Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes Discussion  (Read 442058 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1110 on: November 06, 2017, 10:57:13 AM »
What's your energy source there?  Life is on the surface because the energy is there.  Yes, I know about extremophiles living in deep-sea vents or geysers in Yellowstone.  But the surface seems overwhelmingly likely, particularly for complex life.

What says that anything besides the leaves of the vegetation need to be above the surface?

With a bit of imagination and Sci-Fi storytelling leeway we could have all types of glowing rocks and vegetation with deep root networks that fuel the herbivors and tunnelers with energy. Add underground rivers carrying stuff around or deeper as well.

Or you could have a situation where the surface is so hot/cold that going subterranean is required for a more balanced temperature ( relying either on geothermal or the energy/warmth that trickles down. )
 

Offline Hazard

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • H
  • Posts: 643
  • Thanked: 73 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1111 on: November 06, 2017, 11:34:49 AM »
Steve; will you be tying civilian good production to biomes? Not a hard lock of course, but certain dominant terrains might be more likely to produce certain types of goods in excess or have a shortage.

What says that anything besides the leaves of the vegetation need to be above the surface?

With a bit of imagination and Sci-Fi storytelling leeway we could have all types of glowing rocks and vegetation with deep root networks that fuel the herbivors and tunnelers with energy. Add underground rivers carrying stuff around or deeper as well.

Or you could have a situation where the surface is so hot/cold that going subterranean is required for a more balanced temperature ( relying either on geothermal or the energy/warmth that trickles down. )

Yes, let's ignore the massive efficiency gain that is not having to dig your way through soil and rock and eschew walking on the surface through thin air. Alien biomes will have to be as plausible as terrestrial ones, and one of the biggest constraints is energy efficiency.
 

Offline bean

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • b
  • Posts: 916
  • Thanked: 56 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1112 on: November 06, 2017, 11:40:09 AM »
What says that anything besides the leaves of the vegetation need to be above the surface?
The bit where I can get more energy from my neighbor by being taller than him.  And the bit where I don't have to push stuff out of the way to grow.

I'm not saying that underground life is impossible, just that I wouldn't expect complex life to occur entirely underground. 
This is Excel-in-Space, not Wing Commander - Rastaman
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1113 on: November 06, 2017, 11:59:59 AM »
From what I understand we are descendent of rodents which survived from the Dinosaurs by digging underground not that long ago...

So if you want a more scientific explanation: What if that asteroid that wipes the dinosaurs out never hits Earth but intelligent life develop underground by necessity of hiding from the big beasts instead?

Yes, let's ignore the massive efficiency gain that is not having to dig your way through soil and rock and eschew

What says the gravity must be the same or higher then Earths? In a low gravity world the soil would be significantly less packed and easier to dig through... Especially if it's ground up by big roots or alien mycelium.

If you can't survive on the surface it doesn't matter how much more energy efficient living there would be.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 12:03:46 PM by alex_brunius »
 

Offline bean

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • b
  • Posts: 916
  • Thanked: 56 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1114 on: November 06, 2017, 12:06:17 PM »
From what I understand we are descendent of rodents which survived from the Dinosaurs by digging underground not that long ago...

So if you want a more scientific explanation: What if that asteroid that wipes the dinosaurs out never hits Earth but intelligent life develop underground by necessity of hiding from the big beasts instead?
A lot of animals burrow to get shelter.  Very few of them live exclusively underground.  Those that do tend to be smaller, because moving underground isn't very energy-efficient, and being big means that you need to cover a lot of territory looking for food.
This is Excel-in-Space, not Wing Commander - Rastaman
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1115 on: November 06, 2017, 12:08:47 PM »
A lot of animals burrow to get shelter.  Very few of them live exclusively underground.  Those that do tend to be smaller

What says intelligent life must be as large as humans?
 

Offline Hazard

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • H
  • Posts: 643
  • Thanked: 73 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1116 on: November 06, 2017, 12:19:46 PM »
What says intelligent life must be as large as humans?

Brain capacity requirements for sapience.

To put it very simply, below a certain size of the brain it's impossible to achieve sapience.
 

Offline serger

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 634
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1117 on: November 06, 2017, 12:23:39 PM »
I think, byron is right. There is no chance to build some good story to explain how your kinky-mln-ton terraforming fleet grows the whole planet of jungle from that just-last-year-cryohell. You cannot grow your trees 10 times faster, if you just set 10 times more terraforming stations to work. Jungles must grow for decades, and I cannot see any reason for a player to wait that decades with Aurora terraforming techs.

Generally speaking, I think that terraforming in Aurora is just a little over 1000 times stronger that it must be. When you can make habbitable planet of Mercury with two month of orbital terraforming, and it's just the beginning of your stellar expancion... it's just too much. There is no value in planets with life, no point in serching those planets, when you can just make such things from dead stones.
 

Offline serger

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 634
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1118 on: November 06, 2017, 03:17:04 PM »
Well, more thoughts around of KISS principle.
Because those different preferable zones that I suggested this morning - that was stupid, but wasn't simple. :)

And I agree with Hazard eventually: there is no way to have any other dominant terrain in decisive fight (for transnewtonian civilization colony) apart from urban and suburban.
Therefore, there is no place, no relevance for detailed biome terrain types in surface battle for the colony per se.
You just cannot dig your infantry in those jungle mountains, when your (or alien) cities are placed on more clean terrain spots.
And there is no sense at all in training infantry at this dominant terrain, because there are all those terrain types at the same planet of Earth! Just place your training camp at polar ice or at equatorial jungles, as you wish. Planets are not homogeneous - nor our Earth, nor other earth-like planets, nor those numerous tidal-locked planets (without dense atmosphere) of red dwarf stars especially!

For an StO transnewtonian fight, I can see only two factors, that I can cram into some Aurora AAR without disbelieve:
1. Atmosphere density, that is already realized in VB6.
2. Urban TN-masking. That is: if you see some noticeable TN signature on a planet from a space - you cannot understand if this signature is a military target, or it's civilian car, house, factory, etc, because those civilians use TN techs too. It's difficult to separate targets - not on the wild, but on the city, on the contrary! If you detect some heat or EM noise on the wild - you just aim it and blow it with your meson cannons, it's no problem at all, because if your fire control is precise enough to kill missiles at their velocities, than you aim any bunker without any trouble, the same moment you detect it, and there's no way to hinder you with such things as mountains and trees, that are just not TN signatures and cannot mask TN military activity, correspondingly. The problem is, that if you blow each signature on a planet - you will destroy the whole colony infrastructure, that is the most valuable asset on a planet, actually. Then you can just glass this planet with the same result.

So, Aurora troopers must fight on cities. And if you have low intel on the race that you attack, than you must have a penalty with separating military targets, because your men cannot understand alien common domestic forms and signs. It's all that must be count in decisive surface combat.

But! I see great area for guerrilla/covert operations in this dominant terrain! We have an ansibles, so our spies and guerrillas can hide in difficult terrain to dispatch ships and stations orbiting this planet, eavesdrop enemy com traffic, make covert diversions against your civillians and administration, and so on. More difficult terrain - more infantry you need to clean this planet from enemy spies and guerrillas, or just defend your urban sites, especially on enemy home planet biome. And that is where those biomes are very important! Intel, exhaustion warfare and microbiological attacks. There are very important things, that can force you to glass this planet eventually, instead of having such prolonged, costly and potentially catastrophically troubles.

So, there are only 2 biome marks that have relevance:
1. Race, that have this biome as native. Earth biome = human race biome. Period.
2. Density of biome, that is set to 100% on the homeworld and is rising from 0% to 100% by terraforming efforts in colonies. (And I think that terraforming is seeding your biome, not spurting inconceivable volumes of gases from nowhere.)
 
The following users thanked this post: Gyrfalcon

Offline serger

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 634
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1119 on: November 06, 2017, 03:59:11 PM »
Another on-the-run note:
Xenology skills of ground and naval officers can have an effect of lowering penalty of target discrimination when firing at alien colony.
 

Offline Desdinova

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • D
  • Posts: 280
  • Thanked: 280 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1120 on: November 06, 2017, 04:23:03 PM »
Cool update. Still any chance we might see a test game before the new year?
 

Offline serger

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 634
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1121 on: November 06, 2017, 04:36:37 PM »
And here are some other sleepy notes at ground guerrilla combat / covert ops:
BG sci + xeno = bonuses on developing bio weapons against other races.
(CP+LG+PP)/3 sci + xeno = bonuses on developing coms virus weapons against other races.
Xeno + espy = bonuses on bio attacks (weapon samples must be delivered with ships, as VB6 spy teams).
Xeno + espy + coms + intel = bonuses on hacker attacks (weapon samples can be delivered with ansible com net - no need to fly on, if you have a spy team or guerrilla unit on enemy planet already).
« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 04:39:39 PM by serger »
 

Offline TheDeadlyShoe

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1264
  • Thanked: 58 times
  • Dance Commander
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1122 on: November 06, 2017, 05:27:36 PM »
Quote
Generally speaking, I think that terraforming in Aurora is just a little over 1000 times stronger that it must be. When you can make habbitable planet of Mercury with two month of orbital terraforming, and it's just the beginning of your stellar expancion... it's just too much. There is no value in planets with life, no point in serching those planets, when you can just make such things from dead stones.
fortunately, in aurora, if you dont like terraforming you can just not do it.  Personally I find the game plays way better that way or with very limited terraforming.
 

Offline ChildServices

  • Hegemon
  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 140
  • Thanked: 10 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1123 on: November 06, 2017, 08:28:57 PM »
Probably a controversial opinion but... The biome changes just sound like feature creep that forces players to engage in the game's fundamentally un-fun ground combat. It sounds kinda superfluous to what I view as the core game (the ship design/combat), just like the terraforming/planet changes in general.
Aurora4x Discord: https://discordapp.com/invite/Q5ryqdW

Cold as steel the darkness waits, its hour will come
A cry of fear from our children, worshipping the Sun
Mother Nature's black revenge, on those who waste her life
War babies in the Garden Of Eden, she'll turn our ashes to ice
 

Offline Bremen

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • B
  • Posts: 743
  • Thanked: 150 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1124 on: November 06, 2017, 09:00:24 PM »
Probably a controversial opinion but... The biome changes just sound like feature creep that forces players to engage in the game's fundamentally un-fun ground combat. It sounds kinda superfluous to what I view as the core game (the ship design/combat), just like the terraforming/planet changes in general.

I'm fairly ambivalent on the biome changes for more or less that reason. I don't think they're bad (I think planets being more than just a colony rating more or less cancels out the micromanagement), but I'm not really interested in them either.