More details on upcoming Asteroids update!

Yeah I also think they should not have metal.
However I also don't think there is much merit in having more planet destroying endgame weapons. They may look flashy but tbh I think it would be much more interesting if asteroids were renewable crater-creating weapons that effectively reduce the size of the playing field everytime they are used. In ancient kickstarter time mavor actually gave an interview where I spoke of his ideas at the time that were about "how the playfield gets smaller when asteroids hit" and I really liked the idea.
In that context it actually even would be totally fine if you do not allow pathing of hit areas at all. Make them burning lava that is lost area for the players instead.

In my wild dreams I imagine a balance where players regularly throw asteroids at each other and spread their whole base everywhere to compensate the expected loss of area (and base parts). Kinda like the nuke balance maybe a year ago but more extreme and with better graphical effects

EDIT:
oh the "makes little lava craters" thing would also very clearly differentiate them from nukes. Nukes dont make craters, so they do not destroy building space.

+10

If craters stayed in at all, they would be the exact same as they are currently. Getting them full of lava or anything else is not trivial and currently not in schedule

Yeah, I edited my post after mikeyh pointed out my mistake. But renewable only makes asteroids seem a little dull because they're literally just respawning planets. I liked the idea of differentiation. Still, we'll see how it plays out.

Use the current crater system and just spawn a non destructible lava-like looking piece of "wreckage" at the bottom. Just hard spawn a feature basically at the bottom of the crater. Do not even rely on the potentially broken code that has issues with floating features and stuff.
Just go "this is the place where it creates craters, this place has to know the location and size. Take that size. Create a lava feature of matching size and spawn it directly at x/y/z of the bottom of the crater. It's a static piece of undestructible feature that does not interact with anything else at all and doesn't care at all for any other code. Just hard spawned at that location."

You have the tech. Yeah that is a bit hacky but I am sure it would work.

Out of interest, I remember from the first implementation of planet smashing that, yes whilst the impact annihilated *everything on the surface*, larger planets were still left in system and could be *re-colonized* post smash...

Are you still planning on having that as an option, or do you envisage a 'total annihilation' smash would destroy the planet in it's entirety like an anihilazor does?

I'd personally vote for the former, as even if the smash clears the surface (and ideally turns it into a charred husk), being able to land after a smash is a pretty neat option. It also gives way for interesting game play like:

2 players rush for asteroids, and both have a planet each. Player A gets his halleys up first, and *instead of launching at his opponents planet, halleys into the other asteroid*. This defeats his opponents attempt to asteroid him and critically *leaves the target asteroid (or at least some of it) in system, devoid of opponent forces*. This then allows for him to smash with this asteroid at his leisure (had a game like this in Beta, I was player 2 btw haha).

Edit: Also thinking about things, I don't think you necessarily need a crater on the remaining planet. If it's sufficiently scarred it would still look the part imo. Another thought occurs to me (probably too difficult but may as well mention it), if this was the way things went, having each smash *reduce the number of metal points significantly (e.g. remove half)* would have interest gameplay implications.

I must say I am with cola_colin here.
The whole point of asteroids was to have smaller, nuke-like smashables where you didn't have to make the decision of either using them as eco bases or planet killers.
The system @jables proposes doesn't really change anything from what we currently have.
I am strongly in favor of the planets -> planetary annihilation, asteroids -> craters approach as it makes the playing field that much more dynamic, increases strategic variety and actually would make for a "new" feature.

Fair play.

When it comes to overhauling some gameplay aspects and having asteroids in, would it be possible to limit nukes to not be able to reach all of the map?

I will be disliked for this, but I always preferred them only working between two bodies that are in close orbit, i.e.: planet and it's moon.

Same for the beloved Unit Cannon.

These two limited a bit, combined with the ability to not just lob asteroids, but change their location to orbit another body would make for some awesomeness.

Obviously won't work really since you're moving away from the crater concept, so there woulsn't be an incentive not to just smash the thing, but I'd still love me a mobile asteroid base.

One more idea to consider: Disable the crater system. However do not make asteroids destroy planets either. Instead have them do the fancy explosion effect but then spawn a piece of "asteroid wreckage". Basically a rocky piece (with a some lava textures and stuff) of path-blocking "wreckage" that cannot be destroyed or reclaimed obviously.
So for this you need to:

a) make asteroids hit like nukes, but with a scaled down planet smash explosion effect
b) spawn an object during the explosion. That object would mostly behave like a wreckage, block paths, however it would be static, not reclaimable and look like broken rocks and lava. It could be big enough to "look out of water".

Sounds good!

In some way I kinda liked the crater gameplay but it also felt kinda shitty at times. What mikeyh said. Sometimes you don't know if you're going to destroy the planet or not. Besides that it could also get very stalematey. The new option will avoid creating stalemates which is good.

I would like to have a bit of both worlds. Like cola colins post having asteroids that can change the outcome on the battlefield by doing some directed strikes. (which are kinda cheap but effectice). Smashing will become more a thing because its cheaper yet can be really useful (which feels more aligned with the core gameplay).

And if you want to annihilate the planet then you can go for the big halley smash which will annihilate the complete planet. That way in the system designer you can choose what kind of game you want.

However I understand to make this choice since it avoids stalemates and is cheaper to develop too (less edge cases balance cases and effects making etc).

Maybe in the future with some extra funding? Anyways there'll be a good basic to expand further on in the future.

The thing I'm mostly excited about is with what bgolus comes up with as the planet smash. The original was pretty basic and felt more like we need something to actually make the smash feel a bit like a smash.


@bgolus !
let the magic happen.

This sounds amazing. I can't wait to see what @bgolus comes up with xD!

But what if that crater intersects with water? Lots of edge ridge cases.

@jables Now I (sort of) feel bad about all my recent negative comments in the forum... My love/hate relationship with PA continues

we know there's <3 at the bottom of every post If you didn't care, you wouldn't be posting. It ties to what I said about this community. It really is a welcoming, close knit group.

Water would stay water. Just make the piece of asteroid wreckage look somewhat decent even if it is half (or completely) inside water.

I don't think asteroids that spawn are the way to go, maybe in terms of optimization, but not game play wise. Talking about optimization, if the crater system is gone, now the planet doesn't need to be destructible at all, so you can optimize the rendering system (or whatever) to allow for bigger planets.
Am I right?

Pretty sure the hard part about rendering a large planet, is, well, the LARGE part.

Well, my concern is that it will be really hard to make it look good despite all the edge cases.

Probably true yeah.
Well I would still love asteroids not to be just like planets in terms of smashing. Rather just keep the current craters for them and make planets destroy it all.
If the graphical wizards say making the craters look any better is impossible then well.... what do I know.