One thing that's always bothered me about galaxies is that everything seems so square. Take this picture for instance, the stars seem to line up in rows:
Outside of the general shape, there is no galactic geography, no chokepoints or clusters. In short, every star within the galaxy looks replaceable in relation to its neighbors. This looks really unnatural and breaks immersion, it's also one of the reasons why a lot of us use the procedural backgrounds: the other stars in the sky don't look very realistic. I think its also one of the reasons why the game seems empty - individual systems don't mean anything.
The reason why we get this is because every sector within the galactic shape (except black holes) automatically spawns a star.
Instead of this, it'd be better if there was only a chance of stars spawning inside of the galaxy shape and if that chance failed, a void system was spawned instead. This would lead to interesting constellations and clusters, resembling galaxies in a lot of other games, look at Spore:
Constellations and clusters like this, even though there are less stars in reality, would make the game feel less empty than it is now because there is a discernible geography, every star system will be more meaningful because it is a meaningful point that can be placed in the context of bigger map features (i.e. a system is in the center of a cluster, or between two clusters, etc.). For another illustration, just look at the ends of galactic arms in a current map. For some reason, they look cooler than the middle. This is because every star has a meaningful position in relation to the others and the galaxy as a whole. If the spawning of stars within a galactic shape weren't guaranteed, this would happen more for all stars - even within the core.
A very simple algorithm that just changes the chance of a star spawning would be easy to implement, a random number roll would just need to be added into the galactic generation algorithm right before it places a star. Eventually, I hope Schine would consider changing their algorithm entirely to use more advanced techniques like changing weighted chances for a star spawn per sector depending upon its neighbors and position within the galaxy in order to create more interesting clusters, large nebulae, etc. but they probably have bigger priorities right now.
This wouldn't change the practical star count all that noticeably much either. Some math (for those interested):
Conservatively assuming that there are only 5000 stars in a galaxy (about .2% of sectors in the 128x128x128 galactic square), a 20% chance of spawning a star in a system within the galactic shape would lead to about 1000 systems (still a lot more than the average player could visit in a few months) and would lead to each star only directly bordering 5-6 stars on average (instead of 26 like now). I'm not recommending 20% though, the actual spawn chance would probably have to be the result of trial and error and could even be inserted into the config file to take personal preference into account or varied by galaxy to make intergalactic travel more interesting.
This would lead to a lot of interesting and varied constellations and also create the illusion of a smaller galaxy by forcing factions to compete for less systems within the same space and giving certain systems strategic and tactical importance. All of this would lead to more interesting faction politics as factions begin to struggle over choke-points between clusters or develop imperial ambitions to conquer a cluster or region of stars.
If this were coupled with a revamp of station spawning that restricted the number of stations spawned by default in a sector to 1 or 2 (making every station more meaningful), it would lead to a galaxy in which players and factions have a greater incentive to spread out from the first galaxy's core and interstellar exploration is not only meaningful, but varied and necessary.
Outside of the general shape, there is no galactic geography, no chokepoints or clusters. In short, every star within the galaxy looks replaceable in relation to its neighbors. This looks really unnatural and breaks immersion, it's also one of the reasons why a lot of us use the procedural backgrounds: the other stars in the sky don't look very realistic. I think its also one of the reasons why the game seems empty - individual systems don't mean anything.
The reason why we get this is because every sector within the galactic shape (except black holes) automatically spawns a star.
Instead of this, it'd be better if there was only a chance of stars spawning inside of the galaxy shape and if that chance failed, a void system was spawned instead. This would lead to interesting constellations and clusters, resembling galaxies in a lot of other games, look at Spore:
Constellations and clusters like this, even though there are less stars in reality, would make the game feel less empty than it is now because there is a discernible geography, every star system will be more meaningful because it is a meaningful point that can be placed in the context of bigger map features (i.e. a system is in the center of a cluster, or between two clusters, etc.). For another illustration, just look at the ends of galactic arms in a current map. For some reason, they look cooler than the middle. This is because every star has a meaningful position in relation to the others and the galaxy as a whole. If the spawning of stars within a galactic shape weren't guaranteed, this would happen more for all stars - even within the core.
A very simple algorithm that just changes the chance of a star spawning would be easy to implement, a random number roll would just need to be added into the galactic generation algorithm right before it places a star. Eventually, I hope Schine would consider changing their algorithm entirely to use more advanced techniques like changing weighted chances for a star spawn per sector depending upon its neighbors and position within the galaxy in order to create more interesting clusters, large nebulae, etc. but they probably have bigger priorities right now.
This wouldn't change the practical star count all that noticeably much either. Some math (for those interested):
Conservatively assuming that there are only 5000 stars in a galaxy (about .2% of sectors in the 128x128x128 galactic square), a 20% chance of spawning a star in a system within the galactic shape would lead to about 1000 systems (still a lot more than the average player could visit in a few months) and would lead to each star only directly bordering 5-6 stars on average (instead of 26 like now). I'm not recommending 20% though, the actual spawn chance would probably have to be the result of trial and error and could even be inserted into the config file to take personal preference into account or varied by galaxy to make intergalactic travel more interesting.
This would lead to a lot of interesting and varied constellations and also create the illusion of a smaller galaxy by forcing factions to compete for less systems within the same space and giving certain systems strategic and tactical importance. All of this would lead to more interesting faction politics as factions begin to struggle over choke-points between clusters or develop imperial ambitions to conquer a cluster or region of stars.
If this were coupled with a revamp of station spawning that restricted the number of stations spawned by default in a sector to 1 or 2 (making every station more meaningful), it would lead to a galaxy in which players and factions have a greater incentive to spread out from the first galaxy's core and interstellar exploration is not only meaningful, but varied and necessary.
Last edited:
