleldil Urendi Maleldil is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,066
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Urendi Maleldil is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

We're going to be abstracting a lot of the smaller unimportant objects into zones of space. For example, we won't be modeling every single asteroid in an asteroid field, but there might be an area of the map that is considered to be the asteroid field, and only model special bodies in that area, such as colonizable asteroids, or asteroids with special resources .
__________________
Ken vs. The City

-Km :�
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old April 11th, 2010, 03:20 AM

MarcoPolo MarcoPolo is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 34
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
MarcoPolo is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

There seems to be several ways to approach planets and resources. As some have suggested it can be planet focused or star system focused where the solar system itself is your playground; budding with exploitable asteroids, moons and gas giants.

I agree with having planets with character. We need resource building options that unlock the potential of a terrestrial world, moon, asteroid or even mining facilities that exploit gas planets or even the star itself.

The importance to each resources must be weighed up on the overall focus of the players objectives, whether it be to become an economic giant, to a warmongering empire. Its really dependant on the goals of the individual, and so he must pursue whatever avenues available to acheive this. But whatever he chooses there must be a resiliant, vibrant and flexible game dynamics to support such lofty pursuits.

I am excited about bubbled colonies, scientific research outpost orbiting some far flung gas planet. Or a military installation testing some potent new superweapon around an asteroid belt. I would like to see water worlds and volcanic worlds to acidic/barren planetoids to exploit for minerals or have bubbled domed habitats to expand ones empires reach and claim. All of these things seemingly make for a rich gaming environment, at least in my eyes.

I wish to know however how the Shrapnel guys will tackle allowing several species partake in the colonisation of one planet as I believe I heard mentioned before. This would be a wonderful idea, as I think it would add another level of diversity and realism not seen before. This would certainly lessen the repitituous nature of seeing dozens of colonised worlds looking identical to one another. But I believe if not using a slot based allocation system (each with an allocated amount of resources based on population size) of what I would call planet squatting then I really am interested in Shrapnels solution to many species on one world.

Last edited by MarcoPolo; April 11th, 2010 at 03:29 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old April 17th, 2010, 06:44 AM

pydna pydna is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
pydna is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

Stellar Legacy looks like it has tremendous promise.

These are just my musings so feel free to ignore them. Or if you want me to elaborate on anything just ask.

One thing I've been thinking about is each solar system is divided into zones. By that I mean each planet and it's moons asteroids etc are considered one zone.

For example in the Sol system is divided into 9 planetary zones (or is that 8.....)

Zone 3 consists of the Earth and the moon.

When the solar system is attacked players attack/defend these planetary zones. This reduces the micro management somewhat for both the attacker and the defender.

I do like the idea of players customising their races. I also would love to see a pbem function that would be fantastic.

Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old April 17th, 2010, 08:10 AM
jars_u's Avatar

jars_u jars_u is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: behind the keyboard
Posts: 225
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jars_u is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

Quote:
Originally Posted by pydna View Post
When the solar system is attacked players attack/defend these planetary zones. This reduces the micro management somewhat for both the attacker and the defender.
... I also would love to see a pbem function that would be fantastic.
Cheers
I not sold good or bad but I would think having specific defined zones would increase not decrease the level of micromanagement as you have defined it.

Having zones that correlate for the tactical/combat map depending on how scales are implemented could add variety (debris, gravity wells etc.) but not entirely certain I understand what you are suggesting. Are there any games that have an analogous implementation that you can cite that might help us with a point of reference?

PBEM is a requirement - I think that is a feature pretty much everyone at this point has agreed they would like to see.
__________________
"It is well that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it." Robert E. Lee
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old April 17th, 2010, 10:29 AM
Xrati's Avatar

Xrati Xrati is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Outter Glazbox
Posts: 760
Thanks: 12
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Xrati is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

SE4's system isn't broke. It wasn't all that bad and in some cases was pretty open for anything players wanted to do. Not all planetary systems are going to be uniform in design or layout. Keeping the sysytem 'open' as SE4 did was good.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old April 18th, 2010, 02:12 PM
jars_u's Avatar

jars_u jars_u is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: behind the keyboard
Posts: 225
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jars_u is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xrati View Post
SE4's system isn't broke.
I agree I think systems and the ability to customize for games in SE4 was something that wasn't broke - just trying to fully grasp what was inferred or what might be possible with "zones". But as I picture it I think it leads to more micro-management possibilities which in this case for me I don't think would be a desirable game feature.
__________________
"It is well that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it." Robert E. Lee
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old April 19th, 2010, 02:02 AM

pydna pydna is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
pydna is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

Well it depends on how you want to do your system map.

I've only played Stars! and SE V so I can't comment on SE IV.

the zone idea would reduce micromanagement in that instead saying, now I need to build 5 mines on the moon, 3 research stations on the earth, 12 orbital refineries at Jupiter etc.

Instead you would just order 5 mines and 3 research stations for zone 3, 12 refineries for zone 5.

I've actually been thinking you could simplify this even further by diving all solar systems into two zones (inner and outer).


I'd have to sit down and do some playtesting.

How many star systems were you planning on having in an average game?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old April 19th, 2010, 10:55 AM
Xrati's Avatar

Xrati Xrati is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Outter Glazbox
Posts: 760
Thanks: 12
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Xrati is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

SE4 used to have about 200 systems available. Some could be empty and some could be a Black Hole where your ship is drawn into it with a movement modifier toward the center of the system. These are the things that made the SE4 system good, VARIETY!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old April 20th, 2010, 07:02 PM
jars_u's Avatar

jars_u jars_u is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: behind the keyboard
Posts: 225
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jars_u is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Planets and Resources

I see what you mean now - that is a further abstraction - one that I think could work - but I was thinking more along the lines of placing 5 mines at specific points around the moon instead of just "5 mines at the moon."
__________________
"It is well that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it." Robert E. Lee
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2017, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.