This page is no longer being used to track questions for Joshua. All outstanding questions have been moved to the TRAC instance used by the Editors.
These are several inconsistencies within the game that reduce the believability of the game. They're being documented here as a way to keep track of them. Perhaps we'll get enough data together on these to request that they be changed. Until then, they're here as a reminder to the Editors that these are unexplained (and probably unexplainable) phenomena, and as a hint to Joshua that perhaps he should think about either changing the game behavior or providing an explanation to us.
This is a limitation of the tools available. We have to live with it.
As a form of explanation, it could be argued that what we really have is a cluster of planets at a large distance from a galactic black hole. The light and IR radiating from the accretion disk creates a region of life-supporting planets. The 2D map is the intersection of the spherical surface of that life-supporting region and a globular cluster.
There are two issues here. The first is that a starbase built in the radiation belt of a star cluster automatically has 10 Tech-10 beams. This is because the combat mass of the starbase is not added to combat mass value, but to the defense post count (which is later added to the combat mass value). Various reasons have been provided for this in an activity thread (http://play.planets.nu/#/activity/1805108), but none of them make sense. The combat mass increase makes sense, but not the beam tech or count.
The second issue is that no other starbase provides any sort of combat mass increase. Both of the other types of starbase should contribute something towards the planet's combat mass. The reason this is an inconsistency is that the freighters have combat mass, even without armament. A space station that's fragile enough to have no combat mass wouldn't be strong enough to hold together while firing beams and launching fighters.
It appears that Beam Technology developed by a starbase, or given to the starbase by the Natives, doesn't transfer properly. When a Native race provides a beam technology boost, that boost should be applied to planet, even before a starbase is built. In addition, the beam technology that's developed on a planet should migrate to a starbase when it's built.
When a starbase has a beam technology between 2 and 8, and that beam tech is higher than the beam technology of the planet's defense, the starbase defensive beams are one beam slot lower than the starbase can actually build. This makes no logical sense. The Starbase staff would use the strongest possible beams on the starbase, both to protect themselves, and to protect the investment in the starbase.
The attacker and defender are normally killed at a 1:1 ratio. This isn't appropriate. As the defender knows the terrain, and can choose where to fight, they should have a ~2:1 advantage. In addition, both the Fascists and the Lizards have racial advantages for both attacking and defending. These advantages are the reverse of what they should be.
It makes no sense that 5kt of supplies are able to repair 1% damage on a Gorbie Class Battlecarrier (980kt hull mass), while that same 5kt of supplies will still repair only 1% damage on a Neutronic Fuel Carrier (10kt hull mass).
Beams can be used at more than 2.5 times the distance against fighters as they can against planets, starbases or starships. As the fighters are smaller targets, they should be more difficult to hit.
If you look at a curve of maximum population vs. temperature for the Rebels, the dip between 35°W and 20°W makes no logical sense. This dip, and the high population plateau below it, are contrary to the laws of nature. It would make vastly more sense if it stopped at 60K clans, and even more sense if it continued to follow the curve that controls population for temperatures between 15°W and 84°W.
The damage done by an ion storm to a starship is currently based on the total mass of the starship hull (with weapons), the fuel and the cargo. Logically, increasing the mass being supported by a hull (weapons, fuel and cargo) will make the hull more fragile, not less fragile.
Also, all ships move at the same 75% of the speed of the storm. Logically, the speed should be proportional to the ship's cross-section, and inversely proportional to the total mass (a heavier starship takes more energy to accelerate it).