This Is Great! Yip Yip Hooray!

[Grandpa Troll]

I'll behave..

Psst..
Pssstt..
Hey newbie..er..um..I mean Settler over here quickly behind the tree..run Forrest Run

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Petrus2
If someone likes donut worlds (or large worlds, or small, or Mr Potato Head worlds) what does it matter to others?

Realistic? First of all it is a GAME. And second of all, not a very realistic one anyway. But it sure is FUN. I prefer to leave realistic at the door when I log on to play a game.

Thanks for this is as true and correct answer as I have ever seen!

[Petrus2]

Hush Gramps! hehehe, just kidding

So everyone knows, G-Troll paid me to make the earlier post LMAO!

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Petrus2
Hush Gramps! hehehe, just kidding

So everyone knows, G-Troll paid me to make the earlier post LMAO!

But only at gunpoint

[Dis]

I'm sure there would be a way to implement going north up through one pole, but ending up at a corresponding point in the map on the "other side" of the north pole. ie if you go north through one square, you appear on the north part of the map that would correspond to the other point. You don't end up on the southern part of the map, but an opposite part of the north part of the map from where you started. If that makes any sense

But then you get to the issue of a unit having the "ability" to cross the poles. Even explorers in the age of dicover couldn't do it. It was only until recently have we been able to cross the poles. Today we can do it easily with aircraft. But the way aircraft movement is implemented in civ3- I can't see implementing any kind of system I described above. Nuclear submarines can go underneath the ice in the northern lattitudes. But they can't go under antartica.

And then finally we get to the issue that a spherical image is damn near impossible if not impossible to represent on a flat screen. Because the above does not take into account the shorter distances near the poles.

So in summary: I think the pole system is good as it is. No change is necessary .

[Antrine]

Slight improvement there for a moment Grandpa Troll, your next image was black and white.

P.S. Think world turned inside/out, as scrolling about on the inside of an intact orange peel. It works.

[Petrus2]

Antrine, that's basically a Dyson Sphere.

[Antrine]

Yes, that is precisely what I mean, of course I also mean for real. I think that model works naturally somewhere, of course the 'somewhere' part is 'science not so fiction'.

[Petrus2]

Well a Dyson Sphere is a nice thing for science fiction, but there are gravitational issues with the "real thing"!! If you could build one for a Civ3 type game, it would be interesting. Think about it, your aircraft and space ships could travel the INSIDE of the sphere (instead of the outside, like RL) and that would make them very interesting weapons since travel times would be very fast. Some weapons options come to mind with rocks, too

[Antrine]

Actually, stronger and stronger propulsion is not desired, due to distance compressed, especially by the central Sun, (which is pure positive polarity). Therefore for flying ships, a magnetic or central core engine that utilizes a precise rotating gyroscope reversing the gravitational relationship with surrounding mass is the order of day.

No, this brings us the real source of gravity, here on earth and within hollow earth. This is an iron ball some 400 miles thick. The gravity splits in/out from center mass. Gravity is function of mass. They know this (NASA) but disguise it. A piece of asteroid (once part of just such a hollow iron ball) that is about 400 miles long sports the ‘same’ gravity as earth! (I am not here going to bother with the long list references) Remember this is a game! Anyway, same goes for our moon, its gravity is almost spot on the SAME as earth! For the same reason.

All planets are HOLLOW and generally inhabited inside instead of outside! Ours included. That said without prejudice is why I favor the X, Y wrap.

More sincerely than you might want to realize,

[Kuciwalker]

Some weapons options come to mind with rocks, too

Blowing a hole in the sphere would be a bad idea - bye-bye atmosphere.

[barbeerhj]

They did....

They had a weapon that flung rocks onto the earth on Civ CtP. I believe it was called the "Space Bombers" and could bombard the cities below with a "Rail Gun" that would capture asteroids and accelerate them to earth's surface.

Thinking about it, wouldn't that be the same as firing a nuclear bomb at somone ?

-Ron

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by barbeerhj
They did....

They had a weapon that flung rocks onto the earth on Civ CtP. I believe it was called the "Space Bombers" and could bombard the cities below with a "Rail Gun" that would capture asteroids and accelerate them to earth's surface.

Thinking about it, wouldn't that be the same as firing a nuclear bomb at somone ?

-Ron

Im not sure..why dont we ask someone whos been there?

Wait..

Nah..I wont go there..

[barbeerhj]

Well...

Assuming that the rock thrown at earth is a mile long, and the speed it will be traveling at through the rail gun is fast, then it's velocity and mass will cause a massive explosion on empact.

Surely though, I think they should make little movies you can watch on civ4 where you can see the havoc caused by a nuclear bomb exploding on an enemy city.

I would play the game to Mod just to see that happen.

-Ron

[Petrus2]

f=(1/2)x(mass)x(velocity)x(velocity)

Velocity is the biggest factor since it is squared when determining the force. That's why sci fi talks about hyperkinetic weapons. But it's also scientifically sound (not always true for sci fi!!)

You don't need something a mile long (which probably would break apart anyway) to make a big hole in the ground.