Remove Big Asteroids Orbiting Aquilo

[DrakeyC]

When I first reached Aquilo, I attempted to build a stationary orbital platform to supply the planet with Iron and Copper, among other resources. This proved unfeasible due to a simple factor that made this concept much more complex than it seemed - Big Asteroids. Their presence meant my resource platform had to have a Rocket Turret(s) to handle them, and thus my platform needed to have much larger, more complex infrastructure than I planned. I struggled to get the platform to something resembling self-sustaining and self-protecting, as it took numerous rocket loads to get everything necessary to automate the production of Rockets on the platform, as well as Repair Packs because the Big Asteroids pulverized my platform any time it ran out of Rockets, and if it ran out the whole thing ground to a halt until a Medium Asteroid drifted by since there were no resources.

To get to the point, I think it would be better all-around if Big Asteroids only spawned when traveling to/from Aquilo, not while in orbit. If you can get to Aquilo in the first place, the same platform would be fine hovering in orbit, so such a balance change would only affect stationary platforms like what I attempted. And removing Big Asteroids would let the platform defend itself with Gun Turrets, making it far-more effective and simple all-around. Since I have no raw resources on the planet to craft with, anything I want to build there must be imported, which is just additional complication since again, I already survived the first trip, round trips to get rocket supplies and the like are just busywork to get my hands on science packs. But, if the planet could be self-sustaining, it would be far more interesting to play around on it.

[angramania]

my platform needed to have much larger, more complex infrastructure than I planned

Even blue science requires much larger and more complex infrastructure than most players initially planned for. So, do the same thing you did with all other unplanned complexities—plan for it.

it took numerous rocket loads to get everything necessary

Then, build it near Vulcanus or Fulgora. Obviously, you don’t have to build the platform by sending rockets from Aquillo.

Big Asteroids pulverized my platform any time it ran out of Rockets

And biters will eat you alive when you run out of bullets. Guess what? Right, just make more rockets. Actually, it’s even easier than with biters because killing biters depletes your resources, but destroying asteroids supplies you with resources."

[DrakeyC]

my platform needed to have much larger, more complex infrastructure than I planned

Even blue science requires much larger and more complex infrastructure than most players initially planned for. So, do the same thing you did with all other unplanned complexities—plan for it.

"Do what you do other times something unplanned happens - plan for it".

Wha?

Then, build it near Vulcanus or Fulgora. Obviously, you don’t have to build the platform by sending rockets from Aquillo.

I do if I want it at Aquilo, unless I also want to add a bunch more infrastructure for rocket thrusters and fuel.

And biters will eat you alive when you run out of bullets. Guess what? Right, just make more rockets. Actually, it’s even easier than with biters because killing biters depletes your resources, but destroying asteroids supplies you with resources."

As I said, the platform did not consistently take in enough resources to sustain itself. I'm sure others have figured out more efficient layouts, but I had five gatherers, one on each side and two on the front, and they did not take in enough resources to replenish Rockets faster than I used them up. This contributed to me dismantling the platform, it was bailing out a sinking ship, just delaying inevitable collapse.

[The Phoenixian]

That's odd. By memory It should be entirely possible to replenish rocket ammo faster than it's used around Aquilo, even with the big asteroids eating it up. Though I've not experimented with stationary platforms around Aquilo, specifically.

I don't have a clear picture of your setup, so I have a few diagnostic questions:

Are you filtering targets so that rockets are only used to destroy Big Asteroids, and not any of the smaller chunks they break into?
(I know, I know, it's a really basic way to deal with ammo production rate bottlenecks you almost certainly already know about, but it's not clear from your post, so I feel I should ask to be absolutely sure.)

How many rockets does it take to destroy a big asteroid with your current explosive damage upgrades? (2000 Big Asteroid Health / (rocket damage * 0.9) for quick manual reference)
Stronger explosive upgrades can have outsized effects, since there are a few break points where each asteroid takes one less rocket to break up. IIRC, somewhere around 8, 10, and 12 goes from 5 to 4 rockets, from 4 to 3 rockets and from 3 to 2 rockets to break up a big asteroid, respectively. It's made major differences for me, so it could be a big help for that kind of project.

You also mention resource rates being a problem. It sounds like defenses might have been a later addition in the plans: Are you prioritizing rockets first, or does another operation get resource priority? (IE: Ice feeding water to reactors instead of being reprocessed for sulfur, carbon, and iron.)

[DrakeyC]

That's odd. By memory It should be entirely possible to replenish rocket ammo faster than it's used around Aquilo, even with the big asteroids eating it up. Though I've not experimented with stationary platforms around Aquilo, specifically.

I don't have a clear picture of your setup, so I have a few diagnostic questions:

Are you filtering targets so that rockets are only used to destroy Big Asteroids, and not any of the smaller chunks they break into?
(I know, I know, it's a really basic way to deal with ammo production rate bottlenecks you almost certainly already know about, but it's not clear from your post, so I feel I should ask to be absolutely sure.)

How many rockets does it take to destroy a big asteroid with your current explosive damage upgrades? (2000 Big Asteroid Health / (rocket damage * 0.9) for quick manual reference)
Stronger explosive upgrades can have outsized effects, since there are a few break points where each asteroid takes one less rocket to break up. IIRC, somewhere around 8, 10, and 12 goes from 5 to 4 rockets, from 4 to 3 rockets and from 3 to 2 rockets to break up a big asteroid, respectively. It's made major differences for me, so it could be a big help for that kind of project.

You also mention resource rates being a problem. It sounds like defenses might have been a later addition in the plans: Are you prioritizing rockets first, or does another operation get resource priority? (IE: Ice feeding water to reactors instead of being reprocessed for sulfur, carbon, and iron.)

Yes, I filtered the Rocket Turrets to only shoot Big ones, and my explosives were enough to two-shot them.

[J-H]

Yellow rockets work about as well (unless you have a high density asteroid field) and take fewer resources to make. Just a thought.

[pioruns]

Yes, I filtered the Rocket Turrets to only shoot Big ones, and my explosives were enough to two-shot them.

Then big asteroids should not be a problem for you. Increase chunks processing and reprocessing if you are running out of something and not making enough rockets.
I built my ship by hand, it's first yourney and time on Aquilo orbit was a success. I have no problem staying on Aquilo orbit as it is, and you shouldn't have too. My ship is overflowing with red ammo and rockets, and I am limiting their amounts on shared belt.
I see your balancing request for the game as invalid.

[angramania]

I do if I want it at Aquilo, unless I also want to add a bunch more infrastructure for rocket thrusters and fuel.

Looks like this is your main mistake. It is far easier to build ship on suitable planet and let it fly to final destination. And you do not need dozens thrusters and massive supporting infrastructure if ship should do only one flight.

As I said, the platform did not consistently take in enough resources to sustain itself. I'm sure others have figured out more efficient layouts, but I had five gatherers, one on each side and two on the front, and they did not take in enough resources to replenish Rockets faster than I used them up.

It is rarely about not enough gatherers. Usually it is about not enough production infrastructure. If your design include throwing anything to space then you have enough gatherers but ineffective design, time to rethink it. Also do not try to make platform small at this stage of a game, especially if its role is space station not transport ship.

[trancexpress]

I got 3 space mining platforms above Aquilo (and a ton of various productivities researched). They work fine, designing them was way more fun than designing my other space miners.

[thekoreanseal]

then wat, add huge asteriods?