GalCiv3 Forums
In the same way that we can control the appearance of habitable, anomaly, mega events, &c, Precursor world rarity would be a logical inclusion in the game setup dialog.
Perhaps down to the ability to explicitly state there should only be one, which could lead to a king-of-the-mountain style game.
---and in a similar "game setup control" vein, in response to the "neutered pirates" situation (my support post here: https://forums.galciv3.com/482122/page/1/#3670120 ), perhaps we could have a dropbox in game setup for Pirate range, in addition to Pirate Base frequency.
It represents a performance hit, but no more than many of the other setting choices.
KOU
Map spawn issues are also mentioned in this to:
https://forums.galciv3.com/482160/page/1/#3670533
My reply #6 has my thoughts. I dont mention Precursor Worlds but the same logic with the map generation of extreme planets and 'planet' resources has the same issue. It would be great as you suggest to get more options and control over all. Saves from making maps get stale as well as, as you said, allow for more tailed game play based on your map settings.
You can mod the proportion of precursor planets. However, as I have noted several times before, probabilities don't quite work right behind the scenes in GalCivIII...
There is no randomness to the current precursor worlds, they are a set number, no %, set in stone number. So it doesnt even vary by your ingame planet settings. Same amount, every game for the map size you play.
From MapSizeDefs.xml
<MapSize>
<InternalName>Tiny</InternalName>
<HexSectorRadius>0</HexSectorRadius>
<HexSectorSize>18</HexSectorSize>
<Base>120</Base>
<MaxHabitablePlanets>16</MaxHabitablePlanets>
<RiftAppearanceChance>1.00</RiftAppearanceChance>
<MinPrecursorPlanets>2</MinPrecursorPlanets>
<BaseAdministrationPoints>4</BaseAdministrationPoints>
<PrecursorPlanetPercentOfHabitable>0.01</PrecursorPlanetPercentOfHabitable>
[...]
There are two fields here, "minimum precursor planets," and "precursor percent of habitable." Do you believe that the second field is non-functional? I was not aware of this. Obviously it would be immaterial in this case, since 0.01 of 16 is << 2.
I think that would be a good idea as well; some sort of scale, button or whatever to alter the setting.
It turns out it doesn't matter. Just like the "proportion of extreme planets" field, it appears that "proportion of precursor worlds" field has no effect, at least not in the map editor (I didn't bother checking the actual game, as they seem to correspond when the setting are the same). So, your original statement turns out to be correct, and the answer to my question is that, yes indeed, that field is non-functional!
As always, talking to you about planet modding ends up with valuable information. Thank you!
No, that fields works. I use it in GST set at 0.07 (7%) and it does what it says on the tin.
No, that fields works. I use it in GST set at 0.07 (7%) and it does what it says on the tin.
Have you ever actually counted to make sure the percentage is correct? The reason I ask is that when I set extreme planets to, say, 99% or 100%, it gives me about 50-50 extreme and non-extreme.
EDIT: FYI, I had set habitable to 1%, and almost every star had a habitable planet!
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.