Mountain Biome... We Need To Talk. It's not you, it's me. Okay maybe it's you.

It' really need more terrain loving with different terrain props and ways of actually interacting with the mountain.

Id love to also have mountain props for the other biomes.

*high five* Thanks for jumping on that grenade dude.

It's just not very pretty and there's no way to stop it spawning without having lots of water on the planet, which makes no sense.

I don't think toggling is necessary if the planet generation is more logical and grants us more control.

This is a post suggesting how that could be done (and allow for Biome Crossovers) from the thread I linked to in my OP.

Best of all, this system could use the CSG and Art already in place; we already have some grey Mountains in Jungles - none of that would need to be scrapped.
It'd open new opportunities like Mesa Jungles and flat Deserts, and grant a lot more control in the editor...

I like the mountain range, what I don't like is that every time I see Desert/Earth/Tropical for some reason the sliding is put way down and I suddenly have mountains everywhere. The number of Mountain type terrain needs it's own slider.
I'd also like to see someway to get a "dune" type world with soft rolling sand dunes.

PS - Give me back my plateaus that the Desert Biome had !! I miss those maps so much

}
And yeah not a big fan of mountain biomes also, they could be better painted and better textured to look cool and there could be an option to turn then off i think every biome should have this option

I am a fan of the mountain biome. Sadly, it is also usually my taste in women that leads me to the ones nobody else wanted. People are led to believe I am either a hipster or intentionally pickup uncontested chicks, but the reason is I don't like whatever grading criteria others use. And yes, with women that often means weight, why is there a point at like 150 points, that below that a woman is a guy magnet but instantly above that is a repellent, and for the one gender with the most biological issues with weight too. Why do guys get to make up some imaginary standard but get to be fat pieces of crap themselves without a biological reason as most stout guys are obviously hereditary while most guys in general are obviously fat because they can't go a minute without a corndog in their hand.

Seriously off topic though, I like the mountain biome, it is chaotic chokepoint heaven, while metal planets are well-structured chokepoint heaven. Metal planets you usually have a go-to place to build to advantage off choke points, for mountains you have to search around a minute pre-game to decide where is a place secluded enough but with enough build room and with openings in the right place (or use pelicans more generously although without auto ferrying troops with pelicans from point 1 to point 2 it is more micro intensive)

I like mountain biome. Some arguements agreed, like showing up randomly, a full mountain biome planet is satisfying in signature ways, and I will be that guy who says they like it, which is why that off topic first paragraph is now necesary, because I know what you are thinking when I say I like mountain planets, I am not a hipster or intentionally liking what is unwanted.

What in the everloving ****?

Thank you for sharing.
But yeah a tad off-topic though I totally agree we have daft preconceptions about weight. Though to be honest, English culture tends to just see all fat people as equally unattractive. Yay gender equality? xD
Also I was quite careful to keep my OP gender-neutral after that Gender thread lol.

I like the mountain biome... sometimes...
Okay I don't really like the checkerboard terrain.
I love chokepoints and the way they interact with ground forces. *cough*
But Mesas are more pretty at the moment.
As per my OP, there could be more logical ways for us to control biome generation.

Let's just put the whole part about it being butt ugly biome that is the most annoying thing in planet generation aside for a moment.

• it's a mountain biome yet everything is flat? even when the planet height actually set really high!?
• why is everything made of ash? not all mountains are formed by vulcanism, and those that are don't have nice sharp peaks
• most mountains are actually created by tectonic forces so how the biome should be generated is actually that it's merely a pattern in the height generation (ie. very high steep hills) and a set of rules to allow for snow after a certain height based on the temperature of the planet; again they are NOT a texture flat on the ground, if there was some more finess in the way vegetation spreads the dirt texture would form naturally
• it's mountain a biome with mountains that are a mere 3 stories high? I've seen small hills taller than that... actually even the opening's initial picture has "hills" taller then the "mountains"
• why is every mountain occupy the same space and height? mountains are not trees
• does anyone actually care to have mountain biomes to begin with?

I also agree with the sentiment that mountain biomes should just not be in the game until they're more "presentable." There is probably bigger things to deal with then fixing mountain biomes, but tacking them out takes little to no time and actually improves the game.

It could in fact improve. Would be nice to get some more diverse biomes, I bet we will see those in player mods.

I can't wait for Basalt shores. Those hexagonal forming rocks are wicked looking, and the sharp and hard granite looking material they look like.

I am not understanding why people always run into this issue, I only ran into it once and figured a way around it.
Generally people tend to set water height to 0 when they want a no-naval map. This is not a requirement. Simply turn water height down until there is no water on the map. When you tone the water height straight to 0 you are pulling the whole map into the "mountain spectrum" of the biome appearance. If you set it to about 20 on a large map, you generally get little to no water with lots of sand and grass. It is so easy to get around this issue. Extreme settings in both maximum and minimum ranges will generally do strange things in any application.

You're preaching to the choir, I spend a lot of time making systems. Mountains are not easy to get rid of if you don't want much water and want an 800 Radius or lower map.

Biomes do not dictate actual terrain topography - that is a separate, initial step in the planet creation process, after which the biomes are painted on. However, a biome can specify at what altitudes it can appear at.

Giggity. (NSFW?)

errrrrrrrrrr.... it's just me.

EDIT maybe it's not just me.

I understand. I'm just saying that "mountains" are a little too special to be "painted on" and should be moved up to when (if ever) you take into account actual geological activity and don't just do a noise map or something to get the terrain shapes.

Mountains are like forests, beaches, archipelagos, continent land masses, etc. You can slap them on, in some sense, like you would with craters on a moon, but they just wont look right if you don't take the time to account at least a little bit for their natural causes or behaviour.

Pervert!

The metaphors in this post were cringe overload, but I do agree that the current mountain biome is ugly and useless.

We really need someone with some photoshop skills that would try and give it a go how it could look and work.

I would definitely like bigger mountains.

There is some pros and cons.

If they are tall enough they will block aircrafts, yes imagine that, aircrafts not being able to go above all mountains, when they are so tall they go into the clouds where air is thin.

They offer defensive / offensive advantages, depending on their location and if they have plateaus where you can build and set up structures and defensives.

Specific robot units can climb and scales some / most mountains. helps giving them another advantage from vehicles.

It would even be awesome to have a biome test we could try out, where uber just does some very very basic texturing, i mean it would be white doesnt really matter. just to try out shapes and heights of mountains.

Im sure im not the only one who have said it, but rather than planets, it feels like we are playing on round bowling balls with some small features

Clouds could also help to make orbital units easier to spot. when you zoom out clouds pop in, to give the orbital units some background contrast. i think that could work. i know im having major problems seeing orbital units, because they just get mixed in with all the ground stuff.