So, about smashing things into bigger things

o/

I know it must have been discussed to death, but I recently got TITANS and I was wondering if there was any way to re-enable the old planetsmashing mechanics, wherein you could smash moons for example into bigger planets and not have them blow the entire thing up. Dunno how much people actually care about this, seeing as how I haven't even been on the forums up until now, but I thought it'd be cool to at least have the option or something to revert back.
Soooo... yeah.
Any mods for it?
Any thoughts?
Work in progress stuff maybe?
A change.org petition?

"I know it must have been discussed to death"

yep, which is why solutions/workarounds aren't talked about anymore either.

Shame

Yep. The crater system was a lot more interesting to play with.

would be cool to have it back but considering how many problems it caused with either floating units and structures above the crater area or units getting destroed near it as well wirh busted mexspots ... yea it caused too much stuff to be dealt with in a reasonable timeframe before the games launch :/
personaly i still would have loved lavafilled creaters but alas it wasn't meant to be


also for the love of god .. throw those petitions out of the window ..

You know I wasn't being serious with the petition right?

But to be fair, now that the game had launched the devs have all the time they need to re-work the system, no?

yes, but i was ... like seriously just screw that site and people thinking they could change things that way, it has long become a farce

no, they don't ... they work on vr stuff with a overall small team

Well, shoot. I haven't exactly been following the development of PA so I'm kinda out of the loop when it comes to dev stuff. Thanks for the enlightenment.

Basically, they had to let a lot of people go on the company due to poor management in the monetary department. So they switched focus over to VR development with the small crew they have on board. However, they still have a few people sitting on the PA end of things.

Repeating myself, sorry.

I'd say it's pretty broken the way it is now, with asteroids being infinitely respawning one hit killers. Asteroids would make a lot of sense as respawning super-nukes in a sense. But as it is, any map with asteroids in it is quickly going to run out of planets.

To my mind it seems like you would want either no asteroids and no craters, or craters and asteroids. Asteroids and no craters is just too broken. Sad to see that the same patch which added asteroids removed craters and made every impact a kill.

Craters had a lot of bugs, but I think it would still be more interesting to have than not. Whatever the case, the way it is now is not good.

The crater system was buggy, laggy, unintuitive, and led to games which could stalemate. I don't miss it in the slightest.

That's just, objectively false. The most immediate complaint is that a tiny rock unintuitively can destroy an entire planet just by grazing it. Balance wise it's much more in line with the original design goal of whittling away at the playable area.

This word doesn't mean what you think it means.

Even the tiny asteroids are relatively huge compared to the largest size planets, and would smash it to tiny pieces at the velocity of a planet smash.
Not that PA was ever meant to let realism get in the way of awesome.

No, to destroy a planet completely would need an object of nearly the same size as the planet itself, realistically. Those pebbles would only dent it and destroy the surface.

I'm fairly sure that isn't true.
The crater made by a hypervelocity impact is bigger than the projectile.

https://www.spaceanswers.com/space-exploration/what-is-the-fastest-spacecraft-of-all-time/

"the Barringer Crater in Arizona (pictured above), which has a diameter of almost a mile (1.6 kilometres) across, was made by a chunk of space rock about 0.02 to 0.03 miles (30 to 50 metres) in diameter. It is the speed of these pieces of rock that determine the crater’s size."

I'm not saying prefer the system the way it is now, only that is more realistic than the way it was before.

And that isn't anywhere near the size of the earth. At a planetary scale, destruction is different, even if you had enough force to tear the earth in half, it would quickly reform due to gravity. Only the surface sediments would be completely destroyed. Consider that the moon is speculated to have formed by an impact with an object the size of mars, and the earth is still here. In the old system craters could still eat almost half the planet, which, sans the disappearance of all that material, is more realistic and intuitive.

Where is the proof that it is different at a larger scale? In fact is with PA it may be on a smaller scale anyways.
And define quickly? One day or years or longer?
I never said it is realistic only that it is more realistic than a crater the size of the impactor, and for most of pa impacts the planet is likely to smashed apart at least temperately.

It is clear you have no idea about things like this, if the asteroid can crate a crater 10 times the diameter of the impactor, it is not realistic to think you need a planet of nearly the same size to destroy it.