Let's discuss Asteroids as they are...

The timer mechanic is a big change, I really don't get how people can't see that.

The main difference comes down to this:
- A system with the moons in place from the start means everyone has access to colonise the moons throughout the entire game. This means there is lots of time for people to colonise, invade and otherwise porc up with defences. You also *often* get into a situation where a defeated player retreats to the *only halleyable moon*, and whilst having a vastly inferior economy can fend off almost anything due to the small size / relative ease. As this is their only base (whilst their opponent often will have multiple planets and multiple coms, I agree with @wpmarshall asteroids are more for larger games), they aren't going to smash as that is effectively a suicide move. The game turns into a slow, laggy stalemate situation which many players find frustrating.

- A system with the same number of main planets and with timed entry asteroids instead of the moons plays out very differently.
- Asteroids are not available to players until designated time. This means no pre colonisation or time to build heavy defences.
- All players are confined to the main battlefield and can't run off and 'hide' on an easily defended moon (at least until they appear in system, but remember they haven't had a long build time to porc it up).
- Depending on the (user specified) timings, the system could have reached a stalemate situation with well defended planets. The asteroids arrival creates new *uncontested* land that did not previously exist creating an arms race to get to it and break the stalemate.

This is very different to the current arrangement of simply having a smash-able moon in the system, and I think it *has the potential* to be considerably better (even though I don't agree with the 'destroy everything' mechanic).

No, it's not going to change the 1 v 1 scene, and no I don't think it should do. Remember that there are many ways to play this game so I'd urge you guys not to dismiss something just because it doesn't benefit your own preference of game mode. This is a team / ffa / large game mechanic and in that context the changes do make a lot of sense.

I think you overestimate the difference it's going to make. when you put a small moon with no metal and 1 halley in the system in a large game than that piece of rock will not be touched until much later in the game. Else it would be a waste of resources not being used to win in other fields of the game and going there early might even lose you the game.

If a player settles there as an escape he has allready lost. He doesnt have an army nor is capable of building a large one due to no eco. he might hold on for 5 to 10 mins but than its over.

And 1 thing is for sure.. you can NOT put asteroids and lasers in the same system. (maybe only for prettyness sake) because asteroids win is 99% of the time. Either you spawn asteroids too late and the laser fires, or you spawn them too soon and the laser becomes obsolete. The spawn timing of the asteroids must be precise and every minute is very important.

To find the perfect timing to spawn in asteroids you need hundreds if not thousends of large game replays and see around which time lasers are fired to get any good understanding of when and even than every system is different and has a different time table of when lasers are usually build.

The more I think about it the more problems I can see arise with asteroids.

PS. I may be a 1v1 player but asteroids have a much bigger place in team games so don't get me wrong They can have a place in 1v1's but for that we need larger planets which we are not getting anytime soon me thinks.

Yeah but *why* do you have to have the laser and asteroids in the same game? It's a different map type imo.....

My main thought is why would you build systems with halleyable planets / moons any more? I think asteroids are better and replace them. Also with respect to resources, asteroids can have resources on them (it's down to user choice).

As for timings, well we need to try some different map templates to find good ones. I mean there have been some superb multi planet map designs, however once the new 'CSG' capabilities were added to the mapping tools people migrated to single planet maps with 'lanes' (which kinda negates the point of planets) due to that's what everyone is used to. I personally want to see the map makers start looking more seriously at multi planet systems again. Give us some interesting scenarios- asteroids are a nice addition to that toolbox, along with incidental collisions (marshalls lament anyone?), multi layers of orbits, gas giants and anihilasors.

I had some nice multi planet maps during beta / gamma, although I'll need to update them to make them work again (I set up a map with 2 main spawn able planets, 2 smashable moons 1 orbiting each). It resulted in some very random games depending on where teams spawned, who got which moon and so on

That map could be made more interesting imo using an asteroid belt instead of the moons.

I mean, no asteroids don't completely change the game, but they're still a nice addition and very true to the original vision of PA (far more so than moon smashing, which was always a place-holder right from it's addition in Beta).

I think that's poor game design. No two other game mechanics are mutually exclusive.

On your second point, yeah, there really needs to be a reason to do that sacrifice. Though I'd still keep them around just in case someone gets an opportunity to win the game but an asteroid isn't available. Why deny the option even if it's inferior in most every way?

Well why would you make bluehawks in a single planet game when sniper bots and sheller do the same thing but a 100 times better. Same goes for asteroids and lasers. Yes you can make systems with either of them but you can NOT neglect that they can't be both in the same system. You have to look at all possibilities even though if you thing they are a different map type. Because they are not. They should perfectly well be able to live along side each other. Not one or the other.

Also metal on asteroids would be bad as people are going to use them as full bases.

I see many interesting planets being made indeed and very few systems. But with the change to destroy everything on touch it loses a lot of depth. scraping is no thing anymore. And the only thing you can do is set a invisible timer on how long the game is played or how long you have until you have to ditch your planet.

A good thing Uber should add (now I think about it) is if planets are on collision course (be it with halleys or not) that a timer appears with how long it takes for them to smash. Yes you can see it at the start of the game but nothing tells you how long you have. It can be 10 mins, 15 min or 45 mins and it's damn hard to predict.

+1 for a 'smash timer'. Also I'd like to see an 'incoming asteroid' timer to pre warn people that asteroids are due to arrive in system. That would add an element of planning to the game, do you go for an aggressive invasion *before the asteroid* or prep up a force to capture the asteroid with the aim to smash it?

Yes a smash timer would be fine indeed.

yea definitely need timers for when asteroids will appear and when they will impact. Also a notification once you have built a halley and there is a safe window of opportunity to launch the asteroid at a specific planet, so you don't worry about hitting the wrong planet. I've had this happen a lot now and if it almost makes it but you have to cancel the move and then re launch the asteroid again it has to go all the way around the sun again and if the system is big enough it is impossible to judge the perfect time to launch and not accidently hit the wrong planet!

smashtimer ? .... maybe ...
timer for asteroid apperance? ... naaahhh ... kinda kills that bit of suprisemoment imho ..

Smash timers are more complicated than y'all probably think. Especially with elliptical orbits it requires some calculus.

Personally I don't think it's worth the effort.

I want the ability to name the asteroid belt but not the individual asteroids. Also an option of able to move the asteroid belt as well so they not always stuck on the outside of the system.