FreeOrion

Forums for the FreeOrion project
It is currently Tue Jun 19, 2018 4:15 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:52 am 
Offline
Space Floater

Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 4:46 am
Posts: 21
An asteroid belt counts as a poor medium-sized planet for exobots. With habitability techs and robotic growth specials, this can bring the max population up to about 27, and it automatically provides +5 production to itself and other industry-focused planets in the system. Or you can spend a bunch of production points to turn the asteroid belt into a tiny barren planet with a max population (with all techs and growth specials) of about 11 and no industry bonus. Sure this lets you put your choice of race on the planet which (perhaps after expensive terraforming) might be slightly better than exobots, and it lets you spend a bunch more production to add a Gaia special too, but at best you're still looking at roughly half the population you could have had with exobots, which is almost always going to end up worse than the exobots would have been, and certainly a helluvalot more expensive. So... why?

Assuming that there's not something I'm overlooking here, I guess I would suggest counting asteroids as something smaller than a "medium" planet and/or turning them into something larger than a "tiny" artificial planet. I would also suggest making subterranean habitats not provide much bonus, if any, on asteroid belts.

I also don't think I really understand how you would set up an "orbital" habitat in an asteroid belt, so I would consider reducing that bonus too. On that topic, I'd also suggest making orbital habitats provide a flat bonus for all planets, or perhaps even a larger bonus for smaller planets for which going to-and-from orbit would be cheaper, rather than having this be yet another bonus that gets bigger with increasing planet size. Larger planets already have a huge advantage over smaller planets -- no need to carry that bonus over into orbit where space should be much less at a premium.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:48 pm 
Offline
Creative Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:45 pm
Posts: 3310
I did half the price for artificial planets on belts, and you're right I rarely do it, but rarely isn't never, the supply bonus and/or other factors can be very useful at times: it is, for example, far more likely to fin an asteroid belt around a black hole than it is a habitable planet, and it's not worth spending the PP on a Solar Hull ship crewed by half asleep industry bots.

I have long favoured, and we have discussed, making some of the habitability boosts based on Infrastructure, not Planet Size, at a rough guess the ones that come after the species modifier in the priorities would be the most likely candidates, but it'll take some AI work and it's not been a high priority for me.

And Subterranean Habitation is the pop boost that makes the most sense for Belters, not the least ;-)

_________________
Mat Bowles

Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:03 pm 
Offline
Space Floater
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:54 am
Posts: 33
There is logic in Orbital Habits growing with planet size. With a larger radius planet, there is more orbital real estate, allowing for more habitats. Or if the habits are ring structures, then it's quite obvious how the bonus scales with size, as a bigger planet would have bigger artificial rings.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:38 am 
Offline
Space Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm
Posts: 250
I'd actually be more for orbital habs boosting populations for smaller planets. Not only for game balance (they're too poor of a grab right now), but at least to me smaller planets being generally lower gravity means much better, or at least easier orbital real-estate.

_________________
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:07 am 
Offline
Vacuum Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm
Posts: 595
Smaller planets are great at early-mid game. You get much more supply range, and the same flat bonuses from AA and NAI. Only on mid-late game will I prioritise a large/huge planet over a tiny/small one, when you already have many growth techs and pop.-dep. industry/research techs that fully get all the juice from the bigger populations that larger planets have.

Re. the OP, I think I would be happier with asteroid belts accounting as medium planets, as currently, but producing an small planet if agglomerated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:25 am 
Offline
Space Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm
Posts: 250
Oberlus wrote:
Smaller planets are great at early-mid game. You get much more supply range, and the same flat bonuses from AA and NAI. Only on mid-late game will I prioritise a large/huge planet over a tiny/small one, when you already have many growth techs and pop.-dep. industry/research techs that fully get all the juice from the bigger populations that larger planets have.

Re. the OP, I think I would be happier with asteroid belts accounting as medium planets, as currently, but producing an small planet if agglomerated.
The advantage vs. small populations is lost pretty quickly, especially if you shoot for the supply techs early on or invest in space elevators. Species with supply bonuses can also make the malus from larger planets almost a non-issues from the beginning.

_________________
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:25 am 
Offline
Vacuum Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm
Posts: 595
labgnome wrote:
The advantage vs. small populations is lost pretty quickly, especially if you shoot for the supply techs early on or invest in space elevators. Species with supply bonuses can also make the malus from larger planets almost a non-issues from the beginning.
I don't think in terms of average values but what is best at the current moment. A tiny planet gives me the same supply range than any other planet with a space elevator on it, regardless of any supply tech (because these apply to all planets). One I got it, I can keep sending colonisers further away while I keep building colony bases from the tiny/small planets I've got. The choice is not between colonising smaller or bigger planets, the choice is which one to get first. If I get first the bigger one I'll have to wait at least 5 more turns until I've also colonised the smaller one before colonising a new, further away system.
By the time the advantage of bigger populations over smaller ones is important, I have PPs enough to colonise small and big planets simultaneously.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:13 pm 
Offline
Space Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm
Posts: 250
Oberlus wrote:
I don't think in terms of average values but what is best at the current moment. A tiny planet gives me the same supply range than any other planet with a space elevator on it, regardless of any supply tech (because these apply to all planets). One I got it, I can keep sending colonisers further away while I keep building colony bases from the tiny/small planets I've got. The choice is not between colonising smaller or bigger planets, the choice is which one to get first. If I get first the bigger one I'll have to wait at least 5 more turns until I've also colonised the smaller one before colonising a new, further away system.
By the time the advantage of bigger populations over smaller ones is important, I have PPs enough to colonise small and big planets simultaneously.
I suppose it's a difference in play styles. Yeah small planets are a good grab if you want to expand and don't want to wait, but I usually like to get my research and/or production up early. The supply techs also don't have a lot of interdependency right now, so beelining them is pretty easy. So once that kicks in, I have the numbers to expand really quickly.

_________________
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group