Spaceship Bonus: Why no free settler option?

[GeoModder]

Or at least the ability to move your Headquarters once you have a second city.

Simple. Let an AI colony capture your "city of landing".

 

[Aeson]

Simple. Let an AI colony capture your "city of landing".

Yah, or restart the game.

I'd rather something that would be an interesting choice though.

 

[Aeson]

Moving your HQ (although not the 'original capital' designation for Conquest Victory...perhaps rename it to controling all landing zones) would be good. There is less that's important about it now.
1. The output of the HQ building
2. Road/railroad connection
3. Place to collect expedition yields

That seems to be it.
Perhaps a '10 turns to relocate' for the HQ?

Yah, I think it should be not too expensive. There are some extra HQ modifiers, but not much. So the benefits of moving aren't tremendous.

Being able to move the Capital would be nice too, but need to be limited. Maybe limit it to one move in the first X turns so it can't be exploited for prolonging Domination but still you could say, "this isn't a viable location economically/defensively" early on and make the move to greener pastures.

 

[MasterDinadan]

There's also the fact cities founded by Colonists in Beyond Earth have to spend a bunch of turns as an outpost before properly growing to settlement status.

The rule cannot be ignored, and in the case of a first city, it'd mean a crushing disadvantage regardless of alien aggression.

They could very easily just send you a unique colonist unit that can settle without having to go through outpost stage. I think this would be a very reasonable choice, although not a very good one for the reasons I mentioned. It would need something extra to really be viable (maybe your second city also skips the outpost stage?)

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

The radius for retrograde thrusters is about the radius I would be willing to walk my starting settler in civ5 anyway. Plus thrusters gives me vision of the map. With the vivarium, mass digestor, resource spawning satellites, and very early access to embarkation, the only possible bad start would be one where mountains or canyons take up most of the capital's workable tiles.

 

[telekinetic136]

I like the city being the place you land the spaceship as an atheistic choice. Also there is the fact settlers make out posts which become cities so it is needed in game play for us to start as a city not start as a settler.

 

[Urbannaja]

There's an easy answer to this question: it would double the benefit to all other options.

There are NO settlers in the game, just pioneers. When you build a pioneer (assuming you also start with pioneering), it costs a ton of resources. More importantly though, when you use a pioneer to build an outpost, it *also* comes with its own soldier. So with a pioneer, you get a new outpost+soldier. That would make it far more overpowered compared to the rest of the starting perks.

 

[Napoleon_IV]

I guess in the civilization series you started off as a bunch of nomads ready to settle their first city so you start with a wandering settler. No mission, just spend as much time as you see fit to find a desirable place and settle it. In civ time that could take over a hundred years!
In BE it's more of a mission where your goal is to land and set up, knowing that time is of the essence and that others are comming to challenge you too. So the immediate land and set up makes more sense.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

There's an easy answer to this question: it would double the benefit to all other options.

There are NO settlers in the game, just pioneers. When you build a pioneer (assuming you also start with pioneering), it costs a ton of resources. More importantly though, when you use a pioneer to build an outpost, it *also* comes with its own soldier. So with a pioneer, you get a new outpost+soldier. That would make it far more overpowered compared to the rest of the starting perks.

You only get a soldier with a quest... so it only applies to your First outpost.