SMR-CNN

Posted: **Wed Oct 15, 2003 2:20 pm**

Yeah, I think no ports near planets are a problem too.

Also I think CA's are to far away. Noone even try to mine their planets, its just to hard. I think that the mineproblem from SM is already taken care off with no pacts and single mines expiring in a day. The problem back then where the upper minefields made by several alliance and people using singles as minefields to drain turns. I don't believe placing CA's far from planets is needed.

Also there been some talk about the way planets gals are placed. Think it was Immy who said that planets should be part of the game, and not like now (and more or less as far back as I remember) be placed in outlaying gals where the only reason to go are the planets. Drop the small planet gals. Having planets in all neutral gals could make for a very interesting game.

Which is what I would like to see for next game. Planets faster to build early in game like we talked about this trread and planets in all neutral gals, so planets become a bigger part of the game.

Posted: **Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:19 pm**

ya ports was probably one of the main reasons we had so many planets last game.

add em back.

Posted: **Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:46 am**

Didn't think about the ports being so far away-but even with that, I still think it takes too long to get a planet built up. Three weeks of near-perfect building gets you around a level 25 planet, and by then there are warbirds out and about.

If they were in neutral galaxies, that might help-or at least put ports in the planet galaxies so there's another reason to be there. The planet-only galaxies are an interesting concept, but poorly executed under the current setup.

Posted: **Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:36 am**

Planets should be made part of game instead of being something laying in small gals where noone goes.

Posted: **Sat Oct 18, 2003 1:03 am**

RandyOrsolo wrote:
planet level 0-10: 1/4 time needed to build
10-20: 1/2 time
20-30: 3/4 time
30-50: full time
50-60: 1.5x build time
60-70: 3x build time

Dude, I may be biased, but this allows for easy understanding, as for ports and CA's they r too far away, but this would rule, help ppl get started and allow for more possible PB's lol

Posted: **Sat Oct 18, 2003 1:06 am**

OmegaRenegade wrote:This is a fine setup if you want everyone to be using fed, but I think alot of players want people to use planets again, and if I remember that was what they designed this map to be, unfortunatly it didnt work.

The real problem is that there is no real gain from using a planet, not a long term one since sooner or later you are going to be hit, so alliances choose to use fed, and planets are also a whole lot harder to build and defend this game, so you get everyone using fed or a DE.

The solution is to make planets easier to build, and to make it so an alliance cant afford not to take a galaxy. Here is my proposal:

The green is the Hub galaxy, which will contain the CA's. Its linked to every galaxy in the game and would be very big, and will be filled pretty much like it is this game (ports, random locations etc, maybe fed) Contains all sizes of routes.

The red are the racial galaxies, which would also be similar to this games setup, it may also be benifical to make sure it contains less profitable routes (max 4x?) These are linked to both the HUB Gal, and a planetary galaxy.

The yellow are the planetary galaxies. These are bigger than they are now (maybe 16x16) and contain planets and locations setup like now. You'll notice there are no trade galaxies, thats because the planet galaxies will contain GOOD trade routes (6x and up?).

The blue lines are of course the warps.

What this does for gameplay:

By linking planet galaxies directly to the CA galaxy makes it easier for alliances to mine thier galaxy, adding security. And alliances will be motivated to secure a galaxy to protect the trade routes they contain. Planets will be easier to build since there will be ports in the same galaxy and it will be harder for a planet to be hit also making it a better option to use the time and resources to take a galaxy. Since trade wont be as profitable elsewhere traders will look to planet gals for real trading, which will also somewhat balance out the exp gained from hunting.

Also it would force those alliances that send 6 players to take out a PSF to change tactics a bit, since the best routes would be protected, it would also move fighting out of the racial galaxies where some innocent newbies get caught in the crossfire and moves it into the Hub galaxy, which would be a real battle ground since it contains all warps and the CA's.

Variations:

Change the warps, linking either racials and/or where and how many warps lead to planet gals, this changes defendablility of the planet galaxies. Make the Hub galaxy have some awsome routes, which makes traders decide if they want security or high risk high payoff.

I think the current layout needs to be changed, and I rather like this new one... course I'm a bit biased, so what do all you think?

This is PERFECT. It would really allow for exceptional teamwork and a great balance. Planets could be stocked easier and be abvle to be held easier yet easy to break if good teamwork is employed.. I LOVE IT

Posted: **Sat Oct 18, 2003 8:28 am**

Looks great to me

Posted: **Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:18 pm**

Rejected

SMR-CNN

Planet building

Re: Planet building