Watching a Youtube video (Oldish, back before the Kickstarter goal was met) of TB interviewing the devs has a mention of 'Oh, there's lava there, gonna have a hard time building there' about 30 minutes into the video. That got me thinking - If a planet has been smashed in the face with a BASR, and is either entirely destroyed (In the form of being a molten ball of pain) or has a large, unworkable crater, would it be possible to, say, have an orbital structure (Or structure in the case of a less destroyed planet) that sends drones down to gather metal from the molten planet? I'm curious what people think on this as well. Honestly, I think it could be fun. At least, in the sense of having a hidden 'Metal Richness' variable for the planets, that is set by or influenced by the amount of metal deposits on the planet, that then influences how much metal you get from it.. Possibly influenced by the metal availability of the BASR that's smashed into the planet. Also, would be interesting to see a high-end tech that could make a planet stable and livable again (In the sense of re-generating the map with lower amounts of Metal deposits). Just some thoughts from a slightly crazy person.
Well, it sounds like you're turning the wrecked planet into a lava planet (check the KickStarter stretch goals). To the best of my knowledge, a lava planet is a fully fledged planet unto itself - one that can't be exhausted by sucking it up.
If planet completely destroyed(like ripped into different parts) you could just use 1 half and try do crash it into another planet. If only the surface is completely destroyed you could try to restore it(very expensive terraforming) or it could offer some benefits and some disadvantages... maybe Lava = more energy... but no metal? Or something like that... Units taking damage from heat...
Nope. The point of destroying planets is to make the playfield smaller. We will have a scale for the game like no other RTS before and KEWs will be a way to force a conclusion and limit the length of the game to something that isn't ridiculous long.
Which is why I suggested only being able to use them for a bit of minor resource extraction. But, to be fair, the idea of making planets has been tossed around in the past by the community. In this case, it'd simply be finding some way to cool a lava planet (assuming that this is what happens by looking at the Kickstarter video, you see the planet, when hit, seemingly turn into a lava planet from the damage) into a more useful form. It would cost a lot (or a lucky find of a comet.. Or use of an ice world >:3 ) to do that, and in the end it would just be more area to fight and blow up again. And because of the sheer resource cost of doing something like that (probably), it wouldn't really be something you do in the endgame brawl over a planet unless you have some way to get that many resources and the time to have that solution take effect. In the case of using an ice planet, though.. How fun would that be if you could smash those two kinds of planets together? Especially if you can somehow keep it more or less a secret from everybody. Plus, you still wouldn't have too much of an advantage in terms of play field. And, of course, in one of those 'about to wander off' moments of ideas, if there are comets.. Perhaps some careful maneuvering and planning of a couple could turn a world into an ocean world? I know this is getting into terraforming stuff, but still. Could be interesting.
Your ideas are awesome. But I think the devs are going to rely on mods do all these things that make PA even better!
What if lava planets weren't that great, like, useless even? On top of the intial destruction to your forces, say lava planets don't have any metal points at all. Unless there are gonna be mass fabbers (Which I think Uber doesn't want?) it'd be a way to drain resources from a map to eventual removal.
I don't think they've ruled them out, and I think they had a model for it in the whitebox... Also, why would lava planets not have metal? That would be.... Rather useless in a game with only energy and metal and ALL things are built out of metal. There would be no point to having that planet.
For the base game, I'd prefer destroyed planets to be unusable; it adds a more strategic element to the decision of decimating a planet. If you can continue to collect resources from the dead husk, why wouldn't you destroy any planet that you don't own, and harvest the resources? Even if it's far fewer resources, there is minimal risk, and still some reward.
imagine 20 v 20, if planets arent destroyed making the battlefeild smaller it would last for days and days, maybe if planet is destroyed it makes a few new very small orbitals like astroids but nothing realy to establisha main base on...
