v2.0.0 Changes Discussion Thread

[Bremen]

If I understand it correctly, we are not able to make commercial space station that would have repair capability in orbit of gas giant right? That is something we were able to do with commercial hangars.

That's an interesting question - can you create a DSP in orbit of a gas giant? I'm guessing that would cause some sort of conflict in the programming but it would otherwise make sense.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Seems like a fun and flavorful change. The only quibble I can think of is it might be better to have population growth use the greater of the planet's growth or the orbital hab growth when in orbit of a colony (potentially dropping surplus pops down on the planet), so having a bunch of people in orbit doesn't reduce your growth if the planet below has plenty of space. But that's a pretty niche difference, and something you can already deal with by micromanaging the balance of the colony and orbital hab populations if you want.

The orbital and surface populations are now separate so it doesn't really make sense for them to influence each others growth, especially as each is subject to different constraints. In pure mechanics terms, having the orbital population separate actually increases the planetary growth because smaller populations grow faster.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

If I understand it correctly, we are not able to make commercial space station that would have repair capability in orbit of gas giant right? That is something we were able to do with commercial hangars.

That's an interesting question - can you create a DSP in orbit of a gas giant? I'm guessing that would cause some sort of conflict in the programming but it would otherwise make sense.

DSP are not connected to planets. If you create one in the existing location of a gas giant, it will be left behind when the gas giant continues in its orbit.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

If I understand it correctly, we are not able to make commercial space station that would have repair capability in orbit of gas giant right? That is something we were able to do with commercial hangars.

That's an interesting question - can you create a DSP in orbit of a gas giant? I'm guessing that would cause some sort of conflict in the programming but it would otherwise make sense.

DSP are not connected to planets. If you create one in the existing location of a gas giant, it will be left behind when the gas giant continues in its orbit.

After some thought on this, I've made a change to how DSP work. When creating a Deep Space Population, if you click on a gas giant or superjovian instead of empty space, the DSP will be created in orbit of the gas giant and will move with the planet. I've updated the original post accordingly.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

If I understand it correctly, we are not able to make commercial space station that would have repair capability in orbit of gas giant right? That is something we were able to do with commercial hangars.

You can now, as I just modified DSP to allow it.

[Density]

I prefer building orbital habs on site to tugging/putting engines on them, and in 1.13 it's possible to do so on bodies with zero population. While I'm very happy to see the change that separates surface and orbital pops, having some order available to unload or transfer colonists from colony ships to ark modules would be greatly appreciated (even if the option isn't available to civilian lines).

[Garfunkel]

If I understand it correctly, we are not able to make commercial space station that would have repair capability in orbit of gas giant right? That is something we were able to do with commercial hangars.

You can with the new Repair Bays since they are commercial modules.

[nuclearslurpee]

You can with the new Repair Bays since they are commercial modules.

These require minerals, which you cannot store at a gas giant (well, now you can with the change to DSPs).

[Migi]

You can with the new Repair Bays since they are commercial modules.

These require minerals, which you cannot store at a gas giant (well, now you can with the change to DSPs).

Can't you store them in cargo bays? Although ensuring you have the right quantities could be a pain.

[Destragon]

Doesn't "Deep Space Colony" sound better than "Deep Space Population", considering that they don't necessarily have any actual population?
I assume it's "population", because there can possibly be multiple populations on one colony?

[Demetrious]

STEVE DID YOU JUST ADD GENERATION SHIPS

[Black]

You can with the new Repair Bays since they are commercial modules.

These require minerals, which you cannot store at a gas giant (well, now you can with the change to DSPs).

Can't you store them in cargo bays? Although ensuring you have the right quantities could be a pain.

Minerals for mobile repair yards need to be at colony site or at DSP. It does not work with cargo bays.

[Platys51]

The orbital and surface populations are now separate so it doesn't really make sense for them to influence each others growth, especially as each is subject to different constraints. In pure mechanics terms, having the orbital population separate actually increases the planetary growth because smaller populations grow faster.

It increases % of pop being grown slightly, but you do so by reducing total number of pop growing, which doesn't increase the final amount, instead lowers it.

Also, given that all people are commuting to work on the world unless you have a shipyard there, makes sense you wouldn't see strict population control on habitat anyone can choose to leave at any time to move to surface and leave a free space for someone with no children to move into.

At least not neutering pop in them would go a long way to make them useful in regular games instead of heavy RP ones.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

STEVE DID YOU JUST ADD GENERATION SHIPS

Yes, I think I did

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

The orbital and surface populations are now separate so it doesn't really make sense for them to influence each others growth, especially as each is subject to different constraints. In pure mechanics terms, having the orbital population separate actually increases the planetary growth because smaller populations grow faster.

It increases % of pop being grown slightly, but you do so by reducing total number of pop growing, which doesn't increase the final amount, instead lowers it.

Also, given that all people are commuting to work on the world unless you have a shipyard there, makes sense you wouldn't see strict population control on habitat anyone can choose to leave at any time to move to surface and leave a free space for someone with no children to move into.

At least not neutering pop in them would go a long way to make them useful in regular games instead of heavy RP ones.

I'm happy with the new growth model. Based on the chat I read on the Discord, I realised that OH were being used to increase growth rates on habitable worlds, rather than for their intended purpose of allowing population on hostile worlds. Creating that 'exploit' was a side-effect of the growth mechanics, so I consider that fixed now, rather than nerfed.