A problem with asteroids

How do existing belts work with that limitation? Like if you have a 15 planet system with an asteroid belt does it only spawn 1 asteroid? Could multiple belts share the same pool of spawn-able asteroids? So if you could have say 4 asteroids existing at once and had 2 belts, each belt would spawn 2.

An actual in game example: you have a system with 4 planets, and a belt with 4 asteroids, you use an asteroid to smash a planet, a new belt forms, you now only have 3 asteroids in the original belt (because you used one to smash and it was destroyed) The 4th asteroids then spawns in the new belt instead of the old one.

The belt itself is just a graphical effect. Only asteroids count for the limit and yes if you have 15 planets you can only have 1 asteroid. The number of asteroids that spawns and stays simulateneously is fixed per map. So you could make a pure graphical gimmick belt for sure, but making that look good would mean more work.

Can't the shockwave effect from the annihilazer be used for the death shockwave for asteroids?

Have you seen the latest asteroid effect?

Pretty much anything can be done to an effect anyway.

I like it how it is in the PTE, makes for games that are more fun imo

Yes please. I always found it pretty immersion breaking how these tiny engines can move huge planets all by themselves (or with one or two friends). I think the way it looked in the kickstarter video (6-8 engines for an asteroid) is fine, when we also lower the cost by the same amount. That way it also adds a little more tactical play since defending more halleys won't be as easy as few ones.

the ones in the KS actually covered a whole face of the asteroid if it were a cube and then some.

that's the way it should be.

Visuals are one thing, but planet-destroying asteroids are a poor gameplay mechanic.
They are easier to get than a nuke (pretty much the first one to get there "has it"). Halley is 2x cheaper than a nuke and pretty much incomparably more powerful (can't be stopped, destroys the planet).

Current mechanic will maybe give them some niche as tie-breaker in long games, or a "fun" map where there are almost no planets. But they do not really add to the game, instead they replace existing mechanic (why use a nuke, when there's 2x cheaper, better option?).

I believe that it would be better if they were weaker (whole-planet nuke) or if they could be countered (e.g. nuke destroys the asteroid).

It is kind of op, but you can nuke before it goes at you, or invade it. Or invade person who is on that asteroid in his base on his planet.

Nuking is a ton more expensive, so it's not even an option here.
And what does destroying an enemies base on his planet have to do with countering an asteroid?
Seriously - asteroids are utterly broken right now and become the one single deciding factor in any game they are in.
Once someone has an asteroid the game is over, and if you do even the slightest mistake in trying to take control over said asteroid you have lost the game.
This is so poorly designed that it must have come from a certain someone who I hoped was no longer involved with this game.

Well, you can invade it, use lasers, unit cannons, everything. I say that Halleys could be a bit more expensive and longer to build, but you still need t2 eco. I think if everyone goes there at once, everybody has the chance to win, if he even has an army. If he does not, well he loses, and he would probably lose anyway, but this way he loses anyway.

yea throwing mudd at devs totaly has helped fixing everything ...

Yep, lets just give feedback, not attack devs.

Looking back, a shitstorm is the only thing that caused the devs to ever listen to the community...

Really? You know that's not true.

then i have different memories than you it seems ..

but i surely have no interest in just burrieing old stories up again

It never worked, and it never will. We need proper valid feedback and information from Uber.

Last asteroid topic shows it well, we wanted craters, Ubers said that they cant do it and that they really tried, we accept it and we can try anything else in balance that will help.

Dangerous game you are playing .

I always had the idea of using a halley on your planet to evade nukes and stuff permanently by going between two planets constantly, building your own nukes too and flyby shooting people. But just ended up forgetting to click cancel in time xD.

*Also uber should consider upping the halley cost to atleast 2. 1 is very cheap for what it does.

Could asteroid at least be smaller and act as huge nukes? Maybe even with huge shochwave that damages everything on the planet, just to lesser scale than area affected directly. No need for craters either, decals woud do.

In latest build asteroid = moon with little metal and one engine, so nothing new added

TBH I loved first iteration of planet smashing, where everything on the planet would die and it will leave a crater and you could go back and start anew. It's better than later iteration, where only area directly hit is damaged, and of course batter than two planets destroyed completely

good to see people considering a planetspawning mechanic nothing new ..


" hey there is a mechanic that drasticaly changes the events over the course of a war permanently" ... " meh screw that .. lets rather have the mechanic that changes nothing long term" ...


what i mean is you have spawning planets that are able to reduce the theater of war permanently
adding a clear dynamic to the gameplay and are only contestable by the moment of spawning they can´t be captured before ... adding a factor of need for adaption ...

if instead you leave the same mechanic then it rather is

claim planet - get spawnable nukeasteroid - recapture planet ... rince and repeat long term ..

the new system :
claim planet - get spawnable planetbusterasteroid - errrrr what now need to act quickly ...

so personaly i find the latter much more intresting ...


as for asteroids vs annihilaser?
the annihilasor is a the absolute gameender once fully activated ...
with how asteroids are however it isn´t the only means of drastically ending games anymore ...