Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes Discussion  (Read 442321 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Person012345

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 539
  • Thanked: 29 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #465 on: December 20, 2016, 10:09:22 AM »
Population is directly calculated as "productive" units, part of them become highly trained personnel that can work in financial centers, research labs and such, so it makes sense that forced labor slaves are considered somewhat apart, they cannot simply "join" a population and become productive citizens. One can always RP that part of the population is made of "loyal slaves" that are allowed a certain degree of freedom and basic training, apart from "rebellious/uncontrollable slaves" that are to be closely guarded/segregated in mines and factories and cannot be allowed to access populated areas.

It's unlikely, in such a technologically advanced society, that slave rebellions would be a problem. They're unarmed and utterly controlled, the lowest of the low. Even slave revolts in ancient times were generally put down without major issue, let alone for a society that can nuke them from orbit. Also, if slaves aren't productive then what are they for? Assume that the free population are the skilled workers and the slaves are the manual labourers (which creates the administrative jobs). Although a well educated alien population wouldn't suddenly become stupid and incapable of skilled work just because they were conquered for example.

I suppose there could be issues with modelling productivity (since slaves aren't nearly as motivated as a free population).
« Last Edit: December 20, 2016, 10:11:42 AM by Person012345 »
 

Offline ryuga81

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • r
  • Posts: 40
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #466 on: December 22, 2016, 06:05:42 AM »
You can disarm and utterly control them only if you repress them and make them work at gunpoint, otherwise they would be capable of rebellion, sabotage, assassinations & such.

A well educated alien population wouldn't be as eager to do intellectual/skilled work for an invader, and you wouldn't certainly trust them with strategic job positions (you wouldn't want them anywhere near your ships or weaponry, and you wouldn't let them manage your research or your wealth), so even if they are educated, you are forced to view them as slave labor for mines, factories and other dangerous places. They are "productive" only in that sense.
 

Offline Triato

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • T
  • Posts: 82
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #467 on: December 22, 2016, 11:50:09 AM »
I don´t know if we can cout them as slaves, but during and after WWII many scientists worked as prisoners.
 

Offline NuclearStudent

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • N
  • Posts: 95
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #468 on: December 22, 2016, 05:32:10 PM »
With the change you can;
A) Create massive orbital refinery stations with dozens of refueling systems.
B) Create a modular system where tugs can pick up refueling/tanker modules.
C) Manage your tankers via sub-fleets and conditional orders.
D) Simply do things as normal but make sure to have a few systems on your tankers/supply ships.

I use fighter-tankers a lot. They may not be intentional, but as a somewhat careless person, the current system saves a lot of micromanagement and grief.

If this system is implemented, I would vastly prefer it to be optional, like being able to opt out of maintenance.
 
The following users thanked this post: Happerry

Offline Hydrofoil

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • H
  • Posts: 123
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #469 on: January 05, 2017, 06:16:30 AM »
I know this is probably asked alot but any indication of when a release to your faithful fans might be made?
 

Offline Borealis4x

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 717
  • Thanked: 141 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #470 on: January 05, 2017, 07:20:55 AM »
I hope that automated mines will be replaced or supplemented by buildable mining complexes like the civilians can make with more output and native mass drivers. I wouldn't mind them being heavier and more expensive if it meant less trips for my freighters and more efficient mineral transfer.   
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11651
  • Thanked: 20354 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #471 on: January 05, 2017, 01:11:31 PM »
I know this is probably asked alot but any indication of when a release to your faithful fans might be made?

Not for several months. I had hoped to get a lot of work done over Xmas but I wasn't well. I did manage to complete system generation though and I am now working on the system view window as I get the time.
 

Offline ORCACommander

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • Posts: 16
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #472 on: January 07, 2017, 05:05:20 PM »
Today's Changes:

for airless bodies, shouldn't the population maximum be more a function of volume instead of surface area since those require underground infrastructure?


For normal bodies how does the interact with the infrastructure mechanic?
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11651
  • Thanked: 20354 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #473 on: January 07, 2017, 06:24:35 PM »
Today's Changes:

for airless bodies, shouldn't the population maximum be more a function of volume instead of surface area since those require underground infrastructure?

For normal bodies how does the interact with the infrastructure mechanic?

There is no underground infrastructure in C# Aurora. It has been replaced by low gravity infrastructure. I will be adding some tech though to expand capacity on smaller bodies.

The capacity is the same, whether infrastructure is needed or not. Capacity is not the same as life support. So if a planet can hold a billion people, that capacity can be reached by terraforming or by constructing enough infrastructure to support it.
 

Jon W

  • Guest
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #474 on: January 08, 2017, 08:49:14 AM »
Hi Steve,

Looks awesome! Regarding todays changes to population - you say that excessive water will put a cap on surface area for population, but is the reverse true? Will a planet with no hydrosphere whatsoever have a penalty to max pop? It always seemed like even if you did add a breathable atmosphere to a rocky moon or planet, the surface of that world is still going to be a dry desert.  Maybe I've been reading the Expanse too much, but it would be cool to see water demand or water/gas mining and shipping be abstracted in some way.

Also - are there any plans to change the starting population of Earth to reflect the 7 billion current, or whatever the projected population will be in 2025? I know the current balancing is done for the starting value of 500m but I can never really parse this into a real-world explanation without some massive genocide!

 

Offline Hazard

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • H
  • Posts: 643
  • Thanked: 73 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #475 on: January 08, 2017, 12:06:09 PM »
In regards to terraforming changes; I like it, but creating hydrospheres should probably take much longer than atmospheres. Earth's hydrosphere is 250 times or so as massive as the atmosphere after all. Biospheres would also be nice. Both hydrospheres and biospheres should affect habitability. Hydrospheres because without freely available water there's going to be a need for massive infrastructure projects to keep it available, and without biospheres maintaining a livable atmosphere might be difficult. Biospheres should also range from 'safe' to 'extremely dangerous' to indicate how hostile the biosphere as a whole is to the settlers. It should be possible to manipulate biospheres through GMCs.

In regards to refueling changes; should there not be a maximum number of ships that can be refueled at once at a given level of Spaceport/Refueling Station level? Sure, ships you can build in fighter factories probably should be exempt as they can just land, but larger ships are going to need orbital infrastructure. And are there limits on refueling speeds for hangars? I didn't see any.

Population over capacity should not only cause unrest due to overcrowding but also induce a negative population growth. And given the influence excessively large hydrospheres have on population capacity, is it possible to remove hydrospheres without water vapour in the air, or is a planet with a hydrosphere presumed to always have a lot of water vapour.
 
The following users thanked this post: palu

Offline Aldaris

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 114
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #476 on: January 08, 2017, 02:46:01 PM »
It's mentioned in the change post that Earth's hydrosphere aids in habitability. Does this mean that 0% water-coverage will result in a colony cost? Will there be a way to affect water coverage through terraforming?
 

Offline Bughunter

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 929
  • Thanked: 132 times
  • Discord Username: Bughunter
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #477 on: January 08, 2017, 02:50:04 PM »
Just one thing on overpopulation, please give a thought to small asteroids/moons not constantly becoming overpopulated and filling the log with warnings about it. Would be nice to have a way to avoid without too much micromanagement. Maybe additional growth on them could automatically be transferred to the nearest planet or lowest colony cost population in the system causing the overpopulation there?
 

Offline Barkhorn

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • B
  • Posts: 719
  • Thanked: 133 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #478 on: January 08, 2017, 04:25:51 PM »
I'm not sure the amount of land should affect the maximum population.  Certainly if the player has the technology to build anti-matter engines, they should be able to build as many floating cities as they want.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11651
  • Thanked: 20354 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #479 on: January 08, 2017, 05:10:31 PM »
It's mentioned in the change post that Earth's hydrosphere aids in habitability. Does this mean that 0% water-coverage will result in a colony cost? Will there be a way to affect water coverage through terraforming?

Yes, you will be able to add water. See the Terraforming thread in Suggestions.