What's wrong with Gas Giants?

[Ziggy Stardust]

They have the rings which can be mined, they're the bullies in the system so they have to be taken serious when determining whether a system is a likely candidate for colonisation/exploitation. They have resources in them which can be ... scooped? At least if Mr. Braben is to be believed.

So why are they so low value?

And they're work intensive. Well, for me they are, because scanning a Gas Giant and not the moons is sinful in my book (one copy, at my desk)

Why no love for the celestial body which arguably is the most interesting of the lot?

 

[Zieman]

I've been wondering the same for aong time. Currently only Class II Gas Giants are somewhat valuable.

 

[Tinman]

They have the rings which can be mined, they're the bullies in the system so they have to be taken serious when determining whether a system is a likely candidate for colonisation/exploitation. They have resources in them which can be ... scooped? At least if Mr. Braben is to be believed.

So why are they so low value, while they're work intensive. Well, for me they are, because scanning a Gas Giant and not the moons is sinful in my book (one copy, at my desk)

Why no love for the celestial body which arguably is the most interesting of the lot?

Not just rings...asteroid belts too have zero value...

The only two locations in the game (currently) where we and NPCs can actually get hold of valuable resources to mine and "drive the industry" and yet they have zero value when exploring.

Different kind of planets that we (currently) can NOT access and get valuable resources from on the other hand...

Yeah...doesn't make much sense...

 

[Katejina]

Everything space-related that I've read/played (Mass Effect and Hyperion book series come to mind) have made the assumption that mankind will eventually have orbitals around gas giants because they can be used to collect the gasses and convert those gasses into fuel of some sort. I, of course, have no idea if there is any solid evidence to support the theory, but I've always felt as if Gas Giants were of some importance, so I get ya.

 

[RMORTI]

Have to agree, on both counts. The pricing value is very odd especially the zero value for asteroid belts. Could it be that planetary landing will change how mining is conducted? That in the future, we will land on a Heavy metal planet and mine? Then mining laser and limpets would not be needed, we'd need something else like a mobile drilling rig that drives out the cargo hatch.

And then there are there "terraform-able candidates" but they have atmospheric pressure of 18+ atmospheres and temperatures of 400+ Kelvin. 18 atmospheres, and I could be wrong, but think it would be like walking around in water at a depth of almost 600ft and temperature of 127 degrees Celsius. Wouldn't that be like living inside a pressure cooker? How could you terraform that?

 

[Yaffle]

Many of the books refer to fuel scooping from gas giants, and the pilots preferring that to the stars for safety reasons.

You could, IIRC, scoop gas giants in Frontier and FFE.

 

[Cmdr Raz]

And then there are there "terraform-able candidates" but they have atmospheric pressure of 18+ atmospheres and temperatures of 400+ Kelvin. 18 atmospheres, and I could be wrong, but think it would be like walking around in water at a depth of almost 600ft and temperature of 127 degrees Celsius. Wouldn't that be like living inside a pressure cooker? How could you terraform that?

I've seen terraformable candidates near 1000 Kelvin, with the same sort of atmospheric pressure. I do wonder about the poor people chosen to colonize these things... Imperial slaves, perhaps? Or just plain old slaves? Of course, I've also discovered "ice planets" above 500 Kelvin, so, you know...

I agree on the gas giants, and especially the rings, since the rings seem to provide an enormous amount of the metals (all the player generated anyway) produced in the galaxy. And that's worth nothing?

- - - Updated - - -

Many of the books refer to fuel scooping from gas giants, and the pilots preferring that to the stars for safety reasons.

You could, IIRC, scoop gas giants in Frontier and FFE.

Indeed you could scoop from gas giants in Frotier and FFE - I wonder why they didn't bring it back tbh

 

[Roqinn]

And they're work intensive. Well, for me they are, because scanning a Gas Giant and not the moons is sinful in my book (one copy, at my desk)

Why no love for the celestial body which arguably is the most interesting of the lot?

You wont want to follow after me then as I rarely scan all or even any of the moons of the gas giants. If I want a nice close up look at the gas giant I will since I'm there already. Otherwise; no.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

You wont want to follow after me then as I rarely scan all or even any of the moons of the gas giants. If I want a nice close up look at the gas giant I will since I'm there already. Otherwise; no.

That's why it's just my book You do whatever you please.

If your rule is only scanning the 3rd moon, all the best to you

 

[Roqinn]

That's why it's just my book You do whatever you please.

If your rule is only scanning the 3rd moon, all the best to you

1st, 3rd and 5th moon but only on every other 5th Friday! lol

 

[AsukaZ]

I agree, values seem out of wack.
Esp. asteroid belts.

I'm hoping the next update will address some of these issues.
At least make asteroid belts worth something !
Related to their metal content perhaps.

 

[EUS]

One problem with payout adjustments is that although you get more creds/scan, Elite goalposts are moved further away too.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

They didn't adjust it with the 200% perk.
And even then I don't see a problem.
And they can always descrease the value of other objects to compensate.

But the bottomline is: I just don't get the reasoning behind it.

 

[Allitnil]

ED exploration is generally more enjoyable if you don't look too hard for logic or scientific accuracy...

 

[avow555]

I gotta agree the lack of payment for gas giants is baffling same goes for no payment at all for asteroid belts.

 

[EUS]

But the bottomline is: I just don't get the reasoning behind it.

Me neither.

 

[Whiterose]

I always scan gas giants anyway, as you can fo it a lot further away. I dont scan the moons purely to wind up Ziggy.

 

[Leper Messiah]

I used to scan everything, even asteroid fields/belts.....took sooooooooooo long and quickly became mind numbingly boring that I started to pick and choose what I scan, even in undiscovered systems...just can't be naffed to scan the lot of them. Now if the scanning process was quicker then yeah. But at the mo, waiting for that bleep bleep bleep bleep bleep noise to finish is really ...well, crap!

If they speed up the scanning process, increase payouts for gas giants and have a payout for asteroid then things would be a LOT better for explorers, I'd probably spend longer in each system scanning everything again, but the process wouldn't be such a (I hate using the word but I have to ) grind. It's just NOT fun watching that spinny scan icon animation thing and waiting and waiting and waiting for it to finish.

 

[Ziljan]

But the bottomline is: I just don't get the reasoning behind it.

Isnt it obvious? They wanted every astronomical body to have economic value for PLAYERS for pure gameplay reasons, not logical/simulation reasons. Rings and belts already have economic value via mining, pirating, and bounty hunting. The extrinsic and logical data value of these explored items is almost irrelevant. Every other exploration item is valued based on a weighted version of its rarity.

 

[Kuroshio]

Isnt it obvious? They wanted every astronomical body to have economic value for PLAYERS for pure gameplay reasons, not logical/simulation reasons. Rings and belts already have economic value via mining, pirating, and bounty hunting. The extrinsic and logical data value of these explored items is almost irrelevant. Every other exploration item is valued based on a weighted version of its rarity.

To be fair, value based on rarity is a basic economic principle - like main sequence stars (which don't pay much as well), gas giants may be useful, but they are also pretty abundant. (In a somewhat crude analogy - early explorers went looking for spices, not apples, even though apples are more nutritious.) Or, to keep it in space: We could probably mine (scoop? siphon?) our local gas and water giants for ages, but the real estate in the solar system will still be rather limited and difficult to increase.

One problem is, I guess, that if we include 'usefullness' as a modifier - habitable, terra-formable, exploitable, et ceterable - we would also have to take distance into account. An Earth-like in Dominion space might be interesting for the science community (that's us, I guess), but you won't see any colony ships moving there any time soon. Loss of value by distance would, however, be a serious blow to (an already somewhat fragile) exploration gameplay.

I know, I know, I'm making up in-game reasons for strange design decisions again... Even though I love gas giants.