Starting Planet Values

[Atrocities]

Is it me or do starting planet values vary significantly for each player?

In a recent PBW game I started the game with a horrible planet value and later on I found that the home world of one of my allies had started the game with a significantly superior home world than I.

I lost that game as I battled resource issues while the other players seemed to benefit from a great start.

I tested this theory out and discovered that indeed the starting valaues of planets do vary from player to player.

I thought the setting in the game where each players started wtih the same planet size and settings would insure that each player had an equal footing. This is not nessassarily the turth.

This came as a revolation and angered me so. When set, ALL players should start with the SAME planet size and values. When this does not happen, the game is no longer equal for each player and one or more players will have an unfair, and yes, sometime significant advantage over the other players.

I do hope that in SE V, this issue is addressed and resolved equitably.

[Fyron]

When the setting for "all players planets the same size" setting is enabled, planet values for HWs only vary by a few percentage points and the planets are definitely the same size... Perhaps post a savegame file where this happens, along with the settings you used for that game, so that we can verify what you see happening?

Were you using a mod of some sort? It is possible that you might have had a smaller than normal HW or other players might have had a larger than normal homeworld if you played with FQM and a bad homeworld start, which is expressely forbidden in the readme.txt and modinfo.txt files. This is because FQM uses small moons, which can be chosen as HWs on a bad planet start, resulting in the actual "planet" of the sector being chosen as the homeworld instead. This includes mods like Star Trek Mod that incorporate FQM. Average and good homeworld starts are not affected in any way by FQM, and they should not be in STM unless you made some changes to the planet and system data files.

No mod can cause different players to have vastly different valued planets though... All homeworld planets have around 80%, 100% or 120% value, depending on the quality of the planet selection at game setup.

[Ragnarok-X]

Well, i dont think they vary, at least not greatly. I think EACH resourse-sort can have +- 3% depending on the start value. So if the the setting shows homeworlds should have 80% value, then a standart homeworld could be 77/81/79 or something.

In the example you mentioned, what was the values of your and your opponents homeworld ?!

[Ragnarok-X]

Ah just a 2 minutes to late

[Timstone]

AT:
Quit whining man.
You start with a terrible planet value, and the others start with really good planets, but the only thing they have next to their system is a black hole and you have a lush paradise of nice colonisable planets next to your system.
I'm sure the entire map has some sort of balance, if it is qually divided among the players is another thing.

Edit:
I hope to see some improvement in SE V regarding the planetconditions (climate is horrible or mild, or pleasant...). It really doesn't make any sense to me that my race evolves on a planet with a horrible climte, but only like planets with a pleasant climate.
It should be that the climate for one player is outstanding, but for another terrible. And if that is a bit too much, then all homeworlds should start with at least a pleasant climate.

[Atrocities]

I think we were using the FQM mod.

Its not that I am whining Timestone, its just that after having it happen time after time, and not just to me, I think it should be addressed. How would you like to start on a 99/88/92 planet while those you are playing against start on 120/114/118 planet? If they have but one breathable world near by, its game over against a skilled player. Hell I lost a koth game because my planet settings were atrocious and I was boxed in by two blackhole systems.

I just think it might be high time to address this. Make the differances between HW's within 3% of each other and no more. Or at least have it so we can set the differances manually.

[Timstone]

Okay, that's not cool to start with.
Sorry if I sounded a bit harsh. Hope you people can overcome this and fix the problem. No more whining from either side (your or mine).
Good luck!

[Atrocities]

We were conqoured in short order. Poor people might be the conscripts of war, but they seldom have the money to fight one.

[Nodachi]

AT, that is strange. From the info you've given it looks like you had a medium start and the other player had a good start. If it was a FQM map and a medium start was chosen that could be the problem. I've found that anytime I use a FQM map I have to go with good HW's to keep everything balanced. Now if it was supposed to be a good start I'm at a loss to explain it.

On a related note, if that happened to me I'd ask for a restart and I certainly wouldn't object to one if it happened to my opponent.

[geoschmo]

Timstone said:
I hope to see some improvement in SE V regarding the planetconditions (climate is horrible or mild, or pleasant...). It really doesn't make any sense to me that my race evolves on a planet with a horrible climte, but only like planets with a pleasant climate.

From a game play aspect and giving players a balanced start you are correct, conditions on all worlds should be teh same. And it would be nice if SE5 allowed different races to find the same world different on their own personal conditions scale.

But it certainly does make sense from a "realism" perspective why some players would have homeworlds that were poor conditions. They didn't evolve under those conditions, they just didn't do a good job of taking care of their environment and made the planet conditions worse by the time they became a space faring race.

Geoschmo