Losing planet good for extractors

If you're taking over a planet by culture, as you know, as it's influence gets lower, the output from the planet and extractors gets lower. However, if the influence his 0, and the planet becomes neutral, suddenly all of is extractors in that territory go from 0% efficiency to 100% efficiency, and stay that way until destroyed. Is that a bug or just a really weird design decision.

I don't understand why you losing control of a planet under culture conflict should be beneficial to you.
25,711 views 10 replies
Reply #1 Top
This is just a total guess, so sue me if I'm wrong.

A planet's loyalty or whatever seems to determine the resource output effeciency, which makes sense. I believe it not only affects the taxes, but also the crystal and metal, i.e. 50% loyalty would only net you 50% of the taxes you would normally collect, as well as 50% metal/crystal.

Anyway, when you lose the planet, I'm guessing that the metal and crystal production has to be slaved to another planet. So either the AI picks another one of your worlds to attach that production to (which may have a higher loyalty, thus netting you higher resources), or more than likely it simply defaults the loyalty on those resources to 100%, since they lost their planet.

Can a dev confirm this?
Reply #2 Top
I think it just gets set to 100%, because there is no 'modifier' to adjust it upwards or downwards, so it just comes out at 100%
Reply #3 Top
I'm going with Durikkan on this. An interesting catch, still :P
Reply #4 Top
I don't think so, I think if you have extractors on an uncolonized world it treats them like asteroid belt/gas giant extractors. Full-value resource.

I'm sure it wasn't intentional.
Reply #5 Top
The gas giants thing is a little weird too, I've had a gas giant extractor in the heart of the enemy empire, and yet, I still get 100% of its income.
Reply #6 Top
Well yeah, Durikkan's statement implied that you get the full amount :P It's tricky though.. on the one hand you still have the mines, and so it makes sense that you'd get the income. But it's the planet that modifies the income, each mine doesn't check how far away it is, so hmm :P
Reply #7 Top
Interesting observation. It seems to that if culture is the only alternative to bombardment for acquiring planets, you should loose all of the orbital structures on a planet when it defects from your empire.

Would such a result be unbalancing?
Reply #8 Top
Interesting observation. It seems to that if culture is the only alternative to bombardment for acquiring planets, you should loose all of the orbital structures on a planet when it defects from your empire.

Would such a result be unbalancing?


Yes.

You think siege frigate spam is an issue now? Imagine if as soon as the planet health meter reached 0 and the planet went neutral all the structures in orbit simultaneously exploded/started rapidly losing HP.


I would never build another Cobalt/LRM frigate in my life.
Reply #9 Top
I agree with Kade, but what if the orbiting structures just became neutral, ceased supplying resources, and became the property of the next colonizing empire? That could still be problematic I suppose, since you would lose planetary resource income after a successful siege frigate attack, and you might need those resources to retake the planet and recover within a reasonable amount of time.

I guess the problem still boils down to the much-reviled siege frigate spam strategy, which makes glassing a planet too easy. I don't feel like it's a bug, just an unfortunate consequence.

-HD

Reply #10 Top
I think all production in that gravity well should just drop to 0 and everything essentially should go offline. I don't think they should suddenly lose ownership of it though.