System generation questions

Locked
User avatar
gstano
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:41 am
Location: Huntsville
Contact:

System generation questions

Post by gstano »

I've been looking forward to getting involved in VBAM more for a while, so it is nice to finally try and catch up with all of the interesting things going on here!

I'm in the process of putting together a Commodore level game with 6 systems. One item that has struck me is there has been a strong feel of all or nothing for each system. Surprisingly, some of the most valuable systems have the least amount of locations. I may be mis-interpreting the +/- 0 bonus interpretation. How should this work in the system generation? The reference I saw to this was in map generation where the +/- 0 could lead to a +10 or -10 modifier. At the moment, that seemed even more extreme and I have treated the +/- 0 as no bonus right now and I can apply it later.

With that said, the minimum economic output of any of the systems I have created is well over 100 (granted that is if you assume a fully populated system). This may not be an issue if the game starts with a homeworld only and expands from there. However, this may be more of a problem if the systems represent established powers. How common is it among the community that these extremely valuable systems are found?

Second, the Biosphere stat has been poor for 5 of the 6 systems. For 5 of the systems, the full foodstuff production could barely support 20-30% of the total available capacity. One system is a homeworld and the system can only support 2 Census. All 6 of these systems are homeworld systems. One system did manage to go in completely the other direction and would create enough foodstuff for 66 Census at full capacity. Have others seen this all or nothing output, or did I just get a few anomalous rolls?

RAW and Capacity appear to be plentiful. Overall, it is good to see a good mix of systems, but I was concerned by the very high economic outputs that are regularly occurring versus very low Biosphere ratings.

With that said, here are a few items that I have thoroughly enjoyed.

The moon mechanic is quick and easy to use and can really help a planet in a weak category.

I like the sub-categories of the three planet types. It's a little more cross-referencing than say the Captain level, but it certainly helps makes each system have its own feel.

The Infrastructure set-up looks to be a fun feature. I can see why a Commodore or Admiral level game would only want a few star systems. Additionally, with the climate variables and all of the Infrastructure types, the high economic outputs may not be a problem.

Thanks for all of the feedback!
It's not as bad as it turned out to be.
User avatar
gstano
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:41 am
Location: Huntsville
Contact:

Follow-up

Post by gstano »

I've managed to create a number of new systems and also realized that I had been incorrectly assigning stats to gas giants. Overall, that has helped bring things into line.

Unfortunately, the BIO stat remains a problem. Some of it arises from high CAP dwarf planets, which is rather realistic. They can have good resources, but they are not exactly a great place to open a botanical garden. Still I am running across large numbers of systems with little to no agricultural output. I expected this, but the problem is that several of the small empires I have put together have a hard time feeding the homeworld, let alone anything else.

Granted, in the campaign set up we can come in and alter a few stats, but I wanted to see if others have come across this problem.
It's not as bad as it turned out to be.
Locked