40+ Planet Systems, we will ever have access to such scale?

Especialy that we can already create such systems, this is mine

Based on this art from deviantart user equiliari

System have exact number of 43 planets, but as you see surface wise its not that big, so it SHOULD load already and be playable in current game version, but there is hard limit so it can't... Why?!
WHY?!

Edit: it seems that game actualy can't load more than 16 planets at a time, idk why

Imagine what a waste it would be if everyone played on this system, and someone awoke the annihilazer and just blasted each planet one by one.

Because it's kill the servers I'd imagine, it's feasible to have very very many planets actually, as long as their small. 4 scale five hundreds are equal to one scale 1000, and so one. Get down to the smalls number, like 100 and you've got quuuuite a few planets.

For performance reasons, both client and server side, Uber has a forced hard limit to the number of planets.

When Uber improves the performance, fixes bugs, and gives us server access, we'll be able to have larger games.

^This
Planets go strongly on client memory. Not to mention server memory and orbital pathign cycles.

Besides I think the 40 player game is more interesting then the 40 planet game to have in again.

I don't think I'd ever play with that many planets anywise, it'd just be a HUGE game of cat 'n' mouse.

Some people want to play massive, long games, with lots of enemies.

I wouldn't do it all the time, but I love RTS matches like that.

I am with brian on this one, I may not play a game this massive often, but I really can't wait to try games with that many crazy *** planets, it would just be absolutely insanely fun.

N

Not if you were the first one to die. lol

LOL... well it could be very entertaining trying to keep up watching everyone... Tell ya what though, it would make for one hell of a chrono file

I'm envisioning the eventual clan wars that will occur. Oh you thought i meant two teams representing clans fighting each other? No, i mean entire clans versus entire clans, or, you know, entire clan shared army FFA's, with dynamic alliances between teams?

(all other clans dynamically ally to combat the comming swarm that is RLM, before falling to infighting amongst themselves. the battle lasted 2 years, many jobs were lost and degrees were failed.)




(Ended in a server crash)

Ya'll need to wait for computers to get faster. I'm on a fairly good machine and i still cringe when i see 10 player ffas in 14 planets listed.

Do you understand how much planet surface that would be to render? And with a number of players matching the 40 planets, how much work is required to keep track of all those units and planets?

This is why i really love the shared armies gameplay, it'll be cool to see what sort of meta evolves in team based tournaments. like with a 3v3, you might have one dedicated eco guy, one dedicated logistics and production guy, and one dedicated micro guy, etc.

In my memory TA was the most fun around 2000, ie 3 years after it's release. It felt like machines and gamers caught up to the game then, a game i'd say was as much a head of it's time as i think PA is. The meta had evolved several times over and we could play the really big maps. I sincerely believe PA holds a long and bright future, there's plenty of both meta and modding potential to be discovered and explored still.

Just jam an asteroid in the barrel, and the annihilazer won't bother you again

The game is not optimized yet. Just wait for the release.

many players? super large systems? super large planets? many planets? all a matter of hardware ...

PS : SPOILER: planetary annihilation is a resourcehog ...
and please dont tell me you didnt expect that because if you ever knew of and played total annihilation and supreme commander then you would well know how hardwarehungry those were back then, too ...
so it's not a question of if but WHEN ... guess what the answer is .....

From a gameplay point of view, bigger systems are less fun in my opinion. Large maps in any RTS promote turtling and pedestrian gameplay, and I've yet to see a system in PA where more than five planets was justified, and generally three is a good upper limit.

why is not justyfied at the moment?
because of lack of options to invade planets faster and easier ... the more the unitpool is buildup the more battlefields you can fight on no matter the terrain or size and you still wouldnt be able to go full turtle with asteroids and deathstars around

Of course things might change, but presently having extra planets just for the sake of having more planets doesn't add anything to the fun. Each planet should have some strategic value or be designed to encourage a specific type of play, and past having a gas giant, one or maybe two Halley moons, a metal planet and two standard planets and I can't see how there could be value in having more. I look forward to more imaginative people proving me wrong.