Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes Discussion  (Read 229197 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Vivalas

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • V
  • Posts: 7
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2130 on: January 16, 2019, 04:25:14 PM »
The lore is interesting, but there are a few confusing bits. 

What exactly does it mean by "TNE ships travel mostly in the Aether".   Are these ships visible to the naked eye? Is anything in the Aether tangible to people in normal space? Or are ships kinda all like the TARDIS where they appear larger on the inside then out?

The terraforming section also is a bit weird.   Being able to siphon conventional materials seemingly from thin air seems like a bit of a plot hole even in a world where TN elements eclipse conventional ones.   The amount of production implied by the amount of, say, iron or silicon or oil you could get in comparable masses to that of terraforming gasses would seemingly render most common goods post-scarce.   Perhaps supplementary explanation is needed about terraforming to explain why they don't just use the technology to create anything they want in a factory setting.

This is all neat and all but I would probably modify the canon in my head a bit for my own games to something I find a bit more thematic and believable. 
 

Offline Tree

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 111
  • Thanked: 18 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2131 on: January 16, 2019, 04:37:46 PM »
What exactly does it mean by "TNE ships travel mostly in the Aether".   Are these ships visible to the naked eye? Is anything in the Aether tangible to people in normal space? Or are ships kinda all like the TARDIS where they appear larger on the inside then out?
As I understand it, TN ships exists in both universes at once.

The amount of production implied by the amount of, say, iron or silicon or oil you could get in comparable masses to that of terraforming gasses would seemingly render most common goods post-scarce.   Perhaps supplementary explanation is needed about terraforming to explain why they don't just use the technology to create anything they want in a factory setting.
Probably why regular materials are so irrelevant. Guess it's impossible to pull TN materials through the terraformer, though.
 

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7976
  • Thanked: 4478 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2132 on: January 16, 2019, 04:44:11 PM »
As I understand it, TN ships exists in both universes at once.

Probably why regular materials are so irrelevant. Guess it's impossible to pull TN materials through the terraformer, though.

Yes, both universes at once and yes, TN materials are present in such trace amounts, the terraformers can't access them. It requires billions of years for them to coalesce in gravity wells.
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1351
  • Thanked: 160 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2133 on: January 16, 2019, 05:00:45 PM »
This is all neat and all but I would probably modify the canon in my head a bit for my own games to something I find a bit more thematic and believable.
You are absolutely free to do that, it's even recommended! Loads of Aurora players have their own version of the "canon", some even change it from game to game.
 

Offline drejr

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • d
  • Posts: 62
  • Thanked: 10 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2134 on: January 16, 2019, 06:02:36 PM »
One possibility:

In Aurora, the superfluid vacuum theory turns out to be correct. Spacetime can be be described as a liquid with very low or no viscosity.

In the Aether, however, spacetime is condensed to the point where viscosity greatly increases, and the Aether can be described as a more conventional fluid.

Thrust applied in the highly condensed Aether drags normal material along like a ocean-going ship's propeller - which would give very little thrust in the atmosphere in which most of the ship exists.
 

Offline dag0net

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • d
  • Posts: 8
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2135 on: January 16, 2019, 07:18:35 PM »
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=8497. msg112184#msg112184 date=1547678651
It requires billions of years for them to coalesce in gravity wells.

* dag0net goes starmining
People blame god for making life worth living, in the same vein. . . "Work harder Steve!"
 

Offline Vivalas

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • V
  • Posts: 7
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2136 on: January 16, 2019, 10:29:11 PM »
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=8497. msg112184#msg112184 date=1547678651
Quote from: Tree link=topic=8497. msg112183#msg112183 date=1547678266
As I understand it, TN ships exists in both universes at once.

Probably why regular materials are so irrelevant.  Guess it's impossible to pull TN materials through the terraformer, though.

Yes, both universes at once and yes, TN materials are present in such trace amounts, the terraformers can't access them.  It requires billions of years for them to coalesce in gravity wells.

I was referring more to conventional elements, like the ones in atmospheric gases that the terraformers harvest.  You can synthesize tons of chemicals with the basic gaseous elements in the atmosphere.  I suppose another part of this is there isn't much elaboration on what exactly the TNEs are and why they are special other than accessing the Aether.  I don't suppose trans Newtonian elements would be any better at making say, soap, than common elements.  100% of industry on Earth today is based on  conventional elements (or so we are led to believe :P), so having a giant portal into the next dimension that just poofs out the basic ingredients of literally anything you want to make seems a bit weird.
 

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7976
  • Thanked: 4478 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2137 on: January 17, 2019, 05:02:58 AM »
I was referring more to conventional elements, like the ones in atmospheric gases that the terraformers harvest.  You can synthesize tons of chemicals with the basic gaseous elements in the atmosphere.  I suppose another part of this is there isn't much elaboration on what exactly the TNEs are and why they are special other than accessing the Aether.  I don't suppose trans Newtonian elements would be any better at making say, soap, than common elements.  100% of industry on Earth today is based on  conventional elements (or so we are led to believe :P), so having a giant portal into the next dimension that just poofs out the basic ingredients of literally anything you want to make seems a bit weird.

It depends whether it is more or less weird that terraformers can create entire atmospheres out of vacuum :)

Whether consumers have the equivalent of star trek replicators for non-TN goods is outside game scope (although it would explain why food production is a minor problem) and probably easier to rationalize than terraforming in VB6. However, as someone mentioned, it is fine to use your own background/lore for your own games.
 

Offline Rabid_Cog

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 291
  • Thanked: 21 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2138 on: January 17, 2019, 02:01:28 PM »
If all you can get from the Aether is raw elements, that could serve to explain. Pure, loose elements are kinda difficult to use. Energy states are all wrong, etc. Fine for gasses, they are loose atoms anyway (or bond on their own) but for more complex substances (especially proteins) the effort and energy required to synthesize them would make it quite difficult to use anyway. The energy calculation could still favour local 'real world' extraction and production, so you dont quite reach "post scarcity" for common goods.

Terraformer cant pull it out because it cant REACH the TN materials. There's a planet in the way. It can only reach the higher/lighter materials. Asteroid miners work the same way but they have a long pipe attached and are configured differently to target the heavier elements. Same basic principle as a planetside mine, same way a fridge compressor and a vaccuum cleaner work on the same principles.
I have my own subforum now!
Shameless plug for my own Aurora story game:
5.6 part: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,4988.0.html
6.2 part: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,5906.0.html

Feel free to post comments!
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,5452.0.html
 

Offline TCD

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • T
  • Posts: 224
  • Thanked: 16 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2139 on: January 17, 2019, 03:05:31 PM »
Steve's Great Crusade and its use of the new factory-built space stations to get around shipyard constraints has got me thinking about what creative uses that approach opens up. One immediate thought was fuel harvester bases with a single fuel tanker base to create an easy orbital gas station.

But now I'm wondering what else you could do. I was thinking about early game carrier stations, but I think they'd have to have the new commercial hangers rather than military hangers? That means normal maintenance applies to military ships, so tricky to make it work for fighters I'd have thought. Perhaps you could create an FAC carrier station with hybrid FACs with short ranges but decent maintenance lives.

Obviously the no armour, no shields etc is going to make your carrier stations horribly vulnerable, but you could load them up with CIWS to protect against stray missiles, and if the enemy gets beam vessels in range of your carrier you've probably lost anyway.
 

Online Hazard

  • Captain
  • **********
  • H
  • Posts: 536
  • Thanked: 48 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2140 on: January 27, 2019, 04:12:25 PM »
Steve, I note that the new population requirements for shipyards mean that smaller shipyards have smaller personnel draws than in VB6, but larger shipyards have notably greater impact upon your manufacturing sector.

Also, you may want to change the 'Naval Y/N' column to 'Type N(aval)/C(ivilian)' instead. It would be clearer I think.
 

Offline King-Salomon

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 130
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2141 on: January 28, 2019, 04:49:38 AM »
about the new chances of discovering potential ground survey sites:

I had toyed with the idea for some time and was thinking that to make the effort really worthwhile I (just my thinking) would rise the chances for minimal foundings much higher - I was thinking along

None 30%, Minimal 50%, Low 10%, Good 6%, High 3%, Excellent 1%.

(maybe eben low 10.5% and Excellent 0.5%)

this would rise the number of potential sites a lot - so make the ground unit worthwhile - without the findings becomming too useful ... a lot of the minimal findings etc would still be zero (or near to it) when you roleplay your empire so that you don't only survey when the minerals you found first are depleted but as soon as you have an interest in the body (as would be realistic)...

to make thinks easier to balance it longterm: maybe it would be possible to add a gamesetting about this?  %-chance of basic ground survey ?
 

Offline Xkill

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • Posts: 75
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2142 on: January 29, 2019, 12:18:11 PM »
Hazard has a point. Building large ships would be very taxing on the manufacturing sector.
It's a 250% increase in worker requirements. Sounds a bit excessive...
Seems like it would make colony specialization very important to building large ships.
 

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7976
  • Thanked: 4478 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2143 on: January 29, 2019, 12:27:04 PM »
Steve, I note that the new population requirements for shipyards mean that smaller shipyards have smaller personnel draws than in VB6, but larger shipyards have notably greater impact upon your manufacturing sector.

Also, you may want to change the 'Naval Y/N' column to 'Type N(aval)/C(ivilian)' instead. It would be clearer I think.

Shipyards of the same total capacity will now have the same workers, which isn't the case in VB6. It is more of a case of correcting an issue, then giving smaller shipyards a boost.
 

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7976
  • Thanked: 4478 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #2144 on: January 29, 2019, 12:29:09 PM »
Hazard has a point. Building large ships would be very taxing on the manufacturing sector.
It's a 250% increase in worker requirements. Sounds a bit excessive...
Seems like it would make colony specialization very important to building large ships.

While looking at wealth options, I realised that shipyards were very low on pop requirement compared to other installations such as factories or research. You could create 3x more BP in shipyards than in factories for the same amount of workers, so I am correcting that. SY are still generally more productive per worker but the imbalance has been reduced.
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55