[Poll] A more diverse, TA inspired Energy System (Wind-Tidal-Solar-Geothermal-Nuclear).

I like it, and it wouldn be much complexity.

You remove current odd energy buildings.

You add solar, and wind. Thats your power. Solar and wind are easy to understand, and then special energy spots like geo thermal that gets more power. I think that makes more sense, just as easy and is more fun.

In fact i would take this any day of the week, and then scratch the whole advanced system for energy. Something could be done with metal as well.

I really like this idea, it would add more diversity to the game. I also like the idea of having energy spots to fight over.

So we are adding a significant amount of complexity to the economy for what kind of gain? I don't see it.

It's only 'significant complexity' compared to the complete lack of complexity we currently have.
The point is to encourage us to fight over Geothermal spots and work with Planetary Annihilation's unique features like the Day-Night cycle and diverse biomes which can exist in a single map.

The proposed system encourages combat and adds depth without requiring a huge amount of micromanagement. We still have our base +500 Wind/Tidal on most planets. We still have High-Yield T2 +8000 Nuclear. Only with more explosions. These things don't require extra attention (beyond changing placement from line to area, unless you are willing to take the risk of chain explosions).

It's not like it's hard to understand or use beyond the initial learning curve. It also makes energy in huge quantities more challenging to obtain, making it more important to fight over T2 Geothermal and Gas Giant Energy.

It encourages combat and adds the depth and diversification that is part of the spirit of Total Annihilation, rather than creating a carbon-copy of Sup-Com's system.

It's a bit late to worry about copying SupCom's systems there bud.

The whole point of Planetary Annihilation was that it was more inspired by Total Annihilation and tried to do things in a different and better way to SupCom. That's why it's not called 'Planetary Commander'.

I think variety in the way energy sources generate power could be good if it is 'what you see is what you get' (WYSIWYG). This is so that it's easy to learn and control in-game.

For that reason I'm skeptical about atmosphere affecting Energy generation rates - it would have to be a binary thing, with more generated Solar on Metal/Moon planets (+200 or so?). Otherwise we'd be left trying to judge planet atmosphere thicknesses.
That said batteries are a good idea if night affecting Solar proves difficult. If Solar gave constant power I agree of course it would need to be at a reduced rate, but then there would be less differentiating it from Wind-Tidal.

While I'm at it - any variable 'Wind-Speed' setting affecting Wind Turbine Energy Generation (which would be WYSIWYG as it affects cloud speed) would need to be pretty simple too - a short scale or something, as opposed to the free sliders we have for other Planet variables.
The same goes for Tidal and the number of orbiting bodies; there should be a cap on the bonus generated for increased tidal activity at three or so moons to make it easy in-game to judge which energy sources to go for.

I think damaged structures performing more inefficiently is a can of worms which may not always be WYSIWYG. If our Nuclear Generators are performing poorly because they're damaged, why aren't our Factories? It'd have to be all or nothing - I'm not decided on this. One step at a time.

I think Metal Planets having sources of Energy and being Death Stars and having defenses you can reactivate might be a bit much, as I assume a planet-destroying laser will require quite a bit of energy (and being able to secure that on the same planet as said laser could be a bit easy). I think the energy of Orbital Gas-Giant Energy 'Turbines' should be required to power such an awesome and devastating weapon.

I am a bit new to PA and on the forums "WYSIWYG " crops up every now and then. Can someone explain what it is exactly. Or a link that will explain. This would be most helpful.

What you see is what you get, basically if I make a unit, I should know exactly what it's meant to be, just by the model, etc...

WYSIWYG Stands for "What You See Is What You Get." I'm used to it from playing tabletop wargames (40K) but it means if you look at the unit you can see what it is and know it will consistently be a certain way, nothing hidden and no modified stats or whatever.

What if wind produced more closer to the coast/at a higher elevation (the higher elevation might be a bit harder to clearly show I guess). Could help to give a consistent set of rules which govern how effective wind will be. Just an idea after skimming the thread, LoL.

I love to see interest in nuclear energy on the forums!!!

Nuclear Engineering: Theory and Technology of Commercial Nuclear Power, 2nd Edition
By: Ronald Knief

is an amazing resource and an interesting read. The book doesn't make the assumption you know differential equations and explains everything in words even the DE's. for some of you who may not have an engineering background but find nuclear energy fascinating this book is for you. covers primarily commercial fission but later portions of the book are dedicated to fusion.

here is a purchase link

http://www.ans.org/store/i_350023/r_f

Yes and no. They could implement symetric planets for duels game, so every player would start with the same chance.

Good points are being made here.

The atmosphere thickness is just something like 'thin', 'average', 'thick', 'gas giant' and 'none'. To keep it simple. If you play the game enough, you'll immediately see the difference. Of course planets should have more info displayed at the top right of the screen, their atmosphere thickness, metal spots, geo spots, ...

Wind speed could be the same - a number between 1-5 or 1-10 perhaps? Unlike the atmosphere, this is harder to see, so I suggest whenever you're about to place a power building, have it provide a little menu box that follows your cursor and says 'wind speed/atmosphere thickness = X, power provided = XXX' So you immediately know what your building is going to produce on that planet, before even placing it.

Agreed with the tidal stuff

Damaged buildings... yeah. But there needs to be something special about nuclear reactors, just something. Not a magic box that provides power while you relax back, they should have a twist. Having them shut down when damaged seems to add more strategy, protect your reactors well. You can repair them. You aren't the Protoss who somehow haven't learnt to repair structures. Combat fabricators, even better. Now, energy plants, like how they are now, give a blue glow. If your nuclear reactor has stopped working, why not stop the glow, so you can see right away that they stopped working? Or have them be ON FIRE. (I still want all the buildings, commanders and naval ships to be on fire when damaged)

I talked about flashing indicators once. Have a 'no power' icon flash above a structure that isn't functioning because you have no power. The same for nuclear reactors (and solar, because they deactivate when attacked). They should have some icon that says 'damaged, not working'.That way you can see what's going on even easier.

Should all structures stop working when damaged? No idea. Maybe. I mean, I want this reserved for the nuclear reactor, but if some smart guy is saying 'why shouldn't all structures stop working when damaged then?' Then I would say a nuclear reactor isn't the same as a car factory. The slightest scratch on a reactor will force it to stop working. In a car factory... Maybe they could do that, make it so when a building is critically damaged, have it stop working. This forces you to repair buildings and not just have it sit there 'burning away'.


Death star planets. I noticed you used a lot of ANDs there. Change them to ORs. Planet laser OR Defenses OR energy production. Because then again, not everyone wants every planet to be used in annihilation, and if every metal planet had a death star weapon... It would be a choice a system editor would have to make. And give variety for the purpose of metal planets. I'm assuming lorewise that not every metal planet is supposed to be a death star.


Did I just write that wall of text?

supcom was a spritual successor to TA aswell ... it didn´t have wind,tidal, solarplants .... worked quite well without it
i don´t see a reason to add that kind of complexity for a rather minor gain to this game

Symmetric planets are already a confirmed feature. But we shouldn't make all planets symmetrical.

The game already has no economic complexity... Its dumbed down like supcom2, even more.

It's definitely not as dumbed down as Supcom 2's....

But hey guess what? Apparently wind generators are confirmed!

Lol. I'd be wary of year-old comments if I were you.

Shhhh.. Just let everyone be happy for a moment so their dreams can be crushed!