Stardock has achieved probably the greatest sandbox experience (by map size) there is, few would argue that. But with this accomplishment has come challenges the team is still working on and more challenges will come, as we all watch with curiosity: what improvements come next.
With galaxy size so LUDICROUS as it is now, and, perhaps, even more galactic sizes in the future, sooner or later one must come to realization that I did today: galaxy diversity must be dependant on galaxy size. What I mean by that? It is obvious that small or tiny maps are simply too small to have all the attributes that the game has to offer. Tiny map can have only few planets, no extreme planets, very few strategic resources, very few black holes (if any) and so on. So, obviously, there is a problem for tiny maps: we have too many sandbox toys for one tiny map to put in.
This same obvious truth works conversely on large maps. If a map is too large, the galactic features repeat themselves, repeat, repeat... But most players who choose to play INSANE/LUDICROUS maps seek exactly the contrary: some new, rare and unseen places and wonders. Even if they are aware of all possibilities they can have, they still play the largest size, in hopes to EXplore something new, something unseen.
What are the consequences, if Stardock wants the most LUDICROUS players to be satisfied? What Stardock must come up with, if the sandbox experience is to be proper and rich not only for tiny map players, but also the ludicrous and those who will come after the ludicrous size? I think the answer may surprise, but at the same time it is obvious: ludicrous diversity for ludicrous map. By that I mean 18 planetary types that each must be researched to be colonizable. By that I mean 26 strategic resources and 5 ways to collect/create them, depending on the resource. By that I mean completely new wonders for survey ships to EXplore.
You could say those demands are completely ludicrous and with such complexity that most players could get distracted. But the galaxy map is as ludicrous as those demands. If you like 6 strategic resources, play smaller maps. Even HUGE map is satisfyingly large for hours and hours to be spent. So we shall not be afraid of ludicrous complexity, if we keep in mind that Stardock shall pre-define available properties for each galaxy size. Sure, a player still could define galaxy's properties: how much rare or abundant this or that is. But to some extent the galaxy size shall limit players' options. Those limits shall serve practical purposes only. For example: We already know that huge ship hulls practically are not expected to be in tiny or small maps. If a black hole is found in tiny map, it can only be small. Some could say it does not fit in tiny map. The same could be said for my proposed properties to large or huge maps. But, as the map size grows, so must the diversity. The more ludicrous the size is, the more ludicrous must be the sandbox toys – its as "simple" as that.
And its not like my proposed ludicrousness do not correspond with real life, actual space. Have a glimpse at chemical table. Or try to find 2 look-alike planets in our own star system or 2 even planets in the galaxy. The nature is ludicrously diverse. So it only makes sense to achieve as complex diversity as possible, as the map size (sandbox experience) grows.
This realization came to me when discussing true EXploitation with admiralWillyWilber in the forum.