Orbital Habitats

[Mel Vixen]

  a civilian owns one of my mobile orbital habitats.  Wow i wonder what he will do with that. 

stationing a habitat at a waypoint should work althought it still cant be a colony. 

[Xeno The Morph]

Can OHs be implemented into PDCs?

Not sure what you're aiming for, Unlimited. 

PDC is an acronym for Planetary Defense Center while OH is Orbital Habitat.  .  . 

Unless I'm misunderstanding, the mechanic for increasing the living capacity on a planet is via infrastructure, representing anything from breathing mask handout booths to all up atmospheric domes. 

Are you suggesting an Orbital Defense Center with mechanics and rules like the current PDC that would follow any if-implemented Orbital Habitat mechanics?  Or a different way of extending population via components attached to the PDCs built currently?

Well I know ONE good reason to allow them on PDCs (possibly with another name). 

Hollowed out Asteroid Habitats
(i.  e.   hollowed out and spun up to provide sufficent Pseudo G)

If you could put them on PDCs you could easily simulate these by building the prefabs of the PDC (there would be a few!) and then either

a) adding a few Engineering battalions and using their construction output to assemble the habitat.   then moving in the population
b) Sending out a 'Construction' habitat with a few construction factories and filling it with colonists once it gets there, then assembling the PDC and moving out the 'Construction' habitat elsewhere, while leaving the colonists in their new home!

The PDCs extra armour would even simulate the extra protection of the rest of the asteroids mass , and any extra ones you build just acts as though you are expanding the hollowed out volume.   

This would be much more fitting than having orbital Habitats just surrounding the colony.  .  .   and as PDCs are not always visible if they haven't been active (I think.  .  .  ) it could be a stealthy base.  .  .   especially if all else has been lost! And if you put one on an existing 'normal' colony it would just effectively be a bunkered population environment (in case of last resort)

Heck you might even find old Precursor Asteroid Habitats as a new type of 'mothballed' Precursor find, possibly even still acting as a base for active Precursor ships

What does everyone else think about this idea?

Edit: Just thinking about the issues involved with non-asteroid emplaced PDC habitats, to avoid the use of these on uninhabitable (other than asteroids) planetary objects you could check for either the g's being in the safe zone OR it being an asteroid (I assume this would be possible as asteroids are treated differently for mining and orbits) and if it isn't the habitat just wouldn't work , if it is it would work exactly like a standards orbital habitat for population in it,

[Erik L]

Well I know ONE good reason to allow them on PDCs (possibly with another name). 

Hollowed out Asteroid Habitats
What does everyone else think about this idea?

Why not just emplace a PDC on an asteroid?

[Xeno The Morph]

Well You can emplace a PDC on an asteroid but you won't have any population there unless you also have a 'normal' OH there (which could in theory be moved. . .  so isn't really permanent) , and that would be a highly visible and vulnerable addition, a Asteroidal Habitat would be self contained

[UnLimiTeD]

The reason I wanted Habitation modules in PDCs is that you can't armor Infrastructure.
Sure you can also use it on an Asteroid.

[Xeno The Morph]

The reason I wanted Habitation modules in PDCs is that you can't armor Infrastructure.
Sure you can also use it on an Asteroid.

Indeed I also agree that that would be a useful addition, just really like the ability to have asteroid colonies that could also bring about! 

The issue with the possibility of using them to colonise a 'bad' gravity world is a problem (& possibly why they currently cannot be added) but I think that could be solved with the edit I put in my original post.
(If my assumptions are correct, Steve would be the only one able to know that)

[Shadow]

Sorry about resurrecting the thread, but I've noticed a potential exploit. On 5.42, it's possible to install the huge components of the Transport & Industry category on orbital habitats while still theoretically allowing planetary factories to build the resulting design. Is this intended or not? It might revolutionize my terraforming methods, among other things, given I won't have to worry about slipway capacities.

[dalord0]

If you mean that you can build an orbital hab with construction factories, then this was intended by Steve to alleviate the need for massive slipways

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Sorry about resurrecting the thread, but I've noticed a potential exploit. On 5.42, it's possible to install the huge components of the Transport & Industry category on orbital habitats while still theoretically allowing planetary factories to build the resulting design. Is this intended or not? It might revolutionize my terraforming methods, among other things, given I won't have to worry about slipway capacities.

I assume you mean using 1 orbital habitat module to qualify for construction factory build and a lot of terraforming modules. I hadn't thought of using them in that way so I guess it is an exploit. Although you can already build terraforming installations into PDCs using planetary industry. You can't move them afterwards . I'll have to check out the figures and see if this is really an issue.

Steve

[Shadow]

I assume you mean using 1 orbital habitat module to qualify for construction factory build and a lot of terraforming modules. I hadn't thought of using them in that way so I guess it is an exploit. Although you can already build terraforming installations into PDCs using planetary industry. You can't move them afterwards . I'll have to check out the figures and see if this is really an issue.

Steve

Exactly. The thing with habitats is that you can push them around with tug vessels. So you could have a 'habitat' that's actually a super mining/terraforming station that has one habitation module purely to dodge the shipyards, and 20-30 mining/terraformation modules. Sure, it'll be very expensive, but not really massive compare to OHs with several habitation modules.

That said, it doesn't feel terribly exploity. Perhaps what's in order is but a slight direction change for this whole thing, from Orbital Habitat to Space Station. The former would be just a class name, to describe space stations that are primarily orbital cities. I would allow most components on them (except things like engines, primarily), and have the type-defining piece be something like a station command deck. Yes, you'd be able to militarize stations, but in that case you would have to maintain that gigantic mofo. That wouldn't be pleasant.

[UnLimiTeD]

Ultimately, the maintenance should be reworked so that Commercial components in Military ships either get a bonus to hitpoints, or have a lot less Maintenance requirements.

[Shadow]

By the way... how are you supposed to reliably move these massive hulls? Can several tugs tractor the same target? Because I've done some tests, and it would take 100 commercial (magneto-plasma) engines to puuush a 1.5-megaton habitat at a modest 612 km/s. I can easily build ten 10-engine tugs, but a single 100-engine, 130-kiloton plus mega-tug? That's trickier.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

By the way... how are you supposed to reliably move these massive hulls? Can several tugs tractor the same target? Because I've done some tests, and it would take 100 commercial (magneto-plasma) engines to puuush a 1.5-megaton habitat at a modest 612 km/s. I can easily build ten 10-engine tugs, but a single 100-engine, 130-kiloton plus mega-tug? That's trickier.

Slowly . One Tug only!

While it might take 100 engines to push it at 612 km/s, it will only take 10 engines to move it at 61 km/s. In my current campaign the Soviet have 500,000 ton orbital habitats with their own engines that can move at 73 km/s. NATO built 1.25 megaton habitats that their Hercules class Tugs could move at 173 km/s. The Hercules has 30 commercial ion engines.

Steve

[voknaar]

I like the idea of a Space Station class listing. I don't agree they should be prohibited from the use of engines, but rather use them differently as far as the mechanics go. Space Stations could be set to orbit a spacial body such as a planet or moon/asteroid which is in turn orbiting the local sun. You would Tug the station to its intended distance then release. The Stations engines keep the Station orbiting at the speed you desire around the Stellar Body.

Would mostly be for flare unless line of effect rules get applied. Enemies at the gate? Move the orbital habitats to the far side of the planet to avoid immediate missile bombardment. Send the battle stations to block the ground invasion forces. Swing by the moon every few years while in position pick up maint supplies and reload mags. Build luxury resorts for your liners to send colonists to and from, set them to have the best view of the sunset! Build Spy Satelites and sneakily hide them in radiation belts* around earth like planets.

But that's just my imagination running away again. 

*See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt

[Shadow]

I like the idea of a Space Station class listing. I don't agree they should be prohibited from the use of engines, but rather use them differently as far as the mechanics go. Space Stations could be set to orbit a spacial body such as a planet or moon/asteroid which is in turn orbiting the local sun. You would Tug the station to its intended distance then release. The Stations engines keep the Station orbiting at the speed you desire around the Stellar Body.

I'd assume maneuvering thrusters, apogee motors and other minor engines are taken for granted: all spaceborne designs have a minimum speed of 1 km/s, after all. Aurora only quantifies the large, major engines that are meant to allow for actual space travel. A space station equipped with such engines would become a ship.