| Star Trek Fan Games http://bote2.square7.ch/forum/ |
|
| Planets For Supremacy? http://bote2.square7.ch/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1111 |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | ZDarby [ 30 Aug 2006, 10:27 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Planets For Supremacy? |
Would it be possible to define worlds in terms of atributes instead of classes? Mass. Density. Surface Temp. Water. Atmosphere density. Radiation. Geologic Activity. Geologic complexity. Etc. As you tech gets better, it can effect certain traits more, pulling that planet closer to habitable. You could still have any one of the methods for terraforming discussed above but you wouldn't be using these over-simplified definiitions... Of course, this might be an extremely bad idea of mine. I don't know. What do you think? |
|
| Author: | mstrobel [ 01 Sep 2006, 19:08 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Planets For Supremacy? |
I considered implementing more detailed planet qualities. MoO3 did that, and that game ended up feeling more like playing with spreadsheets. I think it's just too much detail for most people. I don't even want to think about the equations that would be required to determine the desirablilty of a planet for a species given those traits, or how they would affect other factors like ground combat. |
|
| Author: | ZDarby [ 01 Sep 2006, 20:59 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Planets For Supremacy? |
Actually, I was talking about 'under the hood' representations. The front end would still be one of those already discussed, but the internals would be more accurate..... Um... Well.... Now that I say it aloud..... Forget it. Having it represented as classes or having it represented as attributes under the hood would change nothing to the player. So, forget it. I retract my suggestion. |
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|