Quote:

Original post by TechnoGoth You have to consider the strategic impact of allowing multiple buildings. In MOO2 the reason for limiting the player to one of each building was a means to force the player to expand by limiting the value of each indvidual planet. If you can find a means to achieve this and allow multiple buildings then you should be all means. An idea that springs to mind of how to achieve this is through space. if you take the MOO2 resource division then you can think of space in these terms. A planet's surface has a number of units of space,a unit of space can be in one the following states. 1)Urban - The number of units of space devoted to urban determines maximum population. 2)Agriculture - The number of units devoted to agriculture determines the maximum food production, actual value is based on the number of works devoted to agriculture. 3)Manufacturing - The number of units devoted to manufacturing determines the maximum mineral production, actual value is based on the number of works devoted to manufacturing . 4)Research- The number of units devoted to Researchdetermines the maximum science production, actual value is based on the number of works devoted to Research. 5)Facilities - Each facility takes up a number of units of space. 6)Unused - Units of space not yet assigned. 7)Unusable - Units of space which you can not use for what ever reason. So in this way the player has to balance space with their desires for that planet. If they want to create a bread basket planet they could devote most of the planet to agriculture. At the same time if there is no unused space on a planet then the player has decied what existing infurstructure they want to give up in order to continue to expand. New space units of space could become available to a planet with the advent of certain technologies such as aquatic and suberterrainin construction.

You've basically described Ascendancy's planetary management scheme. :P Good work, though. :)

- Rob

Quote:

I've never played Outpost 2, but if I'm correct, it's pretty similar (in premise) to the first Outpost, right? If so, then since the game deals with a single planet, I think there's too much detail to apply its model to an entire galaxy of planets.

Outpost 2 is similar in concept to Outpost 1, though it is not as complicated as you might imagine. Colonies are based on mission to mission gameplay, with the player building a new colony each mission. So the scale of construction on the single planet is not excessively detailed. The largest base is probably relative in size to a base you'd normally find in a RTS like Command & Conquer or Starcraft. However, they spiced things up with the need to manage colony moral and needs, such as suppling enough living quarters, damage response teams for earthquakes and natural disasters, medical facilities to reduce death rates, and food production.

**edit** You can download a Demo of Outpost 2 from the link below to see what its like:
http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/file_description/0,fid,3611,00.asp

Quote:

In Ascendancy, each planetary structure takes up 1 unit of space and 1 unit of population. The number of structures possible on a given planet at a given time is dependent upon the size of the planet and the population at that time. Are you saying, then, that you'd rather have different amounts of people required for different structure types?

Not so much different numbers for different structures, more like a maximum of 3(or so) per structure in general. This can allow more leeway for the player to decide how he wants to build and allocate his colony. There are of course pitfalls to putting to many people into industrial, instead of into food production and residential facilities(Idle ppl like making babies).

[Edited by - Gyrthok on November 20, 2004 6:42:29 PM]