THAT IS ALL. Edit: That is not all, after ruminating on possible ways this might be accomplished: Water height would affect Vegetation Growth as it (kind of) already does, the only difference being that vegetation is currently restricted to its own specific biomes (jungle/woodland). A more logical set-up would have: More Water+Warmer = More Veg all over a Planet, without excluding Mesas/Mountains in the process. As it does in reality, continent thickness would determine how dry things got based upon water levels and heat, thus still allowing for deserts to form on the interior of continents on Earth-Like worlds. Temperature would work with water height and height range to determine humidity, and thus whether an area was desert/grassy/woodland/jungle/ice. Height range would affect terrain/CSG as per. However, it would have the ability to generate CSG like Mountains and Mesas, as opposed to just making terrain bumpy. I feel this is a better alternative to mountains being created by a lack of water and low or high temperature, which is illogical. This would allow for flat deserts, forested or grassy mountainsides, and piny hillsides. CSG textures might need to be altered if trees/grass are able to grow on mountainsides. It may also be necessary to have planet 'Templates' determine what terrain is dominant to govern what CSG is placed (or not) when using Height Range to determine this; open plains, red mesa "Mars" or grey rock "Alpine", with templates which combine multiple CSGs in "Earth"/"Mountainous". I feel these changes would make Planet Editing make much more sense - high temperature would not yield Mesas, and low temperature Mountains. Working in the ability for vegetation to grow at multiple height ranges is also more realistic, doesn't hurt gameplay and looks thoroughly awesome. I also really miss this biome from TA, which could conceivably be created with a flat desert but no CSG.
There was a bug a while ago that allowed to mix biomes. Some results were completly awsome... (i look at you Metal/Earth planet, wink). (Sorry, couldn't find the thread again...)
been suggested and tested before with very good results... so a big vote yes for me... but this is more then likely going to be a mod though rather then officially being able to do that
Its quite easy to modify or create new biomes and even planet types (getting them to look good is another issue ). They are defined in blueprints in the media/pa/terrain folder and subfolders. The changes can be seen seen in the system editor, but won't show up in game. Merging biomes would involve some copy + paste, plus some modification to allow them to spawn over each other (usually, they are designed to not spawn over each other, but it shouldnt be difficult to change). Edit: there's some guides in the modding forum too.
Concept art from ages ago. I wish we had it like that! Yummy yummy. You also can notice there are two planets, that we do not have ingame. Gas and rock.
I guess rock it's like ice planets: those are just earth planets with particular settings. If you decrease water level to minimum you'll have rocky planet... and lags.
But the mountain biome doesn't have sheer cliffs or even large mountains. It's got peaked hills with CSG, which are just an obstruction. Sheer cliffed, flat topped rocks have base-building/defensive emplacement potential which I'm looking forward to seeing in the Mesa Biomes. I think water levels/humidity should be separate from terrain in the way they govern what grows. We already have height range vs water height. Water levels would create prettier/more varied planets if they affected vegetation. That way, you can get forest on mountains/mesas, or desert on open plains.
Looking at the changes to the desert biome, i think it's this way because pathing is not working very nicely with those large obstruction (remember those deep craters?). I think it's mostly a case of getting a more powerful pathfinding (that seems to be an ongoing interation) before more sexy terrain can be done.
Oh, I totally agree here. I also think it's ridiculous that 'mountains' are generated only at high altitudes on a barren rocky surface. Water height is an independent variable. Tectonic activity or something of the sort could also be an independent variable, affecting multiple biomes, not just the rocky/ barren one. I'm glad we're starting to get some mountainous brushes in biomes like the tropical biome though.
yes there is obviously still work to be done when it comes to planet types and biomes, the last update really added a heck of a lot of details to the terrain. Now we just need lava planets to actually look how they look back in the august live stream and now be full of lava oceans with heighted terrain like the concept art above. Mountain biome really looks quite different from that Rockey planet though, that one looks not as good as it can be and needs to be more of a planet type then the biome. Gas could be in the game but its difficult to really know exactly what your supposed to do with it gameplay wise, doesn't really add much cept orbital solar panels. Adding a color palette though so we could change how planets look would add a lot to the visual fidelity of the planets i think.
The mountainous biome really needs an overhaul in general. It's not that good looking right now. The "crossover" as it were already happens to a degree. Trees still grow near water on desert planets.
I agree they've gotten a lot better. I'm loving it! I just wish crossover was a thing lol. Palettes could be an idea, provided they were realistic
Well in the concept art above for the planets, the color palettes are right above them, if we could change them, to add some dynamic look to the planets, so we dont have 10 looking earths for example, red ocean's could be pretty nifty... Or even the ability to add fog for the planets, not think like other RTS, not talking about fog of war kinda thing, just to add some atmospheric feel to the planets.