Abudant Habitable Planets.

Maybe you should try other galaxy size to see if it is the same: it is possible that the total number of habitable planets (which have unique look) is limited.

I've been complaining about this for a while. I'm not saying they should all be class 10, but if I say abundant, I'm thinking abundant, as in no systems with 5 class zero planets. It's like a continent with nothing but mountains on it in Civ 3. you don't see it, because it's useless to the game.

For the most part planets nor relevant to game-play shouldnt be shown. I mean it is nice Eye candy but you cant od anything with them! If you could build stuff on em like bases ect that be ok. But in this game they are useless! Im sure mods will pop up for planet values eventually. In (Omg dont start the flames) Moo2 you had uninhabitable planets BECAUSE they could be made habitable. I mean if I see a system with 5 pq0 planets or one with 0 planets period makes no difference to me... So yeah useless but a tech that could amke em habitible would be super for the game. Maybe just turn em from 0 to 1 so you could extend range ect. (Or 2, I dont remember if you need a starport to extend range).

With uninhabitable planets you should be able to build missile silos (or something similar) which adds to the defensive capabilities to the planets and ships in that system. Just a little addition that would add strategic value to uninhabitable worlds IMO

Heh. Something should be done about the class zero planets, I agree...

Perhaps an orbital terraforming device at high tech levels?

yea im bugged by the desert orange planets in "abundant" setting. that could use some improvemeant.
as for "improving strategic importance"t i think starbases do the job well enough.

I have to say this seems to be a bit of a non-issue, at least from my point of view. You're dealing with a random system here (I'm pretty sure planets and classes are randomly allocated)... Let's say that under the abundant setting there is a 66% chance that a star system will contain a habitable planet. It's entirely possible (but unlikely) that one whole side of the galaxy will be completely devoid of habitable planets and that the other portion of the map will contain all of the planets.

In other words it's pot-luck. I agree that being subjected to this lottery draw can be frustrating at times, but that's just life. I've been in compromising situations before where my home world has been practically surrounded by uninhabitable systems and it's frustrating, but then you see other parts of the map which are densely populated. At other times I have found resources sitting right next to my home planet, and in one game the second planet in my home system was granted a base PQ increase about 10 turns into the game.

Randomness brings interesting variety, as I've come to learn. I once complained about too much randomness but then somebody rightly pointed out that if I didn't like the galaxy layout all I had to do was start a new game...

By the way. Uninhabitable planets don't harm anybody, and can be used strategically at times (path blocking). I would also point out that having star systems that consistently only displayed one lonely habitable planet (because the uninhabitable ones had been removed) would look quite silly. Terraforming uninhabitable planets late in the game (especially on larger maps) would be close to pointless.

If I say the number of Habitable planets I want is rare.
I expect one or two habitable planets.

If say abudant almost every planet I see should be habitable.
There is nothing random.

If you have a random chance say 66% which I think is too low ...I selected an abudant number of planets, most systems have say 5 planets so you should have 3 habitable planets. This does not happen most systems have 0 habitable planets, and if you are lucky one marginal planet.

Well, I know for sure that "most systems" are not in fact uninhabitable. Coz, liek, I'm leet. And also in my experience they're not. Maybe I'm just a lucky guy, or it could because I'm leet. Either way, I don't have any problems finding planets on abundant settings.

Also I'm not sure if you're aware how many habitable planets there would be on a huge galaxy if there were 3 for every star system. Using my powers of leet (a total guess) I'm betting there is an average of 1.5 systems per sector (star systems set to common). At 18x18 (I think) sectors for a total of 324 sectors you would get 486 habitable planets. Cup of simmering insanity anyone? Maybe that's possible right now, I don't know, but it's too many by my books. I could maybe understand more habitable planets per system on a tiny map though.

I play lots of rare habital worlds and rare star settings. That makes for games of just home world systems and empty stars on medium maps. Those bare stars don't look any lonelier then anything else on the map. At least, to me. Not that I find abundant all around yields much better results. Whim of the RNGods I suppose.

I really don't like all the PQ 0 worlds being included on the map. If there isn't a use for them, why have them? If there is a plan to make them usable in an expansion, I suppose they have a place, but overall, all they do is block the placement of the perfect every 3 tiles star basing (which makes zero sense, but that leads into another issue).

I really don't like all the PQ 0 worlds being included on the map. If there isn't a use for them, why have them?

I think its that way because it is what we would find once the human race gets to the point of colonizing other parts of the galaxy. Not that I disagree with you. I would rather send my colony ships to places I know that will have good planets.

maybe the % chance of an inhabitable planet in abundant setting should be increased some...

And set min and max values... (ie... abundant could have a min of 50% and max of 75% inhabitable planets, or some such)

Having to explore and look for habital planets is all part of the game. It is not very realist to have most of the planets habitable. However, maybe the habitability of the planets should vary from race to race. The perfect planet for humans might not be perfect for an alien race and vise versa.

I really don't like all the PQ 0 worlds being included on the map.

Well, if the PQ 0 worlds weren't on the map, then the Stellar cartography will be too powerful since it allows to show planets on the minimap. You will know then where nice stars are. And the only race that doesn't start with stellar cartography is the human.

Having to explore and look for habital planets is all part of the game. It is not very realist to have most of the planets habitable. However, maybe the habitability of the planets should vary from race to race. The perfect planet for humans might not be perfect for an alien race and vise versa.

I agree completely. While we breathe air with oxigen I guess some other race could find it poisonous and would prefer methane... I think this was implemented into MoO3 which could lead to multiple races findins ideal planets in the same system and not interfering with eachother.

It is my impression also that, since a few revisions back, the 'abundand habitable planets' setting no longer is connected to the map generator. I have tried different settings and map sizes but, on the whole, all maps seem to be pretty arid regardless -- typically I play on huge or large maps with rare starsystems, and I've had to build several starbases just to reach one habitable planet a couple of times. Seems odd.

Another thing I've noted is, that since the previous Galciv2 update the planet-square icons seem to be all scrambled for the bonuses, except the food symbol still seems associated with food bonuses, everything else has gone random here.

-Peter

While we breathe air with oxigen I guess some other race could find it poisonous and would prefer methane

Then I will ask a very stupid question: can intelligent life appear and live in an air with methane?

Then I will ask a very stupid question: can intelligent life appear and live in an air with methane?

Can you think of a reason why not?

If ANY life can appear in such atmosfere, why not an intelligent one in time? And we have environments on Earth teeming with life that aren't much different from such a planet.

I read a paper once that explained that it should be possible for Aliens to evolve on a planets without an Oxygen-Nitrogen based atmospehere. I guess in GC they are call Space Sharks

Not to mention that even though nature has sterilized earth a few times, life still came back when conditions were acceptable for it.

Has anyone ever figured out what "dextribopping" (-2 spelling) is? Mr. Smith wrote about it in the Lensman series.

W/R
Suralle

Well, if the PQ 0 worlds weren't on the map, then the Stellar cartography will be too powerful since it allows to show planets on the minimap. You will know then where nice stars are. And the only race that doesn't start with stellar cartography is the human.

But there is no reason in GalCiv for the humans to not start with Stellar cartography. Or for the aliens to start with it, when the humans don't. Not in GC2.

In GC1, it was a matter of honoring the first GC (OS/2) version, which had a back story to explain why the humans didn't know the local neighborhood, right? Well, we, like the aliens, have a good idea what nearby star systems have sizable planets, and even a few that have "earthish" planets. In the next ten years, we will know every earth and venus type planet within several hundred light-years of us. All thanks to one simple autonomous satellite (presuming it gets launched successfully as currently scheduled).

So... now that we are up to the Dread Lords part of the GC saga, shouldn't the humans know where all the useful planets are? Or just have everyone start off the same (no one knows) and be done with it. Brad has written about how he has so masterfully taught the AI to scout out the galaxy map and find the good worlds. So there isn't a game play reason to have the AI know where the worlds are (ie, start with Stellar Cartography) anymore. For fun, I would suggest that no race knows to start with. Exploring adds to the fun, so let's just have it so no race knows where the worlds are and be done with it. Sound good?

So... now that we are up to the Dread Lords part of the GC saga, shouldn't the humans know where all the useful planets are? Or just have everyone start off the same (no one knows) and be done with it. Brad has written about how he has so masterfully taught the AI to scout out the galaxy map and find the good worlds. So there isn't a game play reason to have the AI know where the worlds are (ie, start with Stellar Cartography) anymore. For fun, I would suggest that no race knows to start with. Exploring adds to the fun, so let's just have it so no race knows where the worlds are and be done with it. Sound good?

Actually, this has been addressed. Check out this thread where Draginol is discussing the AI:

https://www.galciv2.com/Forums.aspx?ForumID=164&AID=96325#751980

One theory i have about the galaxy is that some systems actually have a habitable planet but they show 0, because they are 'reserved' for a minor race/event. Isn't it odd that they just 'pop up' like that ?

I really think some kind of setting can be made besides (on/off) .. maybe like double/normal/half minor alien races and of course off. If I choose 3 AI enemys to play against and then having 6 or 7 minor races on top of that is just going to make you mad.

Well, I don't like the difference between "Major" and "minor" race. I always feel that if you are going to include them, let them go, and if they grab a good bit of empire, that will make them major, and otherwise, they are minor. I've played lots of GC1 games, and it wasn't that unusual on my medium and large map games to have some "major" race be weaker then an early appearing minor race. Seemed weird to have minors stronger then some of the majors, and only the fact that the minors don't invade worlds keeping those weak majors around.

If no PQ 0 worlds were included/shown on the world, then I wouldnt' be upset if an AI minor race was spawned and had a new world added to a star that way. After all, what's the point of picking now? In GC2 Beta5, it turns an empty star system into a starting star system for the minors now (ie, a home world and 1 or more "secondary" worlds). So what's the difference? I didn't expect to do anything with those PQ 0 worlds anyways. It's not like you can build orbital science facilities or deploy mining or anything. Again, if you cannot use them, then they don't serve a purpose. What do they do? Decorate the map? Isn't that what the atrocious background is for already?

Again, if you cannot use them, then they don't serve a purpose. What do they do? Decorate the map? Isn't that what the atrocious background is for already?

Well, PQ 0 worlds have no direct use. But events can target them and make them useful:
- artifact that raises PQ of uncolonized world
- being home for new minor (in which case they become a nice PQ 15)

And if you have stellar cartography and display planets on the minimap, you aren't sure that the star surrounded by 5 planets is more useful than a star with one planet.