Posted by: plugger
« on: January 30, 2010, 05:04:54 PM »Goodaye Father Tim,
O.K, thanks for the explanation.
Cheers,
Plugger
O.K, thanks for the explanation.
Cheers,
Plugger
So is it fair to say that the larger the mass of a star the more involved the gravitational survey and the greater the likelihood of jump points?
Cheers,
Plugger
Aurora creates a system abundance rating based on the age of the star plus a random element. Younger stars tend to have planetary systems with better mineral deposits. Each terrestrial body also has a multiplier if it is within the 'life zone' of a star. The mineral deposits are then generated based on the size of the body with larger bodies having generally more minerals and smaller bodies having generally better accessibility
This was by far the most massive star in any of the known systems and would make a gravitational survey of Cardiff a very time-consuming task
Does Aurora keep track on how planetary satellite are formed?Aurora creates a system abundance rating based on the age of the star plus a random element. Younger stars tend to have planetary systems with better mineral deposits. Each terrestrial body also has a multiplier if it is within the 'life zone' of a star. The mineral deposits are then generated based on the size of the body with larger bodies having generally more minerals and smaller bodies having generally better accessibility
I was noticing in the few games that I've generated that Luna is a crap shoot for mineral even though it was formed with a cataclysmic impact, making Luna nearly identical to earth elemental composition when the event accrued. This strike me that it should have a always a similar catch of mineral that earth has, but it doesn't.