Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Young

2 (1.1%)

Balanced

16 (9.1%)

Old

27 (15.3%)

Mixed

115 (65.3%)

A bit of everything

16 (9.1%)

Total Members Voted: 176

[Thaago]

Hah, as much as that sounds interesting, it also sounds like an amount of content work that would be more in tune with something like "an expansion" rather than "a Sector config setting"

... I do really like the idea of getting historical, though, hmm.

Oh yeah for sure! But you could look at it as a way to get a ton of fresh replayability for comparatively little new content required. It would require new descriptions, some tweaks to the core systems that could mostly be done using existing assets for the visuals, tweaks to the sector generation, and at least a few unique quests. Certainly not an insignificant amount of work, but I'd say it would be some very cost effective work in term of new gameplay offered.

If the changes are large enough, it would certain fit the bill for some post launch content.

Oh yes please, mark this somewhere with three red explanation marks for after 1.0 (if you plan post launch content at all ofc)

I love the idea. A combination of more refined player starting options together with sectors time/status options would be very neat indeed. With unique starts for certain time periods and maybe a different prevalence of certain ship types during different times ect.     

In the vein of 'post launch ideas that are a lot of work' that go with this: this provides a natural way of doing a 'new game plus' or 'legacy' type game. The different historical scenarios can actually have win conditions, and what the player ends up doing (faction relations, quests completed, etc) could then be saved and imported into a new game as part of the sector gen.

As an example, if one scenario/historical period was the founding of the Sindrian Dictat, then games started in a later period, with a new character, would have the option of importing the choices the player (who played Andrada, presumably) had made.

I mention this because 1) it adds replayability and 2) 'legacy' games tend to be extremely popular.

[Hellya]

I did 30 or so games and used command console to surveyall. It seemed like the difference between the types was minimal.

Only with old galaxy, which I tried the most, there were a two maps with a hazard 50 planet. That would be the only one that I would select with that 10% +/- chance of getting a 50 hazard planet. Between all 4 types there was always a handful of 75 hazard planets with a range from excellent to low resources and food. Claimed planets were not selected as they would be core systems and static with each game.

[Sy]

one option for physical sector generation that i think could be interesting, and have some effect on actual gameplay, would be about hyperspace cloud generation:

on one end of a slider (or of a set of choices) would be almost the entirety of the sector (except around starsystems) covered in clouds, but with long, continuous (though not necessarily straight) tunnels between the systems.

the other end of the slider would have much less hypercloud density, but with more random spread and size of patches of clouds sprinkled around the place.

the idea here is that for people who don't really enjoy having to pay close attention to hyperspace terrain and prefer to just plough right through most storms (whether it's beneficial to do so or not) would have an option to reduce the overall coverage of clouds. whereas for people who do enjoy paying attention to terrain (and maximizing speed or supply efficiency), there would be clear paths to follow between constellations, for long journeys.

[ahrenjb]

For some time I played exclusively with Mixed, but rececently I've made the transition to Old and am enjoying it. Not a very scientific observation as I'm playing with some mods that affect these things now, but I have the impression that Old sectors provide somewhat more interesting exploration on average.

[Igncom1]

I'm playing with a young age right now and I honestly can't tell the difference.

Maybe there are less habitable planets, maybe, but from what I can see I still get just as much surveying drones, remnants, and ruined colonies/salvageable stations as my last game in old age.

And seeing as you aren't likely to really be wanting more then one mega colony anyway, i'm not sure that's really much of a change.

I just wish I could turn the clouds down, they just annoy me to no end. Get caught with a BB in a storm and you may as well save scum to save time/supplies/effort and so on. I honestly kinda preferred when it simply nuked your CR over being propelled out of the sector, assuming the clouds are large enough.

[Megas]

I like to have at least two mega colonies per system, for overlapping defenses, and I like multiple systems for convenient pit stops along the way of exploration.  Colonies should be big for 1) more income from population, 2) bigger patrols from colonies' High Command, and 3) higher production limit for Heavy Industry.  (It would be nice to produce an endgame fleet with capitals in only a month instead of several.)

Storms in 0.9 are a vast improvement over pre 0.9.  If my fleet gets paralyzed in a storm before 0.9, it was reload time.  Now, my fleet rides them most of the time for the extra speed.  That said, clouds can be excessive at times.

[Sfaus]

I also would like to see "circle galaxy" instead of a rectangle one.