Metal Planets - Should Metal Extractors Be Buildable Anywhere?

Moneymaps are good fun from time to time and could be prime example for a mod.

It's not a good idea to implement it in the main game, not as default if it's an option anyway, they don't play very well at all.

See, now I'm cool with this. Nothing too crazy, .5-1.5 seems completely reasonable to me.

I personally think they should be buildable anywhere on metal planets its a planet made of the primary resource they should be hotly contested planets which give you major advantages should you manage to hold it.

You mean all the advantages if you hold it, right?

Unless such metal worlds are always going to be size 1 then they will always be enough space on them to outright triple the economy of the rest of the solar system, making games into hold the metal world, or slowly die against foes who's economy can only get better.

To expand on the direction I think you're going, the "balance" of a metal planet would be that the player is not getting access to more resources, but that the features you unlock are different than could be built by the player. Like, say, a planet laser would still be destroyed along with the rest of the planet, and the economic resources to support the weapon are still capable of being destroyed, but the weapon itself is already present as part of the planet and doesn't need to be "built" by the player, nor does it necessarily have a direct comparable tool the player could build themselves. It's a unique weapon that would suit a specific set of conditions, but is not intrinsically "better" than the other end-game tools the players can build or weild.

If "owning" a metal planet is not intrinsically better, it adds weight to the other factors like placement in the system when making the decision on whether to try and hold that planet. If a metal planet has as much resources available as any other planet of similar size, and the tools you unlock are only conditionally "better" (ala AA good against aircraft, not so much against submarines), then choosing to inhabit and fight over a metal planet becomes a matter of responding to game tactics and play style, not just a "rush to get the metal planet because it's obviously better" as you've said.

That the direction you are thinking?

Yep.

Although I still really dislike the idea of a death star laser beam, as I would prefer a mass stockpile of nukes to blitz enemy planets with.

Specifically, I would prefer a beam laser weapon for that scale. Less raw damage than nukes, less AoE, strike runs in straight line based on orbit pattern, cuts lines into the surface of the planet, kinda like how modern laser cutters go after steel:



Opponents could then either disrupt orbit to prevent the satellite from having the proper approach angle, or destroy the infrastructure that is powering the laser. Perhaps metal planets would have a drop-down in the system creation menu for the type of "super structure" that the planet contains?

Possibly, or just a prerequisite to having advanced power planets in certain locations?

I think if you have put them everywhere, what about making it so the planet has a set amount of metal since the planet is made of it and in so doing that world would become unusable for the laser or whatever else you could of done.

i didn't read the six pages (because i'm supposed to do soemthing else right now) so sorry if it's redundant.

i voted yes because i thought of TA where it was possible, my first reaction was "what ? it's not the case ?" since the point of a metal planed for me is exactly to place mexes everywhere. but i understand that being able to spam mexes isn't a very sane thing for the game.

i don't like the idea of having sh*tloads of optional things, when people will be playing PA, i expect everyone to be play the same game, not having hundreds of groups each playing with a different set of option enabled or not. this is why i hate mods by the way, i intend to play the game, not one of the thousands of homemade-tweaked versions of it.

so basically i was about to come up with something similar to this, i think it fixes most people concerns, let's just say that the planet surface is made of an alloy that is particularily reluctant to mining.

an other idea (that is not incompatible) would be to be able to place mexes anywhere, which makes sense on a metal planet. but they could work only at a reduced rate (like 10%) and deplete the extractable metal in the area after some time. this way you can't just spam millions at the same place since they would all tap in the same region, and you'll have to put some space between them if you want it to be useful, which makes them harder to defend, and therefore balanced.


edit : by the way, how do i change my vote ?

The idea of being able to mine anywhere has been discussed a great deal. It would be over powered to have metal planets mined anywhere. The original intention of them is as a super weapon, to make them also provide rediculous metal farms would make the other planets obsolete immediately. For a time it was discussed that it might not even provide any resources at all, or that it could not even be built on. I think sticking to it as a playable map has made metal planets an interestingly different playing field. I like the metal planets as manufactured machines of value. Alot of people are confusing the metal planets with the ones from TA which are planets consisting of metal, and not as much a machine the size of a planet.

My initial reaction on seeing metal spots on a metal planet was "WTF?!" as I recall with fondness the days of TA. Then I recalled that TA was on a much smaller scale (and that goes doubly so for playable metal maps) and it just wouldn't work at all given the scale of even the smallest planet in PA.

So no. And no to the option because, as said before, don't fragment the player base.

This is the first I've heard of the Death Star thing though. Where's that come from? Sounds awesome and a suitably unique alternative for metal planets.

From the Devs. Going as far back as the Kickstarter no less.

Mike

I'm going to go with "NO GOD NO" and not make it optional, because it's an "easy mode" for econ and people will always, always choose the easy mode.

Yeah, the last thing we need is a server list filled with money maps.

Exactly.
Hm, I like the idea that you cannot even build anything on a metal planet. It would require you to send more and more armies to it, give orbital support and perhaps use a whole planet's economy just to fuel your war efforts on the metal planet to get access to its super weapons.

having different planets require a diffrent game plan is something i'm all in favor of =)

Interesting idea.

Well there is a 'D' option that should make it much more balanced. What if you could build mex almost anywhere on a metal planet but the 'metal return' per mex was like 50% less or 60% less etc. There are ways to balance it out. You could still have areas that for some reason you cannot build a metal extractor. It could be balanced. Just suggesting a way to avoid this becoming a polemic and trying to think outside the Yes/No/Optional box.
Maybe having a metal planet specific mex that is slightly harder to build, produces less and can only be used on metal planets is an answer. I do think building 'anywhere' would break the game far too much when I had a deeper think about it. These planet maps are much bigger than TA and you would just end up with ridiculous resources.
EDIT:
The 'almost anywhere' comment seems a bit inaccurate. I actually think that would be too much metal. If there were 'areas' you could build mex on rather than spots would work. Like square-like areas.

I gave a fourth option. Would be curious what you think? I don't expect a reply but curious none the less. I never underestimate the work that goes in to even small features.