The game is balance alright... to a fault

Yeah, you're right. I think the current system of map creation would be nice for balanced multiplayer games, so it should stay for that, but imho it gets a bit boring for single player. I would love some more options in the map creation screen which would allow us to create very random maps, or maps with an abundance of volcanic planets, for example, etc.

Allow us the set up the starting positions of the players (per star).

Allow us to set the distribution of planet types (without the need to mod the creation files).

Allow us the set the amount of resources the asteroids have, and if there are lots of them or only few of them.

That would be nice.

At the moment the pre-set galaxy sizes have specific numbers of stars/planets that will be used in generating them. I do agree though, some random options and a planet variety setting would be interesting.

I dont think the number is really an issue (although some variation is nice) its that the solar systems, which are supposed to be "random"(ishly) generated are rather symetric. personally I dislike how each faction seems to have their own collection of planets on each direction facing away from the star.

Ninja

That exactly what i meant

I would also like to see greater variety in galaxy structure and player starting position.

I think it could be interesting if:
- some planets could have more than a maximum of ~3-4 jump lanes. Making them hard to defend against multi-front attacks, but making them a good place to attack on multiple fronts.
- asteroids / planets had a variable number of resources, making certain planets 'better'

Currently every planet is the same (basically, neglecting planet type). I think there could be some planet that are 'better' and would thus be a source of greater conflict. Right now its really only about number of planets a player controls.

I also agree with SNinja, that ever player starts with an identical set of starter worlds, making the opening minutes even more predictable, which I feel could eventually lead to a 'known set of steps to best start the game', which imo detracts from strategy.

As it stands now, there is little incentive to initial galaxy scouting or colonizing far from your home world, since the galaxy set up is known.


The way that galciv2 balances starting positions would translate nicely here, imo. ie: if you start far away from other players you have less resources close by your home world than you would if you spawned right on top of 2 other players.

(I'm not asking for galciv2, I own that, I'm just asking for a little spice )

This needs to be fixed as an option to prevent repetition

bump

But the planet types are different. Terran has higher pop cap, thus higher taxes, ice has more crystal nodes (not metal though), volcanic gives you more fleet logistic points, and I think desert has more orbital logistics points? Not sure what the benefit of asteroids are though.

agreed, that sort of diversity would be much appreciated.

hows about you say it then?

and theres also the issue that in 20 planet solar systems you get a C-shaped phaselane on many occasions, and a weakened O-shape on the others.

asteroids are your glue in between the planets. additionally they are your major supply of metal

but still, I would like to see some asteroids with 2 metal, 2 crystal sometimes, or ice planets with 5 crystals, or maybe desert planets with nothing. point being that if I know the planet type, that doesnt nescessarily mean I should instantly know how many/what RuAs are there.

I did not notice the difference between planets, I like the concept though, I will have to take a look. (did I miss some documentation on that subject? was it in the tutorial and I'm just dense?). This is definitely the kind of diversity I would like to see more of. Make it worth my while to siege a planet 5 jumps from my borders, instead of moving sequentially.



Again I'm with SNinja. I would like to see 'better' and 'worse' types of the same planet.