Lousy galaxy generation/player placement

Puke · #1 February 27th, 2001, 10:33 PM

yep, it sucks. I have a game going that took about 5 restarts to get started because of race file resubmissions and whatnot. each time the game restarted I was holding my breath. first time, i was pretty happy. second time, i knew i was screwed and would be completely unable to compete. third time, i knew i would be untouchable. it kind of went back and fourth like that.

the 'all players evenly distributed' option does not seem to do doink. with it checked, some players were directly adjacent, others were completely isolated. this certainly does need work, and I dont even think it cares at all about what planets are near to you.

at least they fixed the thing with players starting in black hole systems, man that sucked (your ships right out of orbit).

Ubik · #2 February 27th, 2001, 10:52 PM

I think what you mention can be easily mitigated by choosing to have 5 or 10 planets at start. With this many planets, there is always waypoints to other good systems.
I am all in the full randomization of the process as it is.

wilcoxon · #3 February 27th, 2001, 10:57 PM

Yes, it can be somewhat mitigated by choosing 5 or 10 planets. What if I just want everyone to start with 1 planet and have a roughly equal starting position. The only option right now is to start a game with 5 or 10 planets, then go in and abandon all except 1. This causes problems as you loose the research point bonus from the first turn.

Possum · #4 February 27th, 2001, 11:02 PM

Hey, Ubik

What you're asying is very true, but a large start like that makes for a very different game experience from a single-planet start.

I think you and I should come up with a new Facility, the Large-Scale Intergalactic Portugese Software Pirate facility. It wouldn't actually do anything, but your opponents' planets would become unhappy due to paranoia about the possibility of software piracy

Hmm, then again, maybe it should be an Intelligence Operation...

Puke · #5 February 27th, 2001, 11:06 PM

you really should not say things like that Possum. Its highly inconsiderate. I nearly pee'd myself, and that would have gone over very poorly for me since I am at work right now. next time, warn me first with a little disclaimer at the top of the post.

Suicide Junkie · #6 February 28th, 2001, 12:22 AM

On a somewhat similar topic.

Why are home planets not Optimal?

I started a game with a race that had no maintenance, and gave myself 91% reproduction as compensation.

My home planet was something below 'mild', and had ZERO pop. growth.

Fortunately, there was a nearby optimal planet, whose atmosphere I couldn't breathe. I could get 1% growth over there.

Shouldn't every home planet be optimal, seing as you're evolved for it?

dmm · #7 February 28th, 2001, 12:55 AM

quote:
Originally posted by suicide_junkie:
Shouldn't every home planet be optimal, seing as you're evolved for it?

You're making some huge assumptions:
1) Evolution is true.
2) Every race evolved on its "home" planet.
3) Every race reached optimum.
4) The planets are uniform.
5) Each race doesn't have to compete with other lifeforms.
6) Each race hasn't had to compete for long enough for evolution to take that into account.
7) Ability to breed quickly is the main driving force of evolution.