Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by TMaekler on Today at 07:24:56 AM »
Maybe have a "queue" of atmosphere changes you will make, and then display what the target values will be after entire queue is executed?

Queue could also display expected dates when changes will be finished based on current terraforming rate.
Either a queue or having the option to set the final atmosphere composition and the TFs slowly insert/remove all elements at the same time (if terraforming has 0.02 atm these should of course be split up on all involved elements, not 0.02 for all at the same time).
2
The Academy / Re: Can you scrap fighters?
« Last post by Silvarelion on Today at 07:00:50 AM »
You can also scrap them from the Production -> Stockpiles screen when the are in orbit.
3
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by sloanjh on Today at 06:40:30 AM »
I have added an evaporation cycle following condensation that will stabilise water vapour in the atmosphere of a planet with liquid water at a level of:

Atmospheric Pressure * (Hydro Extent / 100) * 0.01 atm. For Earth that would be 1 * (70/100) * 0.01 atm = 0.007 atm

That atm * 20 is the % of the planet's surface that loses water. For Earth that would be 0.14%

As the water vapour is removed from the atmosphere, it will replenish from the surface water.

I'm confused about the hydro/atmo water balance.  Is the 0.14% above a rate, or is it an equilibrium level?  (I would vote for equilibrium level.)  If it's an equilibrium level, then how does that square with what I think I read in the rules change, which is that 20% hydro requires 1 atmo of water (which seems way to high, given that Earth has 75% hydro without having 3.75 atmospheres of water vapor :) ).

Just thinking aloud here on the fly:

- there are 3 main reservoirs for water: atmo, hydro, and ice caps
- ideal gas law says Pressure = constant * density * temp.  So as someone above mentioned, pressure should be proportional to temperature (in degrees kelvin :) ).
- hmmm - this (pressure scales with temperature) should actually apply to all gasses.  So maybe the terrarforming pressures should be measured in "standard" atmospheres, then the "actual" pressure should be standard pressure * (temp/300 kelvin).
- can use Earth data to calibrate numerical constants, i.e. plug 75% in for hydro and pick constants so actual Earth atmo pressure comes out (think this is mentioned above).
- below ice cap temperature, all hydro should go to water.
- need a constant conversion factor that converts from 1 atmo of water vapor to x% surface coverage.  This means you'd need to dump a LOT of water in the atmosphere to get any change in hydro (so atmo is essentially controlled by hydro %)
- Maybe hydro system shouldn't be controlled by terraforming at all (since it takes so much material).  Either you take what you get (without being able to change), or one is able to drop asteroids/comets (whole new game mechanic that probably isn't worth it), or hydro percent change costs 10s of thousands (or even millions) times as much as gases when done through terrarforming.

John
4
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by MarcAFK on Today at 06:01:28 AM »
I'll throw in my two cents. Make terraforming modules/mining modules require reactor power like I suggested for sensors. Then Require reactors to consume fuel.
Then Aurora just becomes a huge fuel logistics simulator.
5
it's fine, although i wouldnt worry too much. it is your worst or least-useful officers that get dismissed afterall.
6
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by TheDeadlyShoe on Today at 04:51:41 AM »
other possibilities: make terraforming modules a high tech system; introduce diminishing returns on terraforming rate; cause active terraforming to introduce a negative manufacturing modifier; make terraforming facilities non-transferrable.

7
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by alex_brunius on Today at 04:45:30 AM »
Something to consider, but it would be awesome if there was a terraforming 'simulator' built into Aurora where you can plan out the proposed atmosphere and be shown what the end result would be (temperature, atmosphere density, colony cost, etc.)

Maybe have a "queue" of atmosphere changes you will make, and then display what the target values will be after entire queue is executed?

Queue could also display expected dates when changes will be finished based on current terraforming rate.
8
The Academy / Re: Can multiple Geo Survey Teams work a planet?
« Last post by Michael Sandy on Today at 03:54:06 AM »
Thanks, that is what I thought.  So it is worth it.  At least if I have the teams to spare.  It also means that I should make lots of teams of the 10% survey officers, if I am not doing anything else with them.  Save the high survey numbers for task force survey officers and survey ship commanders.
9
The Academy / Re: Can multiple Geo Survey Teams work a planet?
« Last post by bitbucket on Today at 03:46:59 AM »
Multiple ground survey teams won't necessarily work cooperatively to get it done faster, you'll just get multiple "dice rolls" to check for completion in each 5-day increment.
10
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by Gyrfalcon on Today at 01:39:20 AM »
Something to consider, but it would be awesome if there was a terraforming 'simulator' built into Aurora where you can plan out the proposed atmosphere and be shown what the end result would be (temperature, atmosphere density, colony cost, etc.)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10