Building New Planets

DirectorTsaarx · #1 February 21st, 2001, 08:36 PM

The main reason I'M building a ringworld is because I can. And they're cool. A sphereworld is an even cooler idea. Why would you need a better reason? If the only reason you're playing is to beat up on a human or on a bunch of AI's, ignore ringworlds and sphereworlds.

HOWEVER. (The rest of this post may sound a little harsh, but it's not intended to be. Please just take it as educational in nature.) I want to point out that most of the research required to get to the ringworld/sphereworld tech is useful in its own right. If you want to finish the game with no ship bigger than a Light Cruiser, no base bigger than a Space Station, and no Stellar Manipulation techs (or just the create/destroy storms, create/destroy planets, warp point closers and lower-level warp point openers), feel free. If you want to take it to the extreme, don't research any of the ship size tech levels, base size tech levels, or stellar manipulation tech levels at all.

As for me, I researched most of the required stuff anyway, and getting to the ringworld components was just one more tech level in Stellar Manipulation. One that also includes the Sun Creation component. And getting the Sphereworld component also gets you the Black Hole creator/destroyer, the sun destroyer, and nebula creator/destroyers.

So, in summary, you're getting more than just a Ringworld for those 2,619,999 research points. You're also getting Frigates, Destroyers, Light Cruisers, Cruisers, Base Stations, Starbases, and a slew of Stellar Manipulation techs, some of which might even help you beat up on the AI.

Spyder · #2 February 21st, 2001, 10:46 PM

Well, I tend to be highly competitive and an optimizer. My strategies tend to be research, development & retaliation. I research heavily, colonize & develop as many planets as I can until someone declares war on me, then I wipe them out. Repeat until done

For the purposes of winning the game as quickly as you can, the artificial worlds, the recycling stuff and some of the other technologies just don't seem to meet the mission requirements.

Sinapus · #3 February 21st, 2001, 11:04 PM

Now that I think of it... it would be nice to actually -build- artificial planets and such. Say 4-6k worth of plating and cabling and a planet generator or something an suddenly you have a new planet. Or moon.

O'Neill style colonies might be neat as well, especially for games where you can't colonize certain planet types and/or atmospheres.

------------------
--
"What do -you- want?" "I'd like to live -just- long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I would look up into your lifeless eyes and wave like this..." *waggle* "...can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?"

Puke · #4 February 21st, 2001, 11:24 PM

i dont have a saved game with a stellar construction in it right now, so it will be a while before I can try this. It occurs to me though, when you build a RW/SW it replaces then star in the system with a planet type RW or SW from the planet types file. this means there is no more star in the system. could you then use stellar manipulation to create another star and build another stellar construction? if so, you could park 33 construction cruisers over a star, time them to finish building one turn appart, and create 3 ringworlds within 3 turns of each other. wow.

then if you just moved your entire imperial population to those worlds and opened 10 wormholes on the same sector, what more would you need? talk about impervious defenses. once you had 11 of them you could build all the starbases directly from ground based shipyards, and you could see how fast your could induce a range check error by having 226 planets in the same sector. that would sure be ugly in tactical combat. yow. then if you saved that map and entered it into the TG contest..

DirectorTsaarx · #5 February 21st, 2001, 11:41 PM

Puke: I think someone's tried that, and got some message about "can't create a star in this system". Probably to prevent the kind of abuse you mention

raynor · #6 February 22nd, 2001, 08:00 AM

quote:
Originally posted by DirectorTsaarx:
Puke: I think someone's tried that, and got some message about "can't create a star in this system". Probably to prevent the kind of abuse you mention

Perhaps I can add a little bit so you can understant this most excellent theoretical idea by Puke.

In the past, folks have complained the game wouldn't let them build planets out of asteroids in systems with ringworlds on the star or all the stars. It displays the error message: "There must be a star in the system." So, Puke is guessing that you should be able to build a star in such a system. He references the fact that the game changes the star to a planet of type 'x'.

This is really quite ingenius if it works.

P.S. Oh, and this is quite trivial, Puke, but with the 0 to 12 (x,y) coordinates, you would be limited to just 169 planets in the same system.

[This message has been edited by raynor (edited 22 February 2001).]

Hydraa · #7 February 22nd, 2001, 08:14 AM

There problem is that in the past (I have not tested this on v1.27) you can NOT create a star in any system that contains a star OR contains a constructed planet. So nature can create binary + star system. Us living beings with all the Stellar manip tech that we can research can only create single star systems.