How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

I usually set my own planet type to ice, and always seem to be at a huge disadvantage against the other races.

How many people, especially those that complain the game is too easy, set their planet types to ice?

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

I think you make a good point. When I switch from rock / oxygen to gas / methane, I find that it slows my start down by quite a bit.

Ironically, I'm playing rock / oxygen now, and it is a harder game than gas / methane in the middle of the game. Usually, by this time I have 'acquired' rock planet colonization from an enemy empire. But everyone around me is rock colony as well! I actually had to research gas giant and ice instead of obtaining it from a race when they surrendered!

Didn't someone say they thought 'none' atmosphere was the most challenging of all? I haven't tried that one yet. Any comments from those who have done this?

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

I played a few games with rock/none race and it wasn't that difficult. All those moons help a lot for such race.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

In my Last game for score in small universe I took ice/none because most AI start with rock (ice is second, gas is rarest), none of the AIs start with none (oxygen as CO2 races are plentifull, hydrogen and methane a bit less present).

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

Has anyone sat down and and figured out what the chances are for each planet type vs. atmosphere?

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

The Arachnid Consortium uses Gas/Hydrogen. Their frequency is intermittant, but, the catch is that they are almost always large & huge. This helps to balance out the quantity problem for me. The problem *I* have is trying to decide which to research next...Ice or Rock...it seems like I always pick the wrong one http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif


------------------
Spyder, Chairman of the Arachnid Consortium

[This message has been edited by Spyder (edited 05 March 2001).]

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

I use Gas / Carbon Dioxide for my Nerdon race. I chose Gas because...well...Nerds tend to stink so I thought them living on a "gassy" world fit.

I chose Carbon Dioxide because at my work, we call people who are useless "CO2 makers", meaning all they are good for is breathing. Thought it would be a race with a little style (very little! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif.

Oh, of course I set my reproduction rate to 91%...Nerds just can't seem to find many dates.. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

I hope I have not offended any fellow nerds! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif




------------------
Regards,
KiloOhm

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

I have set my race to Ice/Carbon Dioxide and Ice/Methane several times and found that the Ice/Carbon Dioxide actually seemed to give me an advantage (as Rock/M or Rock/CD).

I haven't tried the no atmosphere yet... I tend to roleplay the creation of my race and visualize such a being as the Crystal dudes (can't remember name).

I also haven't tried Ice/Oxygen, but will now...

Jason2

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

One thing to keep in mind is that while Rock maybe the most common type of planet found, Rock is ALSO the most common type of planet AI races will inhabit. This means lots of increased competition for the same systems. It also means that the new AI routines will 'covet' your planets and cause a negative diplomatic penalty.

I think Ice and Rock are fairly well balanced because of this. I think Gas Giants are an utter no brainer and they make the game far too easy if selected. There arent many Gas Giant AIs and almost all of the planets are Large/Huge. There dont seem to be to terribly many LESS GG planets either and their values are on par. (I was hoping to see something like lower mineral values or something for GGs so you have to have more mines to get the same results, thus offsetting some of the size advantage).

Talenn

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jpinard:
I usually set my own planet type to ice, and always seem to be at a huge disadvantage against the other races.

How many people, especially those that complain the game is too easy, set their planet types to ice?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's only a short-term disadvantage. In the long run it's an advantage because sooner or later you'll be able to conquer a rock colonizing race and get that colonization tech. This will almost always be MANY turns before any of the AI races can do the same. AI vs. AI wars are very slow. Now you've got TWO colonization types and you're well ahead of the AI races unless they've found a colonization tech in ruins or (unlikely) conquered another race themselves.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

Sigh.

I've been in a 3-player game with sequential movement for a while now, current stardate is 2403.6

Yan, one of my honorable opponents, has his home planet type set to Ice/None and he is still kicking our asses, the young impulsive schemer! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

My point here is just that superior ability is still enough to oversome such a disadvantage, even against human opponents.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

Possum,

No disrespect to the Honorable Yan, he may be in fact a great strategist, but I don't consider Ice/None to be a disadvantage. I would have to say it is a great advantage over any rock/any and at least on par with Gas/any.

Consider your typical neutral ai has rock, odds are the first such ai Yan came incontact with had that, and in surendering to him gave him that tech.

Now very early in the game he has the ability to colonize every moon in the quadrant. And since a domed moon only has room for one facility, chances are slim that anyone has colonized any of them.

But with his non-aptmosphere breathers being able to build more facilities, now he can have on average 3 to 5 colonies in every system that can support space yards AND produce resources to boot.

Some disadvantage!

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
Possum,

No disrespect to the Honorable Yan, he may be in fact a great strategist, but I don't consider Ice/None to be a disadvantage. I would have to say it is a great advantage over any rock/any and at least on par with Gas/any.

Consider your typical neutral ai has rock, odds are the first such ai Yan came incontact with had that, and in surendering to him gave him that tech.

Now very early in the game he has the ability to colonize every moon in the quadrant. And since a domed moon only has room for one facility, chances are slim that anyone has colonized any of them.

But with his non-aptmosphere breathers being able to build more facilities, now he can have on average 3 to 5 colonies in every system that can support space yards AND produce resources to boot.

Some disadvantage!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is also where the Natural Merchants and Advanced Storage traits are VERY handy.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daynarr:
This is also where the Natural Merchants and Advanced Storage traits are VERY handy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I can sure see that they would, but Yan is actually using Psychic and Temporal, a combination that makes me wonder what the HELL he's up to... http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

I know he reads this board from time to time, as does Tobias, my other worthy opponent. I wonder if either of them will chime in here...

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

I generally pick Gas giant because the smallest I've seen is a medium and most are huge. Once you convert the atmosphere you can build tons of facilities.
I find you get as better game by doing the following:
Pick only colonize home planet type option.
Pick th ehome planet type of the majority of the AI you are adding. If possible choose all players that have the same type of home planet.
This makes all colonizable planets more valuable.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

It's true, rock is the most plentiful in the universe and I consider that to be a major BUG. Just looking at our solar system alone gas giants are present in an equal number to rock with ice planets being the rarety, and ice moons being common.

Of course to really make the game work the way it should you should have an equal chance that any planet created will be ice, gas, or rock, put it at an even 1/3 percent for each type and see what happens, suddenly players would have no clue what type of world to pick at the start!

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

depends on how badly I wanna get beat. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif
I have picked all three. and started at all 3 tech levels.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

I started a game under 1.19 with an Ice/Carbon Dioxide race, but then 1.27 came out and I decided to restart rather than continue that game.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

AKA : Yan

Why thanks for all that praise Possum. I do my best.
I didn't have anything in mind when picking psychic and temporal together. It was mostly just the way I pictured my race is all.
Psychic has helped me capture a few stupid AI colony ships roaming out a bit too far. But I just got Rock tech, only three turns ago actually, and havn't even had time to spread my newly acquired oxygen breathing Xiati slaves around yet. (I can tell you they are totally pissed off!)
Temporal though, I don't think was worth it really. Havn't used anything from that tech line to date. Maybe at the higher levels it becomes more worthwhile. But there is just so much to research!

Also, back on topic, I just like being different. I noticed most were picking hydrogen and gas giant. Ice/none seemed like a rare combo. Plus, I'm Canadian, so Ice just fits.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

Once, way in the beginning (before any patches), I did a frequency count of every planet, size, and atmosphere, to find out which type would provide the most amount of facilities.
Unfortunately, I don't have that scrap of paper anymore but from what I remember, and what most people can easily see, Hydrogen/Gas was best. Rock/none was pretty high up also. Methane/Ice and CD/Ice, I believe were the worst.
If the snow ever materializes here in NY, enough for me to stay home from work tomorrow, I'll revisit my previous work.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

Once, way in the beginning (before any patches), I did a frequency count of every planet, size, and atmosphere, to find out which type would provide the most amount of facilities.
Unfortunately, I don't have that scrap of paper anymore but from what I remember, and what most people can easily see, Hydrogen/Gas was best. Rock/none was pretty high up also. Methane/Ice and CD/Ice, I believe were the worst.
If the snow ever materializes here in NY, enough for me to stay home from work tomorrow, I'll revisit my previous work.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lupusman:
&lt;snip&gt;
Temporal though, I don't think was worth it really. Havn't used anything from that tech line to date. Maybe at the higher levels it becomes more worthwhile. But there is just so much to research!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The standard direct-fire weapon (Time Distortion Burst) works pretty well, especially with the 4x damage to shields; the Temporal Vacation Service facility is great - twice the happiness bonus of the Urban Pac Center (and it sounds like you could use some happiness-building facilities); and, finally, the Temporal Space Yard is very useful, since construction rate is at least doubled over the standard Space Yard...

You may now return to the topic at hand...

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

You folks weren't kidding about the Dry Ice world rarity. I started a game with an Ice/CD combo. So far I've explored 18 systems and seen 148 planets, of which only two were Ice/CD, and one of those two was my homeworld; the other was a small bugger...



------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

Here's a quick breakdown based off the SectType.txt file. This does not take into account any limitations in SystemTypes.txt.

Sector probabilities:
............Type........Atmosphere.Facil.Num....Av g..Size
.......Gas Giant....Carbon Dioxide....52..12..4.333..0/0/2/4/6
.......Gas Giant..........Hydrogen....52..12..4.333..0/0/2/4/6
.......Gas Giant...........Methane....52..12..4.333..0/0/2/4/6
.......Gas Giant............Oxygen....52..12..4.333..0/0/2/4/6
.............Ice....Carbon Dioxide....36..14..2.571..4/4/2/2/2
.............Ice..........Hydrogen....36..14..2.57 1..4/4/2/2/2
.............Ice...........Methane....34..13..2.61 5..4/3/2/2/2
.............Ice..............None....30..10...... 3..2/2/2/2/2
.............Ice............Oxygen....36..14..2.57 1..4/4/2/2/2
............Rock....Carbon Dioxide....62..24..2.583..6/6/6/4/2
............Rock..........Hydrogen....62..24..2.58 3..6/6/6/4/2
............Rock...........Methane....64..25...2.5 6..6/7/6/4/2
............Rock..............None....45..15...... 3..3/3/3/3/3
............Rock............Oxygen....62..24..2.58 3..6/6/6/4/2

Facil is the # of facilities you can fit onto the planets.
Num is the actual number.
Avg is the average # of facilities per planet.
Size is a breakdown of # found by size (tiny, small, medium, large, huge).


[This message has been edited by wilcoxon (edited 08 March 2001).]

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

For those of you interested, the post below breaks down further:

Gas Giants 48
Ice Planets 65
Rock Planets 112

Carbon Dioxide 50
Hydrogen 50
Methane 50
Oxygen 50
None 25

Huge 45
Large 45
Medium 45
Small 45
Tiny 45



------------------
Spyder, Chairman of the Arachnid Consortium

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

Now, if you ask me (and, of course, you DIDN'T http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif ) The size distribution should be more of a bell curve around the medium size...Fewer Huge & tiny, more medium. Tinies should have less of a chance to have an atmosphere of any kind, and, Ices should have a higher percentage of having an atmosphere of some kind (usually whatever the ice is made of). Rocks should be evenly distributed & Gasses should always have an atmosphere (as they both already are).

Also, I really like randomization...I'd like to see a completely random button...where all the planets' sizes, atmospheres & makeups are ALL compelely random. You could conceiveably pick a Gas/Hydrogen race and end up with your home planet being the ONLY one in the galaxy.


------------------
Spyder, Chairman of the Arachnid Consortium

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

It seems to me that a "half-bell" peaking at Tiny would be more "realistic". The bigger a planet is, the less likely it is to have formed in the first place.

------------------
Cap'n Q

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

That 'half-bell' would be peaking at 'asteroid' since theres a ton of them everywhere.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by capnq:
It seems to me that a "half-bell" peaking at Tiny would be more "realistic". The bigger a planet is, the less likely it is to have formed in the first place.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmm...it all depends on how you believe that planets are formed doesn't it? If a star system is formed by a catastrophic event, wouldn't you say that the size of the chunks would be random? Also, in a given star system, at inception, wouldn't you say that the smaller chunks were the ones most likely to be sucked back into the sun? Now, I'm not really an astronomer or a physicist (which is painfully evident to those who are http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif ) but only working from a point of logic, and, thusly, it seems to me that the tiny planets would be fewer than the medium ones....I invite counter-views http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif




------------------
Spyder, Chairman of the Arachnid Consortium

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

Seen 7 systems so far, 65 planets total, found 4 CO2 Ice worlds besides my home, one each Tiny, Small, Large, Huge.

Isn't this game great? Just when I think I got it all wired, it throws me a curveball and revives my flagging interest http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

This Pirate stuff is great good fun!

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>If a star system is formed by a catastrophic event, wouldn't you say that the size of the chunks would be random? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Also, in a given star system, at inception, wouldn't you say that the smaller chunks were the ones most likely to be sucked back into the sun?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ok, astronomy lesson:
The current view of how things probably happen (from seeing many in various stages):
Start with a nebula. something happens, such as a nearby supernova, and the gas is compressed.
With the gas more compact, the force of gravity has more effect. (since it decreases with distance)
Everything starts to fall inwards.
Wait many millions of years.
The gas is gathering in the center, but there is a slight rotation in the cloud. Think of a merry-go-round, spinning slowly. When everybody climbs in towards the center, it starts spinning faster to conserve angular momentum.
With the gas spinning rapidly, it forms a disk, with a bulge in the middle.
Now, the disk starts to clump up, due to gravity. Heavy elements gather, and smash into other, sometimes sticking together. Eventually you get bigger and bigger clumps, and the biggest ones, at the right distance from the star, gather gas too, becoming large faster.
When the star gets to it's main stage,and starts pumping out lots of energy, it blows away the remaining gas from the disk, leaving only the heavy dust, rocks & planets.


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Now, I'm not really an astronomer or a physicist (which is painfully evident to those who are ) but only working from a point of logic, and, thusly, it seems to me that the tiny planets would be fewer than the medium ones....I invite counter-views <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Consider that as planets get tinier, they start to be seen as moons, and there are tons of 'em in our solar system. Asteroids are even smaller, and there's many thousands of them out there.

We have:
Giant: Jupiter, Saturn
Large: Uranus, neptune
Medium: Earth, Venus, Mars
Small: Mercury, Earth's moon, larger moons of jupiter& saturn
Tiny: Pluto, any other moons, some large asteroids.
Asteroids: Oodles. I'm not gonna count them in my lifetime.

See the trend? Zillions of tiny stuff, not as many small, bunch of medium, couple of large or huge.

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

No arguments. Except that moons tend to be different by definition. They're trapped by the gravity of a planet, not a star. Because of this they are necessarily smaller (less gravity there)...tiny. Also, there are many possible explanations for moons other than being caught there when the planet was formed.

I was speaking primarily of planets...moons of a star, as it were. If you dropped the moons from your list, you'd get a roughly bell shaped curve with medium planets being the most numerous.

As things go, I think that this would be the norm because of the very forces you mentioned in your explanation of star system building. Most 'chunks' would be medium sized (by definition) and therefore would seem to be the most likely (because of their number) to find just the right distance from the forming sun to remain in orbit and not float away or be sucked back as the star contracts. The number of large & huge 'chunks' would be smaller and so there would be less chance that some would be caught in the system...same for tiny.


------------------
Spyder, Chairman of the Arachnid Consortium

[This message has been edited by Spyder (edited 12 March 2001).]

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

If you're not including moons, then medium would be the norm.
If you're counting all objects in the system, then there should be a preponderance of tiny moons.

Perhaps the system types should be changed to eliminate large planets with no atmosphere, and increase the tiny moons to compensate. Also adding the occasional small moon, as well small moon/small planet. would be interesting.

Did you know that an asteroid has been found with a "moon"?

Re: How many people set their OWN planet type to ICE??
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by suicide_junkie:

Did you know that an asteroid has been found with a "moon"?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I'd read that somewhere http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif Very intersting. Kinda makes you ask "Whats the difference between a really big asteroid and a planet?"


------------------
Spyder, Chairman of the Arachnid Consortium

[This message has been edited by Spyder (edited 12 March 2001).]