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

[Lupusman]

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.

[DirectorTsaarx]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lupusman:
<snip>
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!

---

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...

[Taqwus]

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

[wilcoxon]

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).]

[Spyder]

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

[Spyder]

Now, if you ask me (and, of course, you DIDN'T ) 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

[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.

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

[Suicide Junkie]

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

[Spyder]

quote:

---

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.

---

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 ) 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




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

[Possum]

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

This Pirate stuff is great good fun!