Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to see?

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by cptbritish, December 5, 2012.

  1. cptbritish

    cptbritish Member

    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm hoping they try to make the Planets unique in more ways than looks or what units perform the best/Only ones that can be used (I.E Orbital on Gas Gaints).

    Also how exactly you want them to behave.

    For example.

    Terran/Earthlike Planets having the most easily exploitable metal deposits (i.e there are more standard deposits)

    Water Planets - You can build Sub-surface facilities that are more resistant to Orbital bombardment? due to the water taking a lot of the impact.

    Lava Planets - Environmental dangers like volcanic eruptions, nothing too game breaking - Like a Volcano just popping up inside your base - but permanent volcanoes on a planet that can erupt and scatter rocks and debris around damaging units and Metal Extractors or even bases if your daft enough to build next to one. Metal Deposits give a greater amount of metal but there are slightly less than normal Terran Planets.

    Gas Giants - Have weaker radar ranges on planet and much harder to detect enemy units if you don't have local radar Could be implemented as a sight reduction on units. Greatly increased Energy Income.

    Metal Planets - Can enter orbit (like we are all guessing Asteroids will be able too) and commence bombardment. Should be quite a high tech level for reactivation though (Like tier 3 power plants are many spaced out points.

    In a nutshell I don't want planets to be exactly the same other than with basic restrictions like only Orbital units for Gas Giants or mainly Water units for Water planets.

    P.S Did a search and couldn't find anything like what I was getting at.
  2. bobucles

    bobucles Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,388
    Likes Received:
    558
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    Why settle with tiny modifiers? There's no real reason each planet type can't harbor a unique style to it. Players will be choosing which planets they want to have, and they'll naturally favor planets that fit their style.

    Rock: Standard play.

    Asteroid: Standard play, with rocket engines.

    Volcanic: Big trouble, but lots of reward. Tight clusters of deposits and lots of reclaimables. Melting hazard. Ion storms shoot down air. Favors fast units, hover units which can avoid the lava.

    Ice/Water: Heavy mix of amphibious and land playstyles. Ice transforms into water as damage is done.

    Gas giant: True navy. A massive gas ocean connecting tiny moon-islands together. No land units except for the islands.

    Terrestrial: Gives access to low cost non-metallic units, such as hydrocarbon generators and organic sensor arrays. Local flora and fauna provide cheap energy. Like rock, but with a few units that take advantage of the stable+clean environment.

    Metal: Infinite money (haha, nah). There was some mention that these might harbor unique systems, making them some kind of "death star" or ancient doom fortress or some such.

    Build restrictions are very nice because they're obvious to understand and instantly create a different game. Local hazards might favor certain unit types over others. Unit modifiers are not a good idea mostly because they're too nuanced and minor to be meaningful.
  3. ekulio

    ekulio Member

    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    Not counting asteroids, I would go for just metal, rock, and gas.

    I would prefer the ice/water/lava/desert/etc type planets to just be adjustment sliders on the rock planet, such as:
    -temperature
    -water level
    -atmosphere density
    -wind
    -volcanic/seismic activity

    Want a water planet? Raise the water level. Want an ice planet? Make it cold. Volcanic planet? drag up the volcanic activity slider.
    The main reason I want this though is because I would like to see planets able to have more than one "archetype" at once. Like an ice planet with big volcanic sections or something.
  4. cptbritish

    cptbritish Member

    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    Yea my examples were pretty much just to make them differences without making them downright unattractive to unexperienced players.

    Personally I love your idea for Lava planets, would love to see that.

    Metal planets are basically Death Stars from an Ancient war. Hopefully it won't be easy to reactivate them and take a lot of energy/powerplants/time to give players a chance to react to such a threat. Still its balancing such a weapon.

    I'm my eyes it should be more powerful than the equivalent fully built up battle moon.
  5. FlandersNed

    FlandersNed Member

    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    8
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    This is pretty much happening (apart from some differences).
    Check out the latest UberNet livestream to see what I mean.
  6. neutrino

    neutrino low mass particle Uber Employee

    Messages:
    3,123
    Likes Received:
    2,687
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    The planet archetype spec defines how the different biomes interact on a particular planet. So if you want to create a volcano/ice planet make one with those biomes and give it the right settings.

    Basically a biome is simply saying "this area is this type of terrain". A planet archetype defines how the biomes related to one another. So by combinging biomes differently in different archetypes you can make different kinds of planets.
  7. Pawz

    Pawz Active Member

    Messages:
    951
    Likes Received:
    161
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    Neutrino, have you guys tinkered / thought about / whatever, on the resource distribution scheme for randomly generated planets? IE thoughts on how to keep a map balanced while still being random.
  8. neutrino

    neutrino low mass particle Uber Employee

    Messages:
    3,123
    Likes Received:
    2,687
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    Yes, we've thought of a number of different ways to handle this. I'm not sure which is going to shake out the best, we'll see.
  9. ekulio

    ekulio Member

    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    Not sure exactly what you mean by "defines how they relate to each other" but it sounds awesome so I'm pleased as punch :D
  10. bobucles

    bobucles Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,388
    Likes Received:
    558
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    Huh, that reminds me of minecraft biomes for some reason. So basically, it looks like any planet can have any combination of terrain types/flavors?
  11. neutrino

    neutrino low mass particle Uber Employee

    Messages:
    3,123
    Likes Received:
    2,687
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    So far yeah. And I did get the word from Minecraft.
  12. Pawz

    Pawz Active Member

    Messages:
    951
    Likes Received:
    161
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    ExtraBiomesXL mod ftw!


    For all those out there who want a FPS perspective, maybe it should be a FP resource collection perspective - optimise your extractors by finding the best deposits underground!

    :D


    I need something to tinker with. lol.
  13. ekulio

    ekulio Member

    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    Another thing I would like to see is Venus-like planets with really harsh atmospheres where radar doesn't work and LOS is severely reduced.

    An atmosphere that actually corroded your units would be too extreme probably...but you could always have it increase damage or something to signify weakened armor.
  14. LordQ

    LordQ Active Member

    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    33
    Re: Differences in the Planet Types, What would you like to

    From a realism perspective, you could probably use sonar or a different wavelength of EM radiation to act as radar.

    From a gameplay standpoint, not having radar on some planets would be brilliant and significantly reduce the defender's inherent advantage.

Share This Page