I've just come to see your thread now, and quickly skipped over it. You've suggested a lot of things some of us VIPs had been calling for before ES2 went public (especially climates and colonization), so you have my fullest support on this matter.

I just want to say that the OP's direction is a fantastically good move and I would love to see the colonization tech's reworked in this direction.  It would be a great way to enhance race/faction differentiation while having it still make logical/thematic sense.  Seems like it would be relatively straightforward to implement?

Kweel_Nakashyn wrote:

Somebody pointed I had the same idea in the "Era by field" thread. While I agree on the OP and vote for the thread, I'm not sure this would work in an "Era by tech" based research because there's 2 major problems for me here :

Can you post a link? Didn't remember it, but I'm interested.

- when considering faction vs faction, in early game the current "flawed" system solves something this new system have : Cravers would not attack Sophons until they make very far from Craver homeworld research (so they can steal Sophon's planet : they have to go from Forest to Artic).

In Early game, this would ends in "I must research lots of stuff before actualy attack someone". Or "someone attacked me, he lost, but I have no interest in retaliating before I make a lot of research".

In the end, in early game your major enemies are players using the same faction as you.

With an "Era by field" research, this is a problem too but this is working better because you don't need to learn a lot of tech to target one planet in particular. You need some, but not as many as in the actual "Era by tech" system.

Ok, now "colonization" conflicts could be The-Mother-Of-All-War-Punishement.
Actually, there's not many goals in just making a war vs some other faction just to pew-pew their ships. We should have some interest in waging a war without being able to colonize someone (I'm not sure you can actually settle on a faction's planet if you don't have the adequate tech, I would have to verify this ingame).

Didn't thought this way. But you're right. As I can see there are two solutions when you conquer a system with a colonized planet from another faction that you have the necessary tech:

• The pop is there. You enslave from space, menacing to nuke'em or similar, but not live there. You get the bonus, but your pop sill not grow in this planet until you get the correct tech. The original faction pop can still grow there as it was doing before.
• Your people live in the original faction infrastructures. As it is not well adapted, you get an approval penalty (like -1 or -2) for every pop of your faction living in this planet, that stacks with planet type approval penalties.

Probably there are more options, but for now I haven't more ideas.

Es1 deal with it not having pop from different factions (all was the same), but I didn't look at how is actually Es2 dealing with it, as in the actual state you can invade a system without having the techs to colonize its planets, as long as a faction has colonized it someway.

- about balance, Lumeris likes Ocean and Dust. Dust planet are very far from them. From Ocean, this means they need to unlock 4 lines and 3 rows to go to Desert planets which were the best Dust planets (not considerating gaz giants).

Sophon, on the other hand, like Cold and Science. Artic planet are allready giving them good science bonuses and they only need one row of research to go to Barrens which were the best ES1 science planets (not considerating gaz giants).

Another con I didn't consider. As previous two considerations:

• Lumeris pop gives bonus to dust. It should allow you to keep until you have the techs.
• As in my idea every faction has its own chart, you can do a weird chart for Lumeris, making dry more close than it should be if you follow the direct path.

Hell, you were right. Again!

This is not balanced. What I was proposing doesn't solved that problem too.

didn't read your post, but actual stage has lots of issues, and people doesn't seems to like it, so any proposition to devs should be welcome.

@lo_fabre : https://www.games2gether.com/endless-space-2/forum/66-game-design/thread/21749-fixing-tech-tree-ideas-discussion

About colonization, it's in the end of the thread (i don't know how to direct link to a post here).

Kweel_Nakashyn wrote:

@lo_fabre : https://www.games2gether.com/endless-space-2/forum/66-game-design/thread/21749-fixing-tech-tree-ideas-discussion

About colonization, it's in the end of the thread (i don't know how to direct link to a post here).

https://www.games2gether.com/endless-space-2/forum/66-game-design/thread/21749-fixing-tech-tree-ideas-discussion?page=1#post-218356

You can link to a post but it is somewhat cumbersome as you have to find out what the post id is by inspecting the page html and finding the post id in the div element containing the post ^^

Hope that was the right one.

AndreasK wrote:

Kweel_Nakashyn wrote:

@lo_fabre : https://www.games2gether.com/endless-space-2/forum/66-game-design/thread/21749-fixing-tech-tree-ideas-discussion

About colonization, it's in the end of the thread (i don't know how to direct link to a post here).

https://www.games2gether.com/endless-space-2/forum/66-game-design/thread/21749-fixing-tech-tree-ideas-discussion?page=1#post-218356

You can link to a post but it is somewhat cumbersome as you have to find out what the post id is by inspecting the page html and finding the post id in the div element containing the post ^^

Hope that was the right one.

Thanks. Good and interesting post. I think is a very close idea, but different implementation.

Awesome colonization researching approach.

Because yes, I don't think there is much technical difference between settling on Ocean vs Atoll, or Ash vs Volcano.

And more importantly, the colonization techs are taking too much space in research queue, 4 techs per era out of 10

Skipping those is NOT an option either.

In general this leads to quite strict and repetitive teching beeline in every single game, as opposed to some legit strategical choices.

Asuzu wrote:

Awesome colonization researching approach.

Because yes, I don't think there is much technical difference between settling on Ocean vs Atoll, or Ash vs Volcano.

And more importantly, the colonization techs are taking too much space in research queue, 4 techs per era out of 10

Skipping those is NOT an option either.

In general this leads to quite strict and repetitive teching beeline in every single game, as opposed to some legit strategical choices.

This!

I really love the idea, its a bit convoluted at first but as you start to understand it, it makes perfect sense.

Having separate Techs for every planet type is a bit much considering you need the research freed up for other things (like Dust  generation buildings if you're going for an economic victory for example and extra modules to protect yourself).

Also being forced to research those planet types will make you start to hate it as you want to expand during the early/mid game and not waste precious research on that one planet (which might have valuable resources).

Updated original posts with schemes trying to make it clearer. Not new ideas.

Repeat: I'm not graphic designes, so any improvement suggestion will be welcome.

Trentius wrote:

But to get that +4 massive increase, you had to research techs that gave less opportunities. Take for example a player starting the center of the temperature scale and taking only techs for that scale. With 3 techs, he's gonna have 4 available types, since techs spread your available by 1 row on that scale. He then gets a Humidity tech, netting 4 new available types at once, for a total of 8 (a rectangle of 4 by 2). 

In contrast, a player that has +2 rows in Temperature and +1 rows in Humidity gets 6 planets type (when the other one has 4). When he gets a new humidity row, he gains 3 new types, or a total of 9 (3 by 3 square).

Just to clarify, as it doesn't apper explicited in my first pos, what I thought was that each faction chart will be centered in its planet homeworld type, and all chart rotate according to it, except for extreme enviroments (asteroids,..), giving every faction similar possibilities, at least in number of colonizable planets. That wa to avoid imbalances for factoins extrange enough to start in say an ice planet.

Want to say, because there are few posts that are impling it working other ways, and I forgot to put in my first post.

The point here is techs don't unlock new planet types straight up, they spread your 'colonization area' on the chart by one row or column, so technically the same 'length' is gained for each one. Whether or not you optimize that area (that is, always being square) is up to you. No tweaking of costs would be required, since everyone gains the same possibilities from a tech; the net gain in available types depends only on your previous choices.

Good observation here^^. It is close to my original idea. Also it opens new strategic decision, as you may prefer go for an specific planet type instead of growing the square area.

Some sort of Dev acknowledgement of this thread / topic would be nice.

Given that these suggestions (which are fantastic IMHO) are linked to the tech tree, it seems to me that thinking about these changes in the context of revamping the tech tree is pretty critical from a timing standpoint.  Dev's - please take a look here at what's being suggested.

Quick acknowledgement of the thread: sound ideas in there. I can't speak as to how these all mesh with the plans our designers have for colonization and planet grid (as shown in XorUnison's idea), but that's not to say this won't inform our decisions.

Cool.  You All rock ;)

Your ideas have been mentioned on the live stream! A kind of success, I'd say!

mixerria wrote:

Your ideas have been mentioned on the live stream! A kind of success, I'd say!

Wow!Yesterday arrived from a - well deserved - 5 days vacations and just seen it. I want to see again this stream, as I didn't get some things.

lo_fabre wrote:

mixerria wrote:

Your ideas have been mentioned on the live stream! A kind of success, I'd say!

Wow!Yesterday arrived from a - well deserved - 5 days vacations and just seen it. I want to see again this stream, as I didn't get some things.

https://www.twitch.tv/amplitudestudios/v/102912513 have fun! :D

Returning to this post, after reading various threads I found one telling that Lumeris has penalties in an Atoll (!?), may be it's a mistake, but this make me think that happiness will be better in lore consistence if it's tied to each faction homeworld planet type. This way in your homeworld type yo'll get +5 happiness bonus, and when you get far from this planet type, your bonus will descent to 0, -5, -10, -15, -20  and -25 in the most different planet type.

Also consider tie it to population at population level. This, as an example, way an assimilated deuyuvian in a gas giant will get +5 happiness, but if you move to a cold planet to stack science bonus, it will go into a penalty, regardless what faction you're playing. I understand that this last part may be more complex to implement, but the idea is here.

I like the idea that the colonization tech should depend on your homeworld type. It just makes sense. 

Also the further away from the idea homeworld type a world get, the more tech should be required to effectively settle it. 

Another feature I would like to see is that tech unlocks the ability to even colonize it. But depending on how far away it is you can only put so many pops on it due to incompatibility. 

At least without making massive infrastructure investments. That way later in the game technology is what allows you to make the best of your systems. 

That way you would not just get say... colonize barren, and then have it become a major metropolis hub in no time. I am sure you get the idea. 

But thank you for this post. Very descriptive, and have some good ideas! :) 

First off, I think this is a great idea to create diversity in the early game, and it could help certain races get a specialized feeling from the easily-available worlds (although I'd change most of the current races' homeworld type, like putting Sophons on a colder world).

I'd even go further on the idea, replacing certain system improvements effect to be more dependent on climate rather than a few planet types. For example, rather than just affecting Forest planets for a whopping +10 Industy over the base bonus, Xeno-Industrial Infrastructure could affect all wet planets (for a smaller bonus), making it valuable across a broader spectrum of systems.

However, whether we use this system for colonization only or system upgrades, we will need to fill in the remaining empty spots on the types chart and make certain planets more attuned to their FIDS specialization.

This is a really good idea! The temperature/humidity matrix is pretty complex, like you said, and there would probably need to be a screen somewhere that indicated what colonisation techs you have unlocked and which ones you can unlock.

Going off the suggestions for 'soft links' in the tech tree that Amplitude have proposed, adjacent colonisation techs could have these links. It seems like it would be a fairly intuitive way to indicate which colonisation strategies were easier. But that depends on exactly how the devs choose to implement these links.

Also a random suggestion -- Ecologists could get a high-level law that lets the faction colonist planets from 1 era ahead, similar to how scientists can research technologies from an era ahead.

Trentius wrote:

 

However, whether we use this system for colonization only or system upgrades, we will need to fill in the remaining empty spots on the types chart and make certain planets more attuned to their FIDS specialization.

Of course gaps in original chart may be a flaw in my first proposition. I don't know how to solve it, as the actual colonization techs and planet types, doesn't even match with original GDD.

atejas wrote:

 

Going off the suggestions for 'soft links' in the tech tree that Amplitude have proposed, adjacent colonisation techs could have these links. It seems like it would be a fairly intuitive way to indicate which colonisation strategies were easier. But that depends on exactly how the devs choose to implement these links.

 

Good point here. I hope the idea of soft prerequisites for techs will be implemented before release.

I have some suggestions on you suggestion :)

1) Fill the gaps in the table above. +3 flooded, + 1 wet, +1 humid.

2) All the factions should have a starting point of equal quality, i.e. equal distance from the centre. If the 1st point will be implemented, there will be 4 equal positions: Terran, Veldt, Ocean and *right to Ocean*. If another humidity type is added, there will be 8 equal options. Another way (not very logical): every faction starts on a Unique planet; Unique planets do not comply with any of these types; a player can choose any 1 humidity and temperature at start.

3) I did not clearly understand if unlocking new planet types require researching techs or only achieving the next era. Anyway, unlocking new humidities and temperatures shall not be at cost of techs because as you described them, they would be far too OP. As an option, at the beginning of an Era you choose humidity and temperature types to be unlocked at the end of the era.

Anyway, thank you for your input! If correctly implemented, this will be the best system of colonization unlocking ever. 

Sotnik wrote:

I have some suggestions on you suggestion :)

1) Fill the gaps in the table above. +3 flooded, + 1 wet, +1 humid.

Hi, I didn't think about that. Hope if they choose something close to my system will deal with it. 

As an idea for Burning + Flooded I propose: "Venusian". this is a world like Venus (not present in actual EA or ES1), with hot and dense acid clouds.

For Flooded + Cold I propose: "Titanian": Like Titan, the satellite of Saturn. It's a very cold world with methane clouds and hydrocarbon lakes on its surface.

I would like to see things like this more than variations of the "Terran" planet. I understand that changing this in actual stage is a lot of work and other thing goes firsts, so probably we won't see it.

2) All the factions should have a starting point of equal quality, i.e. equal distance from the centre. If the 1st point will be implemented, there will be 4 equal positions: Terran, Veldt, Ocean and *right to Ocean*. If another humidity type is added, there will be 8 equal options. Another way (not very logical): every faction starts on a Unique planet; Unique planets do not comply with any of these types; a player can choose any 1 humidity and temperature at start.

Good point here.

Still I will consider some exceptions for specific factions, like deuyuvians (if they were a major faction) starting in a gas giant.

Not very fond of unique planet idea if it goes afar from the chart, but can accept some faction-related anomaly unlocked at game start in homeworlds.

3) I did not clearly understand if unlocking new planet types require researching techs or only achieving the next era. Anyway, unlocking new humidities and temperatures shall not be at cost of techs because as you described them, they would be far too OP. As an option, at the beginning of an Era you choose humidity and temperature types to be unlocked at the end of the era.

I post three proposals:

1. First one, when I see GDDs it occurred to me with this chart. It unlocks only with humidity and temperature techs. May be this is the one you consider overpowered. I'm not sure about this, we'll need to at least test it.
2. The second is an adaptation to actual planet chart. It also unlocks with techs. It may be OP because with actual chart there you'll be able to unlock lots of planets with few techs. didn't thought about that at the moment.
3. Te third is to make it more coherent with era system. In this one one coordinate (planet type) unlocks with techs, and the other (Tier) unlocks with Eras. May also be OP for same reason as "2".

I have to recognize that the proposition on your last sentence looks more balanced with actual system, and gives more freedom. Also matches better with Amplitude idea of Eras, and may allow to get rid of some mandatory techs.

Anyway, thank you for your input! If correctly implemented, this will be the best system of colonization unlocking ever. 

Thanks!!

About implementation, doesn't depends on me.

The rationale is logical. Implementing this in game design might be challenging. Here is to hoping.

Sotnik wrote:

3) I did not clearly understand if unlocking new planet types require researching techs or only achieving the next era. Anyway, unlocking new humidities and temperatures shall not be at cost of techs because as you described them, they would be far too OP. As an option, at the beginning of an Era you choose humidity and temperature types to be unlocked at the end of the era.

Thinking again if it's OP. Why? All factions will use the same system.

Maybe the mid-game square increase in colonizable planets looks it, but as I understand fits better in lore sense: first you can colonize few planets very close to your homeworld (early game), the develop techs to colonize almost everything (mid-game), and at last you develop techs to colonize the most adverse environments like gas giants, which are very few places in your empire (end-game).

Sotnik wrote:

I meant these techs will be OP in comparison with other techs in mid-game: you learn one tech and get 4+ new colonizable planet types. 4+ times more beneficial than at the current tech system. Without it, you will not be able to compete with other players which means this tech is an obligatory one - and that is never welcome. 

It's a different story if the cost of this new tech scales with # of planet types it unlocks. Actually, it is better than my previous proposal (free unlock with era progress) because it would let "isolationists" be more compatible. We will probably see a major faction or at least a custom faction focused on surviving at 1 or few nodes.

This way makes more lot sense. Didn't think about this.

Supose it can be tweaked someway.

lo_fabre wrote:

Sotnik wrote:

I meant these techs will be OP in comparison with other techs in mid-game: you learn one tech and get 4+ new colonizable planet types. 4+ times more beneficial than at the current tech system. Without it, you will not be able to compete with other players which means this tech is an obligatory one - and that is never welcome. 

It's a different story if the cost of this new tech scales with # of planet types it unlocks. Actually, it is better than my previous proposal (free unlock with era progress) because it would let "isolationists" be more compatible. We will probably see a major faction or at least a custom faction focused on surviving at 1 or few nodes.

This way makes more lot sense. Didn't think about this.

Supose it can be tweaked someway.

But to get that +4 massive increase, you had to research techs that gave less opportunities. Take for example a player starting the center of the temperature scale and taking only techs for that scale. With 3 techs, he's gonna have 4 available types, since techs spread your available by 1 row on that scale. He then gets a Humidity tech, netting 4 new available types at once, for a total of 8 (a rectangle of 4 by 2). 

In contrast, a player that has +2 rows in Temperature and +1 rows in Humidity gets 6 planets type (when the other one has 4). When he gets a new humidity row, he gains 3 new types, or a total of 9 (3 by 3 square).

The point here is techs don't unlock new planet types straight up, they spread your 'colonization area' on the chart by one row or column, so technically the same 'length' is gained for each one. Whether or not you optimize that area (that is, always being square) is up to you. No tweaking of costs would be required, since everyone gains the same possibilities from a tech; the net gain in available types depends only on your previous choices.