Terraforming Circles, Different Sizes For Each Race.

[Cash]

INTRODUCTION:

This has come up a few times, so I thought I'd start a thread for discussion and observations regarding it. I'll start off by explaining what I'm referring to.

If you look at the Planet Information screen, you'll see a section showing colored circles with a black 'X' representing the current planet. These circles are in different spots depending on race, but it has also been suggested that they are different sizes. If you compare the different races using this screen, the radius of each circle will always show up as being the same size.

This seems to conflict with what the beta testers have said about the different races. If you check out "Lore Weaver's Strategy Series" then you'll see what I'm talking about. It can be found here in the Infogrames forums. Lore_Weaver tells us: "The thing that makes this race strong is the base race. Raas have the largest terraforming circles out of the entire Saurian species. This allows them to colonize more worlds and acquire Magnate civilizations. Magnate civilizations are incredibly important to this race because of its lackluster ground combat skills."

Well, that should give everyone some background on what we're talking about here. I'll next go into what we already know about the subject.

WHAT WE KNOW:

The pressure and temperature preferences of each of the races is a known quantity, but it isn't what we're looking for. These preferences only tell us where the center of the circle is. These do not tell us the sizes of the circles for each race, that is, if they actually are different.

The in-game graph from the Planet Information screen shows us the location of the circle, but the size is shown as the same for every race. The circles leave the graph to varying degrees for different races, but the size (ei. radius) of the circle is always shown as the same. This graph also doesn't show any variation for each of the different sub-species.

(With that said, it isn't necessary to re-post that information here.)

This leaves us with two important questions. Do different races have different sized terraforming circles, despite these not showing on the graph? If so, what are the sizes of the circles for each race?

OBSERVATIONS:

The Raas supposedly have the largest terraforming circles in the game. Well, I got curious and started some games with them. I was able to get "Green 1" with Low, Moderate, or High gravity.

I also started a few games with various races, counting the number of yellow and green planets in the starting system. This turns out NOT to be a good test. The starting system is consistently better than average in terms of the number of habitable planets.

SPECULATION:

The smaller-sized planets seem to show up in slightly larger numbers then medium-sized or larger planets. This seems to make up for part of the size difference. I'm just guessing here, this is only based on very casual observation.

If the terraforming circles do vary, this could be one of the advantages of playing Human over Evon. At least, that's what I'm hoping for.

CONCLUSION:

If anyone has any additional information, useful observations or suggestions, then feel free to post on this thread. Also, feel free to bump the thread if the topic interests you. I'll try to add to this when I learn more. If you do post, please try not to post things that we already know.

What we're really trying to find out is this:

Do different races have different sized terraforming circles, despite these not showing on the graph?

If so, what are the sizes of the circles for each race?

[Cash]

Ok, I've got some data. I chose to compare the Trilarians and Raas. This sample was based on randomly exploring 100 planet systems for each race. The starting system was NOT used in this sample, as it tends to be better than average.

RESULTS:

Raas Graph:



Raas Sample: SS=4, G1=22, G2=37, Y1=54, Y2=64, R1=39, R2=131, planets=351, systems=100

Planet Types:
Sweet Spot: 1.14%
Green 1: 6.27%
Green 2: 10.54%
Yellow 1: 15.38%
Yellow 2: 18.23%
Red 1: 11.11%
Red 2: 37.32%

Trilarian Graph:



Trilarian Sample: SS=6, G1=23, G2=31, Y1=47, Y2=44, R1=57, R2=210, planets=415, systems=100

Planet Types:

Sweet Spot: 1.45%
Green 1: 5.54%
Green 2: 7.47%
Yellow 1: 11.33%
Yellow 2: 10.60%
Red 1: 13.73%
Red 2: 50.60%

COMPARISON:

This seems to favor the Raas. The Trilarians were worse for every planet type except for Sweet Spot. I don't think 100 systems is necessarily enough, but it's enough to convince me that a small difference might exist.

The percentages for yellow planets shows a large difference, probably explained by the Trilarian's yellow circles leaving the graph. The green circles were much closer, so it could just be a fluke that the Raas had more green planets.

[darcy]

The only race-dependent variables I could find in habitability.txt are atmosphere_factor, temp_factor and PlanetaryGravityModifier.

So the rings are indeed all of the same size. There might be still be a certain racial advantage if the galaxy generator creates more of a certain type of planet.

[Cash]

Thanks for the reply.

I also looked through the spreadsheets and didn't find anything, in habitability.txt or elsewhere, that would indicate different circles sizes. I'm going to post this on the Infogrames forums, since that's where the rumors started.

[HawaiiFive-O]

Just because it's not in the data files does not mean it's not in the game (it might be hard coded in the EXE).

I am very curious if this is true. Cash's initial analysis is interesting.

Any further information/data regarding this, anyone?

[Arnelos]

I've been digging through the spreedsheets in an attempt to figure this out as well.

As far as I can tell, all terraforming circles are the same size, but the advantage in terraforming circles goes to species that have less OTHER species that overlap with their terraforming circles and for whom more planets fall within their circles.

I'm guessing this is why the Saurians supposedly have an "advantage" in this regard, though such an advantage is near impossible to quantify without knowing exactly how it works for sure.

Competition for planets then is principly between races/species that go after similar planets.

As such, here's the rough groupings I've made:

Ichthytosian and Etherean species have similar terraforming circles and will end up competing over similar planets. Their Sweet Spots and Green 1's are different, but their Green 2's seem to overlap and what is Green 1 or Sweet Spot to one might even be Yellow 1 or Yellow 2 to the other.

Ethereans and Saurians also compete, but far less closely.

Humanoids, Harvesters, and Insectoids have GREATLY overlapping terraforming circles. All three races start with "Terra Approxima" type planets, the Humanoids being with thicker atmospheres, the Harvesters being colder, and the Insectoids being warmer. Competition between Humanoid, Harvester, and Insectoid races (among their own species and between species) can be expected to be rough compared to that between other races/species.

The Geodic species (of which there is only one race, the Silicoids), seem to be utterly free of competition for their Green and even the yellow part of their terraforming circles. They do not have to compete nearly as much as other species for control of planets in their terraforming circle, but having PLAYED the Silicoids, I can tell you that there just aren't very many planets that meet their needs. This is probably intentional to make up for their lack of as much competition.

There is SOME overlap (at outer red rings I think) between the Geodics and the Insectoids and Cybernetiks, but overlap in the outer rings isn't really much competition.

The Cybernetiks compete closely with the Insectoids (which seem to have the most competition...), but the Cybernetiks go for the thinest atmosphere planets overall, which gives them something of an edge for any worlds that are devoid or nearly devoid of atmospheres (which seem to exist in some quantity). Their close competition with the Insectoids over slightly cooler and thicker planets isn't that big of a deal then becauase the Cynoids won't always start next to the Tachidi and the Cybernetiks still have plenty of low-atmosphere worlds that NO-ONE is going to compete with them with except perhaps the lucky guy with the Protoplasmic and Avian magnate civs.

The Saurians only competition seems to be a very slight yellow/yellow overlap with the Ethereans and a lot of planets do seem to fall within the Saurians' circle, so this is likely an intentional advantage for them.

The curveball the devs seem to have thrown at us are the magnate civilizations.

You see.... the magnate civilizations can effectively give a race access to an entire range of planets in what would normally be another species' terraforming circle and thus create competition that would otherwise not exist over certain systems or planets.

Here's the rough grouping I've created:

SAURIANS
- Metashifters
- Plants
- (Gnolams somewhat)

GEODIC
- Fungal
- Elerians

CYBERNETIC
- Protoplasmic
- (Avian somewhat)

INSECTOID/HARVESTER
- Avian

HUMANOID
- Gnolams
- Mrrshan
- (Bulrathi somewhat)

ICHTHYTOSIAN
- Gargantua
- Bulrathi

ETHEREAN
- (Metashifters somewhat)
- (Gargantua somewhat)

When I say "somewhat", I mean overlap likely in the red1 circles, PERHAPS in the yellow 2 circle... which doesn't count for much.

The Ethereans then seem to have an advantage, but the problem for the Ethereans is that it seems that less planets are inside their terraforming circles and they have some competition with the Ichthytosians for part of that circle, but thankfully for the Ethereans the planets they DO get tend to be rather large

The reason the magnate civs are important then is explained above... they cause competition for land that might not otherwise arise. A Trilarian player who has the Elerians as a magnate civ is suddenly competing with the Silicoids for the same planets whether otherwise their Red1's don't even overlap. A Sakkra empire with an Alkari magnate civ can do the same to the Meklars or the Klackons, etc.

Conquering another player race has a similar impact, as you can use the conquered population to compete for systems your own race wouldn't be able to effectively use and thus you might overlook and leave to another player in the game.

This makes for a number of interesting strategies regarding magnate civs, but unfortunately magnate civs being near you is largely a matter of chance

So if you get a magnate race that is green or yellow to you, it's easy to colonize, but of minimal use... you can already colonize THOSE planets (for the most part), but getting a magnate civ that is red2 to you is GREAT, as it effectively expands your empire's terraforming circles emmensely once that magnate civ colony is up and pumping out colony ships.

Btw, I've made a practice of making multiple colony ship designs and giving them names specific to race and being sure only to build the right colony ship on each world (checking the queues every once in a while to make sure the AI doesn't build the wrong one).

This is important if you're trying to CONTROL colony ship movement (as opposed to leaving it to the AI), because it's good to know which of the 2 colony ships in your reserves was produced by teh Darlok world and which was produced by the Evon world

[drsparnum]

Okay, my experience is limited here but I have played 3 games so far. The first (as the Tachidi) was kind of a blur so I will discard it. The second was as the Raas, and while I was playing that game I commented to myself "this is the best universe ever - everything is green!" and I thought I got alot of lucky coincidences. My third game was as the Psilons and after the Raas game I found myself cursing the galaxy for making me travel huge distances to get to green worlds (although I began to expect a system like the one described here was in place).

Now, reading this thread, it makes sense. Although I didn't calculate it, or perform a statistical T test or anything, the difference in the number of green worlds I saw between the Psilons and the Raas was tremendous and I cite it as support for your idea. I have the last saved turn of both of these games and I will count the percent of worlds that are at least green 1 after work today.

Arnelos, I know that the magnate races like different enviornments. Is there a way to view the planets from the perspective of a magnate civ? I have seen ways to view the planets from the perspective of the 16 main empires on the planets tab but not a magnate civ. Specifically, I have a protoplasmic magnate civ in one game. How can I view worlds from the protoplasmic persepective instead of the raas one? In addition, I turn AI colonization off (although I think they will still build and settle worlds with system colony ships). However, my magnate races seem to spread regardless - on autopilot. I didn't complain about this because I figure they are spreading to worlds with amiable enviornments for them - but if I could take a more direct role there are times I would like to.

Finally, I am sure you guys are aware of this but I post it for other readers who may not be. It takes 4 colony bays to settle a red world and 2 for a yellow world. Later in the game if I find a Red world with a magnate civ (a great find!) I design a colony ship with 4 colony bays and order my home world to build it and deploy it to that planet. Instant magnate civ. I haven't checked the production point cost but I believe this is cheaper then building 4 colony ships with 1 colony bay each, since you only need to pay for things like life support and the bridge once. If I remember I will check the cost effectiveness of this approach someday as well.

[Cash]

I decided to calculate the margin of error for one of my results. The Green 1 results are the most important, so I'll concentrate on those. For the Raas, I sampled 351 planets and came up with 6.27% of planets sampled being Green 1.

CALCULATIONS:

M = 1.96 * SQRT( (P * (P-1) ) / N)

M = 1.96 * SQRT( (.0627 * (1 - .0627) ) / 351 )

M = .025359

key:
M, margin of error
P, proportion
N, sample size

RESULTS:

So, at the 95% level of confidence the margin of error would be:

Green 1: 6.27% give or take 2.54% (our margin of error)

This is NOT accurate enough.

For the Trilarians, I sampled 415 planets and came up with 5.54% of planets sampled being Green 1. The difference between the two races is less than a single percent, so our results unfortunately aren't statistically significant. I'd welcome some feedback from someone with more knowledge of statistics.

[drsparnum]

i went to do the test i promised of counting the worlds in the raas game and the psilon game. unfortunately i cannot because in the raas game i have likely terraformed many of the worlds already (thats funny - i don't remember my home system of three worlds being three sweet spots at the start of the game? Hmm.)

[Arnelos]

Originally posted by drsparnum
Arnelos, I know that the magnate races like different enviornments. Is there a way to view the planets from the perspective of a magnate civ? I have seen ways to view the planets from the perspective of the 16 main empires on the planets tab but not a magnate civ. Specifically, I have a protoplasmic magnate civ in one game. How can I view worlds from the protoplasmic persepective instead of the raas one? In addition, I turn AI colonization off (although I think they will still build and settle worlds with system colony ships). However, my magnate races seem to spread regardless - on autopilot. I didn't complain about this because I figure they are spreading to worlds with amiable enviornments for them - but if I could take a more direct role there are times I would like to.

No.

This is one of my gripes about the game and someone's already put it in the patch suggestion thread, I believe.

Wouldn't hurt if more people mentioned it and made sure QS notices it, though.

Personally, I've just been having to use guesswork to attempt to figure out whether a world is probably good for a magnate race or not.

You can sometimes tell the atmospheric thickness of a world by the graphics representation of its cloudcover... a lot of clouds, it probably has a thick atmosphere. Likewise with temperature... you can mostly tell by the albeido or color of the planet. If the planet is a deep red, chances are it's rather hot. If it's a white/blue/violet type color, it's probably pretty cold.

As for each of the species' temperature and atmosphere values... here's what's in the spreadsheets:


SPECIES - ATMOSPHERE - TEMPERATURE

Humanoid - 61 - 38 (Terra Approxima, Mod Atmo, Cool)
Etherean - 106 - 55 (Martian, Very Thick Atmo, Temperate)
Geodic - 50 - 78 (Venusian, Thin Atmo, Hot)
Cybernetik - 30 - 55 (Primordial, Thin/No Atmo, Temperate)
Ichthytosian - 96 - 36 (Martian, Thick Atmo, Cool)
Harvesters - 47 - 27 (Terra Approxima, Thin Atmo, Cold)
Insectoid - 45 - 46 (Terra Approxima, Thin Atmo, Temperate)
Saurian - 89 - 73 (Volcanic Rock, Thick Atmo, Hot)
Metashifters - 105 - 83 (Volcanic Rock, Very Thick Atmo, Very Hot)
Non-Corporeal - 76 - 26 (Terra Approxima?, Mod Atmo, Cold)
Protoplasmic - 38 - 65 (Protostar?, Thin Atmo, Warm)
Plant - 70 - 76 (Volcanic Rock?, Mod Atmo, Hot)
Fungal - 54 - 67 (Venusian, Thin Atmo, Warm)
Avian - 38 - 38 (Primordial, Thin Atmo, Cool)
Gargantua - 105 - 27 (Martian, Very Thick Atmo, Cold)
Bulrathi - 86 - 21 (Martian, Thick Atmo, Cold)
Mrrshan - 68 - 32 (Terra Approxima, Mod Atmo, Cool)
Elerians - 43 - 72 (Protostar, Thin Atmo, Hot)
Gnolam - 67 - 53 (Terra Approxima, Mod Atmo, Temperate)
Antarans - 78 - 63 (Volcanic Rock?, Thick Atmo, Warm)

So the best I've been able to do is to use the above I've done up as a sorta of a rough guide to planet selection. Planet color/albeido and cloud cover can be roughly judged and used in combination with these preferences.

It's important to note that each species also has a gravity preference which I believe has an impact on population growth rate as well as planet productivity. Here's the preferences for each species:

LOW GRAVITY:
- Cybernetik
- Insectoid
- Protoplasmic
- Avian

MIDDLE GRAVITY:
- Humanoid
- Ichthytosian
- Saurian
- Non-Corporeal
- Plant
- Fungal
- Mrrshan
- Elerians
- Gnolam

HIGH GRAVITY:
- Geodic
- Harvesters
- Metashifters
- Gargantua
- Bulrathi
- Antarans

CRUSHING GRAVITY:
- Etherean

There might also be an impact of the "aquatic" trait (for the Ichthytosians), the "flyer" trait (for the Ethereans and maybe the Avians), and the "subterranean" trait (for the Insectoids) on the suitability of a planet and various population bonuses, but while the spreadsheets mention it, I'm not at all clear how that works or especially how one might be able to tell which worlds they'd get the most of those bonuses from.

[Arnelos]

Originally posted by drsparnum
Finally, I am sure you guys are aware of this but I post it for other readers who may not be. It takes 4 colony bays to settle a red world and 2 for a yellow world. Later in the game if I find a Red world with a magnate civ (a great find!) I design a colony ship with 4 colony bays and order my home world to build it and deploy it to that planet. Instant magnate civ. I haven't checked the production point cost but I believe this is cheaper then building 4 colony ships with 1 colony bay each, since you only need to pay for things like life support and the bridge once. If I remember I will check the cost effectiveness of this approach someday as well.

The trick I use is even more fun. I'll use one magnate civ to colonize another magnate civ

If I've got the Elerian magnate civ, for instance, and I come across the Fungal magnate civ... why not have have 2 different Elerians worlds each build 1 colony ship each and send them to the Fungal world (which is likely in their yellow range) than having my stock race (if I'm not playing Geodic in this example) have to build 4 of them?

Same thing goes for if I've conquered another playable race. No sense in having your stock race colonize things when one of your magnate or conquered races can do it faster

[mactbone]

Look at the picture of the "Terraforming Circle" again. Don't concentrate on the size of the radius. Concentrate on the area that is Red 2. Notice how some Civs go off the charts a lot while others are more in the center? This is the difference. All Civs get the same SS and green sizes, but Raas has most of yellow within the square while the Trilarians are missing a big chunk of yellow.

This IMO explains the difference.

[Arnelos]

*bump*

(this thread is rather useful...)

[Cash]

Originally posted by MacTBone
Look at the picture of the "Terraforming Circle" again. Don't concentrate on the size of the radius. Concentrate on the area that is Red 2. Notice how some Civs go off the charts a lot while others are more in the center? This is the difference. All Civs get the same SS and green sizes, but Raas has most of yellow within the square while the Trilarians are missing a big chunk of yellow.

This IMO explains the difference.

What you're describing was covered earlier in the thread:

"The in-game graph from the Planet Information screen shows us the location of the circle, but the size is shown as the same for every race. The circles leave the graph to varying degrees for different races, but the size (ei. radius) of the circle is always shown as the same. This graph also doesn't show any variation for each of the different sub-species."

If this is true, then the beta testers are wrong. I haven't completely decided either way, but I'm beginning to feel that this may be the case. With that said, the purpose of this thread is to find evidence and discuss what is happening in the game. Is the terraforming circle screen displaying incorrect information or are the beta testers (ex. Lore_Weaver) and other folks wrong about there being different size circles (ie. larger or smaller radius) for each race?

[HawaiiFive-O]

Yes, I understand now.

It's not the size that's different. It's how close the "Sweet Spot" is to the center.

The Trilarians lose a lot of yellow, some green(!) because they are nearer the edge then the Raas.

Makes sense to me.

[Cash]

Originally posted by HawaiiFive-O
Yes, I understand now.

It's not the size that's different. It's how close the "Sweet Spot" is to the center.

The Trilarians lose a lot of yellow, some green(!) because they are nearer the edge then the Raas.

Makes sense to me.

What you are saying is pretty clear from the graph, what is being questioned is the graph itself. The beta testers are saying that the graph is wrong. Take a look at Lore_Weaver's thread on the races:

Lore Weaver's Strategy Series

Quote:

"Raas have the largest terraforming circles out of the entire Saurian species."

"A wider range of planets is available to the lizards, and this plays well with their hardwiring."

"The nice thing about Saurians though is their wide terraforming rings allows them to conquer Magnate civilizations easily..."

This seems to suggest that sub-species have different size rings, and that the width of the rings is different for different races. The graph does not show the Raas having a different-sized circle than the other Saurians. It also does not show the Saurians having larger circles (in terms of radius) then any of the other races.

[drsparnum]

Cash, why be mean?

[Cash]

Originally posted by drsparnum
Cash, why be mean?

Sorry, I edited the last post. The extra sarcasm has been removed. I was just trying to make it clear that I have looked at the in-game diagram.

[asleepathewheel]

Great thread, this one is

This game has so many levels to play on. Its a shame that it seems a lot of people can't get past MoO2 or the UI

[Xelvonar]

And just to throw in a curve:

The spreadsheet that was recently uploaded says that the Raas do indeed have the widest terraforming circles. But I agree that the graph does not reflect it.

One consideration that is important when comparing graphs is that we need to know whether or not planets are evenly distributed on the graph, or if they tend to cluster toward the center. If they do, then races nearer to the edge have a significant disadvantage; if planets are uniformly distributed, then the advantage of being nearer to the middle is less important. Does it really matter much if you are missing a piece of your Yellow 2 or Red 1 rings?

-Xelvonar

[campfreddie]

That information in my spreadsheet is based on Lore's strat guide.
I thought it was 100% reliable but maybe it isn't.

It may not be correct. The race details are the only ones I'm not 100% sure of.

I've already noticed I made a mistake in humanoid planet preference! I also missed the etherian +40% manufacturing efficiency and +30% research efficiency.

I'm updating it and will upload a new verion once I can verify some info. I'd like to see what this thread reveals.

I was wondering if the planet generation method tends to put more planets in the saurian area of the terraform graph.

Etherians were supposed to have very small terraform circles, essentially restricting them to gas giants. Obviously, they seem to have the same size as everone elses. I've not played as them so I don't really know how they work.

It would be great to see a distribution chart of planet conditions, to see which planets are most popular (possibly weighted to account for planet size). That sounds like a really hard thing to do though, so I'm not volunteering!

[AntaranX]

I'm playing as Etherean/Imsaeis and what they lack is that the terraforming circle goes on top of the chart, almost half of the circle go out of the chart. Luckily the ones that suit them are really big planets which have the gravity suited for them. Therefore they tend to have less planets but they count as even 2 or 3 other smaller planets because of their size. Later on the game the gravition suitability can be altered and they can use midsize planets as well.