Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: xeryon
« on: May 05, 2014, 04:09:05 PM »

As far as managing water as a physical asset to be produced I agree that it would be a needless layer of complexity.

There are things that could be tweaked to make it more meaningful though.  A minimum colony cost for bodies without water sounds reasonable.  To go hand in hand with that the number of bodies that contain a hydrosphere may need to be improved upon.  Or at the least change hydrosphere to 'Water Presence' as recent discoveries are quickly expanding the number of bodies in our system that are believed to contain non-trivial amounts of water.  Extrapolating the percentage of bodies in our system with water present in some form that percentage, with variance, should be applied to all extra-solar system bodies based on stellar age.

I did a quick search and came up with the following image.  Not entirely sure on the accuracy but the premise is valid.

http://io9.com/5827649/a-map-of-all-the-water-in-the-solar-system
Posted by: Sharp
« on: May 05, 2014, 02:12:45 PM »

I don't like the idea of needing to manage water tbh. With TN elements all non-TN elements are pretty mundane and abundant, do you really want to manage water levels? There will be civillian mining and logistical operations for finding and transporting water and for ships most of the water used will be recycled.

Just assume any colony cost 0 planet has an aquifer and any infrastructure includes water and recycling units.
Posted by: Beersatron
« on: May 05, 2014, 01:42:09 PM »

Maybe Steve can add in a specific population sink or production modifier in line with the hydrosphere.

i.e. If there is no hydrosphere then a certain percentage of the population is designated as 'mining water' or the production modifier is reduced due to the need to divert resources in order to extract water from below the surface (the presumption being that underground aquifers are present).
Posted by: Paul M
« on: May 05, 2014, 09:27:27 AM »

Worlds without water should have a minimum colonization cost as life is pretty much impossible without it.  Besides needing to drink it, you need it to grow food, for cooling purposes, for washing and sanitation, and in a large number of industrial processes.  If it is not present in quanity you have to go mining it from asteroids or comets and the amount you would need is non-trivial.  1 million people need over far more than a million litres of water per day, and no recycling process is perfect.   Admittedly 1 m litres is only a 10 m x 10 m x 10 m cube but still that would amount to a fair amount of asteroid mining, and something that would grow quickly with time.
Posted by: xeryon
« on: May 05, 2014, 06:51:05 AM »

Hydrospheres are purely RP at this point in time.  The only element they add to the game is when they transition from frozen to liquid to vapor as that changes the planetary albedo and causes surface temperatures to jump up/down at the time of transition.  Otherwise, they have no direct impact on the game.
Posted by: Hydrofoil
« on: May 05, 2014, 05:15:01 AM »

Hmmmm oooh well I guess not having a hydrosphere doesn't seem to stop the world from prospering in any significant way.
Posted by: Paul M
« on: May 03, 2014, 12:14:51 AM »

Sorry Erik at least in 6.1 the vaporous dihydrogen oxide is not a greenhouse gas, though it should be.

Adding water to a planetary body would be possible via asteroid strikes...but to produce significant amounts of water on the surface would require a substantial number of asteroids. 
Posted by: Cheet4h
« on: May 02, 2014, 08:08:41 PM »

Just tested this. SM'd 1 atm of water in the atmosphere of a waterless moon, hydrosphere still stated "none" after a 5-day cycle.

Now if the hydrosphere is "Vapour" or "Ice Sheet" you can cool it down or heat it up until it becomes liquid, but it seems there is no way to add a hydrosphere to a body.
Posted by: Erik L
« on: May 02, 2014, 05:47:48 PM »

The vaporous dihydrous monoxide is a greenhouse gas if I recall.
Posted by: Haji
« on: May 02, 2014, 05:32:38 PM »

Quote from: Hydrofoil on May 02, 2014, 05:08:28 PM
Possibly but then why can you add water when terraforming?

IIRC that only adds water vapor to the atmosphere, which works as any other gas. And as far as I know you can't change planetary hydrosphere in any way. Pity.
Posted by: Hydrofoil
« on: May 02, 2014, 05:08:28 PM »

Quote from: Erik Luken on May 02, 2014, 04:23:10 PM
Gonna go on a limb here and say no.

Possibly but then why can you add water when terraforming?
Posted by: Erik L
« on: May 02, 2014, 04:23:10 PM »

Gonna go on a limb here and say no.
Posted by: Hydrofoil
« on: May 02, 2014, 02:51:36 PM »

Hi just a quick question. Is there a way to give a planet a hydrophere? because in my latest game there are a few planets perfect for colonisation except there is no water available on the planets now i know that wouldn't stop me from colonising them its just i like to RP terraforming as they big feat of human engineering and giving a planet a new hydrosphere would be great from an RP stand point.