Is achieving a stable environment even possible to mess up ?

[RandomLust]

I have 0% C02... My oxygen was at 37 % but when I started to import lots of nitrogen, 02 got to more appropriate level of 24%. GHG, I forget it specifically but, it was around .3% despite my massive importing of GHGs to increase the CO2, which did not happen.... It would seem at this point, zero CO2, plants would die off... but that is not the case it would seem.

ANyway, my question is... is it designed in the game to just progress and then... just win, regardless of your actions. Or is it possible to do something or lack something and fail... lets say... O2 get too high and ignites, or GHG gets to thick and cause global thermal runaway, or you go afk and just let it run and .... something....

It seems disappointing that the developers would create a "sandbox" game that could not go wrong... Not much a of a sandbox if you always succeed. I doubt that that dropping asteroids would lack any downside to a mission like this. More like an amusement park if you start the ride and always get off at the same point. #saftyfirst

Is this how the developers intended it? Or are there some losing actions currently, or in development?

Skill does not seem like a factor.. Maintaining a sustainable supply chain is the only thing to consider as it stands now. The plethora of supply chain games, it's not much of a challenge to just over produce since there is no downside... yeah, sure I could spawn less resources in the game creation but.. there is not skill needed, it's just a longer timeline... I do like the game and will follow it's development, but I did advise my brother to wait for it to go on sale because the replay value seems very low.

I do admit and have not finished the campaign and I have not finish the terraforming task in my two "sandbox" game task; but I'm not far from it. Just need to wait out the time needed to do the magnetic pole thing. Not like anything will go wrong, just need to run it on 16x for an hour or two.

I would also like to ask for more indepth settings in the "sandbox" mode. High resource sources, larger build requirements, slower manufacturing.. just some options. Maybe I could add and AI or two to make it more challenging.

I know there are more ideas coming, the project map posted by the devs was very lacking.

[Magistar]

Hmm I have seen people having trouble with too much O2 that made their buildings catch fire. Also if you start a harder game resource scarcity means you must plan ahead and you cannot really leave the game running on x16 let alone for 2 hours.

[RandomLust]

the lack of replies suggest a two things... players don't know and the devs can't defend such a easy-win case. The first case suggests the players don't know because everyone is winning the atmosphere task and failure is not something they can speak on. The latter then hints at two more things.. Devs can't tell me anything because of whatever reason and the Devs can't defend the auto-win for the atmosphere.

So, the answer would appear to be..

You do auto-win the atmosphere task. The Devs don't have a gameplay in development they can talk about nor do the Devs want to give even the slightest hint because they don't know the direction the game is going.

The "sandbox" gameplay is not a sandbox at all. It's a time sink that requires zero skil and just the attention of a 9 year old.

Sad... please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Magistar]

But you dou did receive a reply: there have been people failing.

Regardless it is very hard to think up of a strategy game I 'lost'. The only game that comes to mind would be majesty 2 (that can be brutal on modern systems due to some fps related spawn mechanics).

If you start a 'normal' game you will have to keep expanding to prevent running out of resources. This creates logistical bottlenecks that you have to deal with.

Replayability is low though but that is basically the case with all games from this genre. Games like banished I mastered in an afternoon at least this took me +- 30 hours to complete the story. Just started on endzone, played for 10 hours and already hitting achievements with 1.8% global achievement rate. I liked this one better especially with the story they added.

[RandomLust]

failing and people having building fires are two different things. I don't entertain your suggestion that achievements reflect anything.

[Magistar]

Originally posted by RandomLust:

failing and people having building fires are two different things. I don't entertain your suggestion that achievements reflect anything.

Well it is quite clear you didn't really want to ask a question. You wanted to critize the game. I recommend you do just that in the future.

As for the failing just search on 'restart' and you will find your answer.

As for the achievement
It is quite clear what global achievement rates reflect; They reflect the exact percentage of the player base that obtained that specific achievement. Nothing more, nothing less.

Really for someone that supposedly finds the game too easy you seem to have a very difficult time understanding concepts such as searching, asking a question and apparently global achievement rates. Which again is fine but oh the irony.

Exhibit a:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/803050/discussions/0/2970650651623376838/
Exhibit b: https://steamcommunity.com/app/803050/discussions/0/2993169283954350351/#c2993169283954430516

That said often games where players fail get ripped apart because millennials cannot deal with losing and need a golden badge of excellence for every fart. Just look at what happened to planet base. That game was harsch. Everyone in my base got radiation sickness from a random solar flare, there were 4 survivors which created a food shortage. When a dropship arrived with food the guy took it to the cafeteria. At that point a meteor hit exactly that building and 3 out of 4 remaining workers died... It didn't take long for the game to get nerfed. Now the first planets do not even get solar flares.

[RandomLust]

your exhibits have to do with the supply chain.... only proving my point that the supply chain is the only thing to pay attention to. I spoke to that.

My question was legitimate.
-Can you lose the terraforming task?
Meaning, the GHG, O2 and CO2 content. I referenced that.

If my question came across as criticizing the game, then so be it. I don't care. Not sure why you are the defender of the game.

Global achievements is a sales tactic. It reflects nothing. And if it did, what are being compared to? Americans have this need to be #1. or at least rank in the top 10%. Keep clinging to your achievements, and classing millennials beneath you.

Planetbase was easy. You lost ?

[mreed2]

It is impossible to get the game into a situation where you cannot complete the terraforming tasks.

It is possible to make it somewhat harder if you allow the oxygen percentage to rise to high (originally 30%, but I think they increased it to 50%) which causes fires to break out everywhere, but even then the damage rate is low enough that an endgame base is likely to be able to be able to produce and distribute plastics and electronics in sufficient quantities to keep up with the damage until you can import nitrogen. That's just a guess, though.

Other than the risk of fires, the only other way to fail the terraforming mission is to run out of resources (this used to be water, but the most recent update fixed that, so I'd guess that aluminium or chemicals would be the limiting factor). Its really hard to get into that situation, though.

I've said it before, and I'll probably say it again: Despite the advertising for this game, it isn't really a game about terraforming Mars -- its a game about managing logistics, with "terraforming Mars" being an excuse plot to setup the a scenario where you need to move large quantities of goods. This isn't saying its a bad game because of this -- I actually think that the plot works very well, and is a real strength of the game. But the difficulty of the game comes from solving logistical problems, not from terraforming Mars.

Other examples of games with good "excuse plots" include all of the city building games that include a plot of any description. For example, the old Caesar games really didn't have anything to do with conquering the ancient world on behalf of Rome. Its really pretty standard in the genere of city building games, which this game probably belongs to. Factory building games that have plots fall into the same category.

[Tiwaking! 56k NZ]

Originally posted by Magistar:

Regardless it is very hard to think up of a strategy game I 'lost'. The only game that comes to mind would be majesty 2 (that can be brutal on modern systems due to some fps related spawn mechanics).

Majesty 2, that accursed game!! I played Majesty and it was a fun, enjoyable, and exciting game. Majesty 2?

Here: Have a Dragon you cant possibly hope kill on level 3 or 4!

[Spite Sprite]

Originally posted by RandomLust:

My question was legitimate.
-Can you lose the terraforming task?
Meaning, the GHG, O2 and CO2 content. I referenced that.

You can not lose the terraforming task: there will not be a traditional "game over" screen that triggers at a certain point of no return, for example. That said, I wouldn't say you auto-win -- you need to make deliberate building decisions in order to complete the terraforming process. Without that, the terraforming process will not progress no matter how much time passes and may make things more difficult for you if you let things grow unchecked.

It is certainly possible, with enough time and patience, to rectify a situation where you have too much of something despite it being difficult. For example, as others mentioned, having too much O2 will increases the likelihood of buildings catching on fire... but with perseverance you can rectify that. Players in these situations usually restart the game, though, as it may be personally easier for them to start with a blank slate.

Originally posted by RandomLust:

The Devs don't have a gameplay in development they can talk about nor do the Devs want to give even the slightest hint because they don't know the direction the game is going.

Since launching the game, we've released 10+ updates including two content updates that add new features to the game. We have more content updates on the way, as well: you can see more in our recent roadmap blog post or even in today's content update announcement. Game development throws unexpected wrenches in even the best laid plans, so we try not to overpromise the upcoming updates because we don't want to get player hopes up which is why you may find details lacking. You can look through past patch notes to get a better sense of the breadth of our updates.

P.S - I do apologize for the lack of a developer response! I drafted one up and could have sworn I posted it on the 31st, but I clearly didn't. That's my bad!