SPACE EXPLOITATION ver 2.0 hosted by Smilo

[NotLikeTea]

A little clarification of my anti-space rantings, since it seems that the comment in the introduction of the summary is the only mention of this view

I would like to see less future in CivIII (well, just as much as CivII, but less than most people here are advocating)

Why? Civ is an historic game, and the future is a domain of SF, for the moment at least. Games that try to combine history and SF usually do a poor job at both.

Also, consider this. CivIII is one game in their "Sweep of Time" trilogy. SMAC is another game in the series. What would be the third? It could take place before Civ (unlikely, as there isn't that much to do before civilization exists), it can take place at the same time as SMAC (on earth, but unlikely since SMAC deals with the death of Earth) or it can take place after SMAC.

The third option looks most likely, but even the second is plausible. In both cases, planetary exploration, colonisation, mining, etc would fit in perfectly! These are all good ideas, but they belong in their own game. In Civ, they could only seem to be poorly grafted on. I look forward to seeing them eventually, but not in this game.

Mind you, space is important for the game.. like I mentioned before, things like Sputnic, the first man in space, the moon landing, probes to the planets, and even simple, primitive colonies on the Moon, and manned missions to mars (as wonders or projects) are all fair game in this game. I don't want to see new maps for all the planets, for example. I thinbk that this is going too far.

[Ecce Homo]

NotLikeTea, I agree on your point that most of the space stuff should be left for the third SoT game.

However, sending 40 000 colonists to AC is an advanced project, which would require centuries of research and preparation, including colonization of the solar system. Why go to another solar system as long as most of this one is untouched?

Another idea about the AC race:
Building a spaceship when at war would be dangerous. It is likely to be attacked by your enemies. You should have the choice of where to assemble it - under ground on Earth (easy to build but hard to launch), orbiting Earth (vulnerable, easy to launch), under the surface of Moon or an asteroid (hard to build, but safe).

[EnochF]

The more I hear about Test of Time, the more I become convinced that space exploration in Civ III is not only plausible but indispensible.

Okay. Concept #1: The Extended Game
There is an option to turn this off. Meaning that Civ III can be played just like Civ II, with the voyage to Alpha Centauri taking place directly after the Apollo missions. Of course, we all know the people who turn off the Extended Game are the world conquerors and deity players, but the option for Alpha Centauri will still be there.

But for those of us with loftier goals, there's the Extended Game, which consists of colonizing the habitable bodies of the solar system and exploiting resources. In Test of Time, you may end up in a conflict with aliens to keep things interesting. I don't happen to think aliens are necessary to keep players interested, but it would be an interesting twist. Maybe you'd discover microbial life living on Titan and develop the science of exobiology (xenobiology), which would come in handy when dealing with the more developed alien life on Alpha Centauri. The Extended Game would also include a number of future technologies based on extrapolations from present-day cutting-edge techs and possibly SF sources. Less emphasis on the military: we don't want this to turn into Robotech or Star Blazers, though a handful of space units are okay.

Concept #2: Multiple Maps
Test of Time already has multiple maps, four of them! It would be simplicity itself to take this concept and apply it to the colonization of the solar system! Let's say we have six base maps for an extended game. Earth, Moon, Mars, Titan, Ganymede, Alpha Centauri Planet. Each of these maps can be any size and randomly generated. The Moon map will always be the satellite of the beginning planet, but the Mars, Titan and Ganymede maps can be any size (or even not exist depending on how many planets were randomly determined to be in your solar system) and contain all manner of exotic terrain. The Alpha Centauri Planet map will always be the same size as the Earth map and will contain terrain not to be found anywhere in the other solar system maps.

Plus, multiple maps opens up a lot of great ideas for city improvements, units and abilities. A city improvement that transports units between maps like an airport. A unit that can transport other units between maps. (The Unity might be an actual, physical spaceship you could control!) And considering that each planet would have its own level of "space" (high orbit) to colonize with space cities, the possibilities are endless!

[EnochF]

I just spent a little while in a foreign set of forums... er, can't remember just which at the moment... I sort of stumbled onto them while following a string of links from a Gamespot review of Birth of the Federation.

In any case, John (the same one who answers questions in Apolyton's Test of Time forums) was dropping hints about possible uses for multiple maps.

One of his suggestions really fired me up for designing scenarios: Time travel. Each map could represent the same planet at a different period in history!

Mostly this would be a scenario-related thing. But it's also another argument in favor of multiple maps, which means it's an argument in favor of colonization of the solar system.

(Or maybe the Extended Game could include time travel. After all, by 1950 or so, most expert Civ players are at the top of the power graph, but what if a competing civ sent a handful of modern units back in time to fight your Civ back in the days of crusaders and musketeers? It might be a good challenge for jaded Deity players. I know, I know, it opens up a whole can of worms we don't want to get into... it's just an idea.)

[Tornado7]

Back to the Top.
Maps for the solar system:
Moon
Mars
Venus
Mercury
Galilean Moonsm (Ganymede, Callisto, Europa, Io)
Big Asteroids(Ceres, Pallas, Vesta, etc.)
Titan
Pluto/Charon
Maybe Triton
Alpha Centauri
The goal of the game could be to make contact with the Centaurians and exchange enough techs that you develop FTL together.

It wouldn't be all that hard to generate all the terrain, either. Most of the "space" terrain could be recycled from map to map. A crater is a crater, whether it's on the moon, mercury or on a asteroid. The only maps that would have to be really unique would be Mars, Titan, parts of Venus, and maybe Europa(Which could be a linked map with the surface and underwater)
And for the unimaginative pansies that can't handle creativity, you could just turn it off.

------------------
Truth is stranger than fiction, and people are weirder than both.

[Harel]

Develop FTL with the centaurians? You do remember it's civ, right? Which was BEFORE alpha centaury? People didn't GO to alpha centaury to become centaurains yet.
Besides, expansion over the entire solar system, beside being too time-consuming ( remember, the game need to end by 2050 ), it's, well, just un-civ. Even the futurisitc SMAC only centred around one single planet.
If you space conquest, I suggest birth of the federation. This isn't for Civ. I still say that colonization of mars and the moon should still be a wonder.

[don Don]

At the risk of starting another Harelite War, I'd like to make a comment about nuclear propulsion.

<u>nuclear drive</u> A uranium rode hitting up a Zinc-based engine ( a high-bulk matter, very good movement ratio ).
Tech: 1990
Cost: Normal
Upkeep: 1 per 5 fuel-units.
Enviroment: Very bad. Radio-active.
Reliabiltiy: Low.
Speed: 0.15 G' acceleration, 400 fuel-units

I'm really confused by this. I've been studying nuclear propulsion as a hobby for… 10 years, anyway. I've never heard of any serious proposal for using a light metal as the reaction mass, but it might be suitable for "smaller, faster, cheaper" robotic exploration missions (on which I am not current).

I can't guess how to translate what I know (Isp = specific Impulse, the length of time one lb-mass of reaction matter can produce one lb-force of thrust) into "movement ratio" (huh?) "fuel units" (arbitrary) and "G" (strictly dependent on payload size). For reference, LOX-LH2 engine produces Isp of 600 seconds.

There are two basic forms (with variants): solid core and gas core. Solid Core typically uses a "bed" of fuel pellets coated with a carbide protective layer. Reaction mass (typically H2 or CO2 seeded with microscopic metalic carbide particals for heat transfer) is heated to conventional temperatures to produce Isp in the 800 sec (CO2) or 1000-1300+ sec (H2) range. The reaction is controlled by the concentration of pellets in the bed. This is little different from the NERVA engine built and tested in the 1960's. Snazzy future tech might produce somewhat higher Isp with superior fuel control & heat transfer.

Gas Core has the best potential for the forseeable future. UF6 gas in a fused silica/diamond sphere is the reactor. The reation mass would again be seeded H2 or CO2. Temperature limitations of fused silica (marginally possible with today's tech) yield an Isp in the 2000-3000 sec range. The biggest problem at present is isolating the unused fuel in heavy shielded tanks, temperature, and controlling the reactor. Fused silica with diamond protective layers (forseeable) might boost Isp to 5000 sec. Diamond reactor and engine parts (far but feasible future, 100+ yrs) could yield Isp as much as 20,000 sec.

Neither design has notable contamination of reaction mass with fission products, but malfunction or attack could release radioactive pollution. Non-military use would likely be confined to space only. In a less squeemish future society (as might be encountered in a Civ3 game) nuclear propulsion for military aerospace weapons platforms would be awesome.

<font size=1>(I'll correct the Isp figures if necessary when I get home)</font>

------------------
*a friendly note from your favorite heretic

[Harel]

I like wars Don don
No, just kidding. It's nice to see a serious post. I can say I learned something.

First, on of the earlier SF books described an atomic missile using Zinc as reacton mass. Since it's heavy, and got good momentum/energy cost ratio I listed it up. I also remember seeing a movie on discovery about nuclear engines prototypes back in the 70's, but I didn't rememebr enough to post it here.
Ofcourse, the values I put in are arbitery and completly fictional. Just like the difference between a foot soldier and a plane in civ model was not like real life, we have to drift from the real figures here. The difference in a flight from Mars from a catapult drive to a fusion engine ( or even FTL drive ) is too great to show realisticly. The values I listed were, ofcourse, made up figures ( just like movement ratio in civ ) and only make sense in compersion to the other suggested means of transportion.

[The Ellimist]

I have a simple idea: Allow asteroid mining. Not with a wonder, but normally. You can mine up to 100 asteroids. You can also use asteroids as space stations.

[dinoman2]

BUMP

Harel, noramlly I agree with you, but this time... Are you so unimaginative that you have to make the game end by 2050? You have to follow the story line THAT exactly? I'm sorry to say this, but no matter hoow many neat features are put into Civ III, if it doesn't go into the future, it won't be THAT much different from civ II, and may even be a step down from ctp, which is saying quite a bit.

------------------
"Idealism is the despot of thought, just as politics is the despot of will"
-Mikhail Bakunin

[don Don]

I don't think the civ format/engine is capable of doing justice to space except by generalizing to the point of the abstract. I didn't like the orbital intallations in SMAC; they just don't make sense. Why have orbital hydroponics? In orbit you have to build an air-tight environment and lift water and organics at huge expense. Nonsense. Hydroponics works on the planet surface, you know.

[Harel]

To The Ellimist:

"Allow atroid mining normally".
First off, many people allready suggested that. And secondly, how do you "normally" mine astroids?

Dimo:

I would LOVE for the game to continue to the deep future. And yes, stepping down from CtP seems like a troubling thougth.
However, I am trying to be realistic. With all the plan on "sweep-of-time" i think that thier is no chance Sid and BR would break the chain as it happened on SMAC.

Don don:

Here here.

[dinoman2]

Don don

Why would someone do it? Hmmmm......
Ok, let's say your nation's population is growing fast. Thus, your cities are taking up more room. Thus your farmlands are getting replaced by cities. Thus your population is getting less food. Thus lots of people are dying of starvation. Thus you need to find a new place to farm. Thus you use orbital instillations. How would a crisis like this develop? I don't know, but I DO know that it is developing across the world today, making sky hydroponics labs a more realistic proposition

------------------
"Idealism is the despot of thought, just as politics is the despot of will"
-Mikhail Bakunin

[smilo]

Some food for thought (to keep the discussion going).

Even if our planet can generate enough food & water for a massive population eplosion, what about materials like oil, metals, ... ?

[Harel]

Dino, that would never happen. Don don is right, brining mass amount of water to orbits cost way too much, regardless of your technology. Even fusion power would find that task daunting.

No, technology is much easier, better and cheaper applied on Earh surface.
Even today, thier is hardly a problem to make enough food for the entire world. The problem is money.
The farmlands on Texas alone can supply the entire world with enough food: however, creating so much food would reduce the cost per ton-wheet/corn too such a low level, thats it would not cover the cost of harvesting and transportion.
The problem is economics, not technological.
Not to mention that geneticly altered plants would generate much much more food ( with better crops and better nautrinat value ).

And even if that won't be enough, the entire world popultion could be fitted into huge archologies that would cover only a fraction of the surface now used.
If we assume that you can built 4-5 archolgies per square kilometer, then one Squared KM could house, with comfort half a million people.
Even if the world popultion would double, it could still be fitted into 150 X 150 kilometers. That's right. Sounds odd, doesn't it? But true.