Resource system - suggestion to add rare resource types

The thing is, for certain there won't be fighting on every planet. Even in competitive Supreme Commander games, until you've actually lost it altogether, your base goes completely unmolested most of the time.

So you can build geothermal plants on a volcanic world. Okay, so you traveled several planets and started from scratch on a new world just to get +200 energy, or whatever. Big deal, you could probably turn your starting world into a massive solar-panel-covered battery. Eventually you do reach a point where energy concerns no longer exist, even metal, because your bringing so much in, at which point another geothermal spot just isn't worth the time, and you just go for the enemy base instead.

I think we're getting too hung up on the idea that the SupComm / TA formula was the best, especially since we're in such uncharted territory. SoaSE is the only other RTS to have attempted something on this scale in the past, and even in there, it was common to reach a critical mass of resources on all but the smallest map, where you have so much metal coming in that you literally cannot spend it fast enough.

Planets effectively allow every 'base' to act as an independent island of sorts, so it makes sense to want to limit players' ability to simply turn their starting planet into a resource world, and encourage conflict over the no-mans-land planets in between.

Additionally, it would also be best to make losing a world something that you wouldn't want to do. If you can just suck mass out of any old planet, then smashing an asteroid into one doesn't carry any weight. You didn't really 'lose' anything.

:?:

The thing is, for certain there won't be fighting on every planet. Even in competitive Supreme Commander games, until you've actually lost it altogether, your base goes completely unmolested most of the time.

So you can build geothermal plants on a volcanic world. Okay, so you traveled several planets and started from scratch on a new world just to get +200 energy, or whatever. Big deal, you could probably turn your starting world into a massive solar-panel-covered battery. Eventually you do reach a point where energy concerns no longer exist, even metal, because your bringing so much in, at which point another geothermal spot just isn't worth the time, and you just go for the enemy base instead.

I think we're getting too hung up on the idea that the SupComm / TA formula was the best, especially since we're in such uncharted territory. SoaSE is the only other RTS to have attempted something on this scale in the past, and even in there, it was common to reach a critical mass of resources on all but the smallest map, where you have so much metal coming in that you literally cannot spend it fast enough.

Planets effectively allow every 'base' to act as an independent island of sorts, so it makes sense to want to limit players' ability to simply turn their starting planet into a resource world, and encourage conflict over the no-mans-land planets in between.

Additionally, it would also be best to make losing a world something that you wouldn't want to do. If you can just suck mass out of any old planet, then smashing an asteroid into one doesn't carry any weight. You didn't really 'lose' anything.[/quote]

Your quote tree exploded.

Guys think bigger. So every single different type of planet has a spot that an energy generating building can be built on? How exciting.

Now I really want that water planet so I can build hydrodynamic energy generators instead of geothermal energy generators on my lava planet.

...

The whole reason I started this discussion was as a way of seeing whether rare resources could be a way to differentiate planet types and make it a strategic consideration which planet type to fight for. If there are different rare resources they should not all do the exact same thing.

Well, maybe rare resources is he wrong terminology. Call it strategic points or somewhat and the discussion will lead into another direction.

Nobody wants a thrid res. That I can tell after 9 pages here. I think I know what you mean. Are the "rare spots" I talk all the time about (some pages before) the same thing you mean?

I say put in different types of materials and metals like iron, copper, gold and other types of "mass" just have then reclaimable only. that way they can be depleted but each one can provide different amounts of mass. for example a rocky outcropping with gold mixed in it would yield 5000 mass where the same rocky outcropping that is just rock would only give 500 mass. This way you could hunt for those sweet spots with a ton of mass in it and protect it.

Yes I think so Or at least they're one implementation of it, maybe a better one than an actual resource. Please see also the "snowball resources" thread though for why actual rare resources might have some benefits too.

I could get behind some kind of rare alternate ressource for some kind of units to motivate exploration.
Otherwise the starting planet + a couple of buffer planets between you and the ennemies is all you'd need.

Perhaps there could be stuff to find on planets, weapon cache for mostly complete units and stuff like that. Well simple stuff that wouldn't make it complicate, but would add diversity.

---

I could also get behind some kind of system to limit the number of buildings per planets.

Like an artificial maximum number of buildings (not that fun) or if possible a soft limit imposed by the size of the planet and it's layout.

For exemple metal extractors would require a "safe zone" around them since they are digging and making the ground unstable.
Solar plants would need an unobstructed zone so that nothing would block sun rays.
Unit factories would have the factory (the part that can be damaged), and warehouses, and some ground space and so on.

Those big spaces around the buildings, would still allow units to walk and fight. That way, the buildings don't have to be gigantic clutering the planets, and use all the space preventing units from doing there thing.

And it would make "space" another ressource.
You'd need to colonize other planets, litterally because you "ran out of space".
Loosing a planet would mean loosing the extra space it provides, and the ressources.

And you might very well have been out of space in your other planets, making the loss that much more important, because you can't build some more factories elsewhere.
This would play a big role for end games as well. As the number of planets decreases, there will be a point where unit production will too instead of staying the same since all factories are located in a couple of planets.

It would make it worthwhile to destroy planets controlled by the enemy too, to cripple his unit production rate. Because he wouldn't just be able to just build a factory somewhere else to compensate... at least once he runs out of space.

Space as a "ressource" would add strategy, a motivation to collonize, and depending on the planet it might even push the player into specializing it since the player wouldn't be able to built just everything he can. So planets closer to the limits of his controller space would have more factories for making units and defence systems, while safer planets would be more about ressource collecting.

And planet types would be even more important, a gaz or lava planet would be a greater asset if specialized as ressource collecting. Since that one planet would bring more energy than any other kind of planets. You'd be able to free some other planet for unit production.

We'd still be able to have the same amount of crazy units doing crazy continuous rushes at ennemy bases/planets. It's just that to substain a big number of units, you'd need more controlled planets, to have more factories and ressources. Just one planet wouldn't do the trick.

Anyways, just a thought.

Not sure that I agree with a single thing you posted...
...but I commend you for digging up and continuing an existing thread instead of starting another.

Same here sadly. A+ for effort thought!

Mike

the question we should look at is why build on more than one planet? will it be possible to build everything on a single planets worth of resources? if i can build power generators that can support my whole army on the surface of a single planet who cares about some super HE3 power generator. if i am sitting on a massive surplus of energy, its pointless. having more planets should be vital to winning.

Because if you centralize everything you leave yourself open to being taken advantage of, say you build all your Pgens on one planet, if you lose that planet you'll be set wayyyyyyyy back.

Mike

That really depends on how the power side of resource generation is balanced.

It could move to a model more like that of mass in that 'fabricating' it is vastly less efficient than pulling it out of a resource node.
Kinda like if FA had no Fusion but buffed Hydro, with more points on the map, in this case Gas Giants are one of those points.

ok, i would be cool with that. i guess we need to know more. there is so much speculation on the board ( myself included) based on the our bitterness of prior games we played that we expect it to be like that. the game idea is so revolutionary that we will need all new original ideas to implement and balance the game. i cant wait to see what uber has in mind to tackle these problems.

I think there could be much potential in another resource, but the simplicity of having just metal and energy costs for production is too good to move away from.

With metal probably going to be the main attraction to planets, it's going to pretty much boil down to who can get the best metal rich planets. Another resource could be put on metal poor planets, and thus make them attractive.

I was thinking it could be something that could be turned into metal or energy. I realize energy is usually never a problem, but this is a new game and may have a different sort of balance.

Something along the lines of 'exotic' matter, or however it will be named. It's not directly usable, but can be turned into either resource. A structure similar to a metal maker, but with a toggle to switch between metal and energy production could then be used to convert it.

This avoids complicating the production mechanics, but creates greater diversity in extraction.

Or you can just add more metal spots to those poor planets, which is basically what you suggested in a roundabout fashion....

But that defeats the purpose of there being different planets, no? At least in an economic sense.

I suppose each planet could just have similar mass, but that makes things seem a little dull IMO.

I'm just concerned that certain planets (primarily water and gas) will become more and more useless as the game progresses. I'm not sure what basis this fear has though the game isn't even out yet.

I don't see water having any 'unique' buildings that are needed in the end-game. Normal planets dominate that regard IMO. Gas offers energy, but unless that's difficult to do, they become more useless as time goes on. Lava planets are naturally going to be metal rich, but I imagine rare enough not to be an issue. Metal planets aren't really planets, and their use is probably more geared towards combat than economy (be kinda disappointing to get a metal planet and determine it to be more useful economically than militarily IMO)

I really shouldn't be speculating about how the game will play, but what else is there to do :| ?

I don't see how Water planets would be useless, I imagine the mass will just be on the seabed and drilling rigs will be used, like how we drill for oil or there will be some set up to make them just as valuable. Heck even if the mass was clumped up on a bunch of mini islands it should still play well so long as naval is more than just 'Like Land but on Water' type deal.

I've theorized that Gas Giants will be strategic locations not just because of the potential Energy to be harvested, but also in terms of moons/asteroids to use for various uses.

Mike

Ah, good point. If this isn't already the intention, I agree it should be.

EDIT: Dayum, just had this overwhelming sense of awe of what this game can be... again.

The balance will be hard in this game as far as resources go. like how many mass points will there be on a planet? if i can gain 5k mass a second by exploiting every mass point on the planet won't that allow me to build anything i want as fast as i want? will going to another planet and gaining an additional 5k a second make much of a difference? will tech 1 units cost 10,000 mass each to make it balanced? the game has to scale somehow from fighting on a single planet to fighting across multiple planets. you should be able to build all units quickly with just a single planet so that games that use a single planet will be fun as well. I can't imagine how to balance such a thing. to me forged alliance was weak in that regard when dealing with larger maps. There wasn't as much excitement on 40X40 maps and bigger.