Lousy galaxy generation/player placement

wilcoxon · #1 February 27th, 2001, 10:26 PM

Anybody else feel that the way SE4 generates the galaxy and places players needs a MAJOR overhaul?

MM borrowed quite a few ideas from Starfire, but did not borrow the balanced start. IMHO, this was a major mistake as the game can be won/lost on your starting location the way it is now.

I'm in one PBEM where I started with 1 breathable planet and about 6 colonizable planets within 2-3 jumps of my start. Another player with the same planet/atmosphere choice started with 5 breathable and an unknown number of colonizable planets within 2 jumps (and I've only seen 3 of his systems). To make matters worse, the one breathable I found 2 jumps away was 1 jump from the other player's home system. There is virtually no way I can compete against him (especially since trading for another colony tech only gave me 2 medium breathable planets and another 5-6 colonizable).

Nitram Draw · #2 February 27th, 2001, 10:31 PM

Yeah, I've had some pretty bad starts too.
I wish they would spread you out more. How can you be in a large quadrant with 5 other players and run into one them 10 turns into the game? That happens to me quite a bit.

Puke · #3 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 · #4 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 · #5 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 · #6 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 · #7 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 · #8 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 · #9 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.

capnq · #10 February 28th, 2001, 04:07 AM

Maybe your homeworld is Unpleasant because your large population is overwhelming the ecosphere. Pollution problems might be what's driving your race into space.