Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Procedural Generation needs improvement  (Read 3958 times)

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 17049
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2019, 10:27:35 AM »

By the way, I definitely am not suggesting that Terran worlds should somehow be handcrafted. Perhaps one possible approach would be to give systems containing a Terran planet a "minimum level" of detail, e.g. at least 15 features, 3-8 of which are planetary bodies. Or something similar.

Yep, I gotcha. The implementation details would need some looking at, in particular since "how many things" gets figured out before "what things"; will just have to see how that goes!


... dropping Sun-Skimmers into the central star - some of the large scale megaengineering the domain was doing that's fallen into disuse under the splintered factional strife of the current Sector.

I'll just say that I'm partial to those kinds of things as well, and could totally see adding an odd bit of content in that vein here and there.

Logged

Okaenia

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2019, 11:46:19 AM »

I agree with pretty much everything Sendrien said here.

When exploring, the thing I care the most about a system is how it looks. The Core Worlds are all cool and fun to explore. Empty systems are necessary, sure; but any system with less than 3 planets is just boring and I don't even want to explore it, I just leave immediately. That may be what was intended, but when half the sector is like that (Maybe I am just unlucky?), well, half the time spent exploring is just boring.

When building a colony I don't settle for anything other than Jungle/Terran Eccentric/Terran worlds right now, so I really like the idea of marking the systems that contain worlds with life as "special" (they already are, right? Just the fact there's life is awesome!) also have other interesting things in it, like an asteroid belt, a nebula, maybe at least 3 other planets, a gas giant with three moons, etc. Those worlds can all be 250% accessibility for all that matters. I just don't want the system to be... empty.
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2535
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2019, 12:30:40 PM »

The neatest system I've set up shop in was actually back in the very first vanilla run I played; it had a close-in desert planet with light ruins (habitable, 150 hazard rating, no farming though), a further-out tundra world with vast ruins and literally every resource (albeit almost all at 'poor' levels) - also 150 hazard rating, and a gas giant with three moons, two of which also had ruins (175 & 200 hazard rating, though).  On top of that it was right next door to the core worlds, with a +25 accessibility bonus for proximity, had a full set of domain-tech buoys, a weapons cache with a handful of blueprints, a research station, two equipment caches (one with a tempest blueprint, at least as long as you haven't skilled-up your salvaging), and a handful of assorted derelict vessels that were, in the end, just so much scrap material.  Oh, and, okay, it was also a warning beacon system... but the entire 'threat' consisted of maybe six remnant frigates split out among almost as many fleets.

If you want to take a look: MN-1912144308577010012 - make sure you're pure vanilla; mods like console commands are okay, but anything that adds systems will mess up the procgen - and head east to Chird Bogotanma.  Bring plenty of crew so you can just drop a settlement down immediately, and then use that for storage as you loot the rest of the place.

@Alex: And, by the way, this is what people mean when they say they don't see the value in the salvaging skill.  If you go in with it at level three, that tempest blueprint just... isn't there.  It is -not- a good feeling to test different skill levels and find that -increasing- your skill makes you -miss out- on some very valuable items.  We -know- that the items in a given cache/ruins/whatever are fixed based on game seed; it really shouldn't be that hard to keep the stuff you'd get from unskilled, and just add -more- with more skill points.
Alternatively, how about making it so that the salvaging skill doesn't have -any- impact on rare loot from exploration - but instead improves the output of tech mining operations; that would have the secondary advantage of making it so that you can take the skill partway through a game run without feeling like you missed out on earlier opportunities.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 17049
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2019, 01:00:54 PM »

@Alex: And, by the way, this is what people mean when they say they don't see the value in the salvaging skill.  If you go in with it at level three, that tempest blueprint just... isn't there.  It is -not- a good feeling to test different skill levels and find that -increasing- your skill makes you -miss out- on some very valuable items.  We -know- that the items in a given cache/ruins/whatever are fixed based on game seed; it really shouldn't be that hard to keep the stuff you'd get from unskilled, and just add -more- with more skill points.

... yeah, I guess I might as well do that; there. From an in-universe point of view, it does make more sense to keep the stuff you'd get from an unaltered roll and just add more; I think I was more focused on the part where it makes no sense to compare the results of two random rolls from a technical/probability point of view,  but that's not really what's going on here.
Logged

Sendrien

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2019, 06:57:26 PM »

@Alex - By complete accident, one of the best constellations I've ever found was called Kardashev. By the very fact that this name is in your name generator, I know that you know its significance. So I needn't elaborate further.

But it got me thinking - here is humanity having spread its wings beyond our own solar system, perhaps even to a new galaxy, we're not sure. And yet none of the relics of a bygone era are a Dyson Sphere?

How awesome would that be for a point of interesting exploration!!
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8329
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #20 on: January 06, 2019, 06:22:45 AM »

@Alex: And, by the way, this is what people mean when they say they don't see the value in the salvaging skill.  If you go in with it at level three, that tempest blueprint just... isn't there.  It is -not- a good feeling to test different skill levels and find that -increasing- your skill makes you -miss out- on some very valuable items.  We -know- that the items in a given cache/ruins/whatever are fixed based on game seed; it really shouldn't be that hard to keep the stuff you'd get from unskilled, and just add -more- with more skill points.
That is my biggest problem with Salvaging.  In my first game, I had the best loot for unskilled.  Had I taken max Salvaging, I would have missed out on pristine nanoforge, and I all I would get in exchange are blueprints for Eagle, Astral, and one other ship or weapon.  Most of the extra loot was unwanted junk like more pirate and ludd packs and corrupted nanoforges - yuck!  More loot in Salvaging should not reroll loot, but simply add a chance for more loot on top of unskilled loot.  Now, I avoid Salvaging like the plague unless I want the level 1 ability.  Also, if I want more rare loot skill, better to spend it at Planetary Operations so I do not need to bring so many marines to raid markets (plus I can effectively govern one more colony at level 3).

Wyvern explained it better than I did a month or two ago.
Logged

RawCode

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #21 on: January 06, 2019, 08:53:52 AM »

Well, i do not actually like "level scaling", but...but this game actually need some form of level scaling to keep player from reaching "endgame" under single hour of game play.

Also i do not like seeded based loot, there are no reasons to use seeds instead of actually preplacing all loot directly, to support "looting skills", additional sections may be generated and stored, additional sections can be used by mods, or for story content.

As for story and progress, instead of just trying to explain, i will provide link to "live" implementation of system:
http://wogen.wikia.com/wiki/Gothic_3_Unique_Chests

TLDR, "chests" have 3 sections, first section is level scaled loot, that depend solely on level of player, at moment of chest opening, second section, is random scaled loot that depend on chest location (area level), third section is "list" of weapons that appear in specific order, ignoring player level and position of chest in the world.

This system can be used in SS to prevent player from getting paragon from first research station, perfect world inside very first yellow star system ever entered, and at same time, may be used to ensure, that perfect system and paragon will eventually spawn, no matter how unlucky player is.

As for planets, as long as player not actually entered system (or performed full survey), world feature may stay unfinalized, world is "habitable" but it's type and planetary features are not picked from list.
This can be used to delay "good" planets by picking "bad" modifiers from list, and later, reverse effect, by picking "good" modifiers from list, it may ever be used to spawn "gaia" world in exactly very last yellow star system explored by player.

This kinda kills "rogue like" spirit, but, it will provide smooth and rewarding gameplay, instead of spiky and jiggly "curve" of happiness and frustration (mostly frustration).
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8329
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #22 on: January 06, 2019, 04:00:13 PM »

When exploring, the thing I care the most about a system is how it looks. The Core Worlds are all cool and fun to explore. Empty systems are necessary, sure; but any system with less than 3 planets is just boring and I don't even want to explore it, I just leave immediately. That may be what was intended, but when half the sector is like that (Maybe I am just unlucky?), well, half the time spent exploring is just boring.

When building a colony I don't settle for anything other than Jungle/Terran Eccentric/Terran worlds right now, so I really like the idea of marking the systems that contain worlds with life as "special" (they already are, right? Just the fact there's life is awesome!) also have other interesting things in it, like an asteroid belt, a nebula, maybe at least 3 other planets, a gas giant with three moons, etc. Those worlds can all be 250% accessibility for all that matters. I just don't want the system to be... empty.
I do not mind a system with only one planet if that one planet is special, like say a 75% Terran planet with great resources.  May not be ideal colony since one colony alone may have trouble repelling all expeditions, but it would be a nice place anyway.

I remember one game where one of my first pirate bases was in a system with only one 100% Terran eccentric.  It is a decent colony candidate, and eventually became colony two.  (Colony one with 175% hazard water hole, which could have been 150% had I known Birdy's Decivilized removal trick at the time.)

But too many bare systems with useless planets is not very fun.  Just something to examine quickly for rare loot before moving on.

The systems I like the least are huge systems with lots of junk planets and no rare loot to be found, possibly nebula to slow down fleet travel as well.
Logged

Okaenia

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #23 on: January 07, 2019, 06:39:17 AM »

When exploring, the thing I care the most about a system is how it looks. The Core Worlds are all cool and fun to explore. Empty systems are necessary, sure; but any system with less than 3 planets is just boring and I don't even want to explore it, I just leave immediately. That may be what was intended, but when half the sector is like that (Maybe I am just unlucky?), well, half the time spent exploring is just boring.

When building a colony I don't settle for anything other than Jungle/Terran Eccentric/Terran worlds right now, so I really like the idea of marking the systems that contain worlds with life as "special" (they already are, right? Just the fact there's life is awesome!) also have other interesting things in it, like an asteroid belt, a nebula, maybe at least 3 other planets, a gas giant with three moons, etc. Those worlds can all be 250% accessibility for all that matters. I just don't want the system to be... empty.
I do not mind a system with only one planet if that one planet is special, like say a 75% Terran planet with great resources.  May not be ideal colony since one colony alone may have trouble repelling all expeditions, but it would be a nice place anyway.

I remember one game where one of my first pirate bases was in a system with only one 100% Terran eccentric.  It is a decent colony candidate, and eventually became colony two.  (Colony one with 175% hazard water hole, which could have been 150% had I known Birdy's Decivilized removal trick at the time.)

But too many bare systems with useless planets is not very fun.  Just something to examine quickly for rare loot before moving on.

The systems I like the least are huge systems with lots of junk planets and no rare loot to be found, possibly nebula to slow down fleet travel as well.

Yeah I dislike huge systems with nothing of interest too. I'm talking about making systems that already have something of interest that you're 100% sure the player will want to colonize (Like Terran worlds or systems with a sleeper ship) less empty and more interesting.

I'm pretty sure you had a moment when you found an awesome system and you felt super good; it's a reward for the player.
A single Terran world that is the only single object in the whole system beside its star is... well, rewarding too because they're so rare. But my reaction would be "uh, nice I guess", not the "THIS IS SUPER AWESOME" I would have if the system had even more planets, a ring system and a few moons. Or even better; two stars!

I can't find the words to explain it if you don't understand me, sorry. xD
« Last Edit: January 07, 2019, 06:42:59 AM by Okaenia »
Logged

Torch

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 64
  • Long-time lurker and space RPG fan, neutral good
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #24 on: January 07, 2019, 06:55:16 AM »

Ensuring that there are at least a few procedural systems of significant value and interest would set a good base for factions fighting with each other over it, too.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8329
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #25 on: January 07, 2019, 07:15:57 AM »

A humble system with a single excellent planet (that is ideal primary colony criteria) is an awesome find.  Well, maybe not ideal since some expeditions can beat defenses of a single colony.  They probably cannot against two large colonies in the same system.  It is less of a good find if system does not have a point for comm relay.  (I will smash Domain nav and sensor relays if it is the only way to get a comm relay in the system I want to claim.)

Terran planet with 75% hazard and all of the resources and not too far from core is an awesome find, regardless of system.  Some games do not even have 75% hazard Terrans, or they have a 75% Terran with bad resources and bad location (far from core).

Two stars are (mildly) annoying, especially if they make the system bigger.  I had that for my primary colonies in two of my games and wished they were only a single star.

Rings (asteroid belts) are annoying if I need to travel through them.

I dislike nebulas, especially if they overlap a jump gate.

I prefer my systems to be minimalist.  The best system for me is a small one with two great colony planets (two is enough to repel all expeditions, and more slows the game down), two or three points for relays, and nothing else.  Oh, and jump point near one of the planets.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2019, 07:17:32 AM by Megas »
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4741
  • Quantum Mechanic
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #26 on: January 07, 2019, 01:36:15 PM »

My main system at present is a 100% hazard arid with minimal resources orbiting a yellow star... that also has a black hole as a companion. No other planets, but it does have a domain comm relay and nav beacon and space for a third. Overall a nice world in an interesting system.
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3739
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #27 on: January 07, 2019, 06:31:00 PM »

A humble system with a single excellent planet (that is ideal primary colony criteria) is an awesome find.  Well, maybe not ideal since some expeditions can beat defenses of a single colony.  They probably cannot against two large colonies in the same system.  It is less of a good find if system does not have a point for comm relay.  (I will smash Domain nav and sensor relays if it is the only way to get a comm relay in the system I want to claim.)

Terran planet with 75% hazard and all of the resources and not too far from core is an awesome find, regardless of system.  Some games do not even have 75% hazard Terrans, or they have a 75% Terran with bad resources and bad location (far from core).

Two stars are (mildly) annoying, especially if they make the system bigger.  I had that for my primary colonies in two of my games and wished they were only a single star.

Rings (asteroid belts) are annoying if I need to travel through them.

I dislike nebulas, especially if they overlap a jump gate.

I prefer my systems to be minimalist.  The best system for me is a small one with two great colony planets (two is enough to repel all expeditions, and more slows the game down), two or three points for relays, and nothing else.  Oh, and jump point near one of the planets.
While a system with asteroid belts, nebulas, and a binary might not be the best, min-max optimal system, that is what makes a system interesting, both visually and gameplay-wise.  I genuinely hope Alex does not change the proc gen system to favor anything near as bland as that.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2019, 06:33:52 PM by The Soldier »
Logged
Quote from: Trylobot
I am officially an epoch.
Quote from: Thaago
Note: please sacrifice your goats responsibly, look up the proper pronunciation of Alex's name. We wouldn't want some other project receiving mystic power.

RawCode

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #28 on: January 07, 2019, 08:07:43 PM »

imho, game should not throw "best" planets at player with some exceptions, each planet should have something "bad" about it and no planet (with exceptions again) should be perfect.

getting 100% planet with low gravity and all resources just 1ly away from core is game over.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8329
    • View Profile
Re: Procedural Generation needs improvement
« Reply #29 on: January 07, 2019, 08:10:35 PM »

While a system with asteroid belts, nebulas, and a binary might not be the best, min-max optimal system, that is what makes a system interesting, both visually and gameplay-wise.  I genuinely hope Alex does not change the proc gen system to favor anything near as bland as that.
It is only visually interesting if it is unusual and player likes unusual.  Otherwise, all of the extra stuff in a permanent colony system can be an eyesore or unwanted clutter at best, or lag the game at worst.

I never said I want all systems to be my ideal colony system.  After all, the most planets I can colonize without alpha cores is eight, if I have all of the colony skills in Leadership and Industry.  In my current game, I have more than eight good planets to colonize (and I already colonized two), and picking which ones I want is torture.

Turns out having lots of nebula and several stable debris field is a slowdown magnet.  In my current game, I was almost ready to colonize my desert system next to core worlds until I noticed three or so stable debris fields slowed down the game.  That will be a problem if I get size 8+ colonies later then expeditions to slow down game even more due to more fleets and junk scattered around.  Since I have several more good colony candidates, I probably will pass that system up for others.

imho, game should not throw "best" planets at player with some exceptions, each planet should have something "bad" about it and no planet (with exceptions again) should be perfect.

getting 100% planet with low gravity and all resources just 1ly away from core is game over.
I have no problem with great planets.  They do not happen in every game.  Also, planets with everything may not be much use if we have industry slot limits.

What is the big deal about low gravity?  Not sure if +10 accessibility is worth +25 hazard.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3