Matrix Games Forums

It may look cool however, with the new 3d movment, Ships have to fly around a asteroid. If you see how difficult it is already for ships that are at the wrong side of a Planet to fly around to a spaceport you can imagine how impossible it is if they have extra to fly around dozends of asteroids.

its simply annoying so please no asteroid fields around planets, especially Homeworlds, it makes anyway no sense and is just a annoyance.

Also please way less Nebulas. even if you set them to very sparse, sometimes half of the galaxy is covered by them and your ships are stupid enough to fly in and go lost in space with disabled hyperdrives. Or make the AI better so they fly around them.

I would already be happy if this was an option like the ring with the help of the in game editor.
Example: 1. option normal ring, 2 option asteroid ring, 3, option no...
the ring is a good thing, but because the bases are too close to the planet, so in its present form it is really irritating. In DW:U, the station was above the planet so it was hard to designate the planet, but the ships had no problem reaching it. it would be good if the location of the base to be built could be determined by me, you wouldn't have to build 5 bases in an asteroid belt because the idiot construction ship can't find the belt core.

There is plenty of room for the asteroids to be generated farther out from the planet but that will increase the amount of mining stations needed to cover them all. For me its mainly an annoyance early game because your ships are so pokey moving around. Once you get decent engines its not an issue anymore.

I too would want it to be options to have asteroids or not around planets and also less nebula. The current lowest nebula option is still TOO much for me.

Removing asteroids around planets is something you can mod yourself rather easily in Orbtypes.xml. SPACE AGE will have those removed and only have asteroid belts (or isolated abstractions of the whole belt anyway).

Miletkir wrote: Mon Mar 21, 2022 10:47 pm Removing asteroids around planets is something you can mod yourself rather easily in Orbtypes.xml. SPACE AGE will have those removed and only have asteroid belts (or isolated abstractions of the whole belt anyway).

Nice to know.

in my oppinion planetary belts should be reserved for planets with halos, as a physical representation of the halo.
Because I actually can't imagine a world being very hospitable while the natural equivalent of nukes in orbit.

On the cheesy side of things, it is awesome to have abundant ressources on my homeworlds.

Emperor0Akim wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 8:19 am

Miletkir wrote: Mon Mar 21, 2022 10:47 pm Removing asteroids around planets is something you can mod yourself rather easily in Orbtypes.xml. SPACE AGE will have those removed and only have asteroid belts (or isolated abstractions of the whole belt anyway).

Nice to know.

in my oppinion planetary belts should be reserved for planets with halos, as a physical representation of the halo.
Because I actually can't imagine a world being very hospitable while the natural equivalent of nukes in orbit.

On the cheesy side of things, it is awesome to have abundant ressources on my homeworlds.

Unfortunatly they mostly usless. Mining Ships will ignore them for most part and even if try to mine here comes again the issue with flying with sublight to and around them and than back to Spaceport again around the Planet and Asteroids.

Its basically same issue with, sometimes, Gasplanets or Moons being very close to your World. Its looks like a + but in fact its a huge minus as your Ships will not warp to the destination but crawl with sublight to and back.

Schatten wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 12:20 pm

Emperor0Akim wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 8:19 am

Miletkir wrote: Mon Mar 21, 2022 10:47 pm Removing asteroids around planets is something you can mod yourself rather easily in Orbtypes.xml. SPACE AGE will have those removed and only have asteroid belts (or isolated abstractions of the whole belt anyway).

Nice to know.

in my oppinion planetary belts should be reserved for planets with halos, as a physical representation of the halo.
Because I actually can't imagine a world being very hospitable while the natural equivalent of nukes in orbit.

On the cheesy side of things, it is awesome to have abundant ressources on my homeworlds.

Unfortunatly they mostly usless. Mining Ships will ignore them for most part and even if try to mine here comes again the issue with flying with sublight to and around them and than back to Spaceport again around the Planet and Asteroids.

Its basically same issue with, sometimes, Gasplanets or Moons being very close to your World. Its looks like a + but in fact its a huge minus as your Ships will not warp to the destination but crawl with sublight to and back.

You can manually instruct the construction ship to place a construct exactly where you want it around a celestial body. But really this is a complete non-issue past the REAL early game.

Emperor0Akim wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 8:19 am Because I actually can't imagine a world being very hospitable while the natural equivalent of nukes in orbit.

Huh huh.

Emperor0Akim wrote: Mon Mar 21, 2022 10:47 pm in my oppinion planetary belts should be reserved for planets with halos, as a physical representation of the halo.

I suppose you mean debris rings like we have around our gas giants. Debris size varies, from dust to a few mountain-sized objects, but I think the asteroids as currently depicted in the game still wouldn't do. It's better to keep them for actual asteroid belts, which ideally I would see completed with some low res, low resource-greedy texture representing an entire ring.

Schatten wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 12:20 pm Its basically same issue with, sometimes, Gasplanets or Moons being very close to your World. Its looks like a + but in fact its a huge minus as your Ships will not warp to the destination but crawl with sublight to and back.

Sublight engines in SPACE AGE also have their power increased 2-fold (that is, speed twice as fast, not twice the amount of power usage...).