Waterworld Scenario

[heardie]

Anyway, I would have liked to have come to this forum earlier,, but I only just got it.

Anyway I have good experience with making mods, and I also know a brief bit about c++, soo I should be able to get a shot at understanding Slic.

Anyhow, I was thinking my first scenario could be an underwater scenario. But I have a few questions.

1. How did the world become fullly covered by water?
Global Warming?? Nuclear Bomb? ASteriod?

2. Should the scenario be a realistic one, or a sci-fiction one?

3. I am going to make it based from one side(unless there is a way around that 8 player problem). What should the side be? What can the storyline be? What can happen? What can the objectives be?]

Anyway, as you can see, I need help with ideas. I can create scenarios, my problem was alqyys the idea. anyhow, I'll go play some CTP2 now

[MarkG]

quote: Originally posted by heardie on 12-28-2000 12:27 AM 1. How did the world become fullly covered by water? Global Warming?? Nuclear Bomb? ASteriod?

Global warming.

quote: 2. Should the scenario be a realistic one, or a sci-fiction one?

flood by global warming is clearly realistic
btw i think that ctp2 has enough SF stuff to cover any kind of need for such a scenario

quote: 3. I am going to make it based from one side(unless there is a way around that 8 player problem). What should the side be? What can the storyline be? What can happen? What can the objectives be?]

how about this(i'm not sure what of the following is doable):
you could do it in a way that you could "see" the global warming happening
e.g. you play(or just watch) the first turns where the flood slowwly takes place, covering the entire world

the result is that only 8 nations in the world manage to stay "on top"

then you could either step forward in time 50 years later and have everyone with the sea-cities tech, or you could do a race-to-the-tech as the first part of the scenario(the other would be, well, to "unite the world" )

as for which could be the nations, just look at the world map and see who could normally get to a high place and survive the flood
(btw, you could have a european nation instead of one of the europeans nations(does that make sense? )

[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited December 28, 2000).]

[DaveZZZ]

Not exactly.

Much of the polar ice rests atop land, and is therefore not already raising the ocean levels.

-Dave

[Colonel Kraken]

From my humble recollection, the north pole is just one big sheet of ice and snow. The south pole has continental land with ice and snow, but a lot of the ice sheet extends out into the water.

Now whether MOST of the ice is on land or on water, I'm not sure. But it would seem to me if the entire north pole is just one big sheet of ice and only part of the ice on the south pole is on land, most of the ice is in the water --therefore not affecting ocean levels if melted.

I love arguing.
[This message has been edited by Colonel Kraken (edited December 28, 2000).]

[Colonel Kraken]

Quoted from USA Today "Cold Science"

quote: UNDERSTANDING THE POLAR ICE MELTING The idea that the polar ice caps are going to melt and flood the world some time soon is a gross oversimplification. Except for Greenland's Ice Cap, the Arctic's ice is floating in the ocean. If it melted, it wouldn't raise sea level although it would have other effects on the world's climate. Antarctica is so cold that even the worst possible warming isn't likely to melt its ice for centuries, if ever. Still, there are concerns about what could happen to the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.

quote: Imagine the 48 states and maybe half of Mexico covered with ice and you have Antarctica. It is a continent of about 5.4 million square miles, which makes it about one and a half times as large as the USA’s 48 contiguous states. Ice, averaging 1.6 miles deep, covers 97.6 percent of Antarctica, giving it 90 percent of the world’s ice and 70 percent of all of the globe’s fresh water – in the form of ice. If all of this ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise by about 200 feet.[Emphasis Added] Fortunately, even the most drastic scientific scenarios for global warming don’t envision Antarctica warming enough to directly melt all of this ice for at least hundreds of years, if ever. In fact, one of the first effects of a warmer climate could be more snow for Antarctica, which would more than make up for melting ice. This would happen because warm air carries more water vapor to turn into snow.

Even the most catastrophic scenario would raise the oceans' levels by 200 feet. Although this would be an incredibly horrendous situation, it would not be "Waterworld".

Not that I'm opposed to a waterworld scenario.
I think it's a GREAT idea! I would love to play it.

Just a little science fact versus science fiction.

[Colonel Kraken]

quote: Originally posted by Colonel Kraken on 12-28-2000 03:00 PM From my humble recollection, the north pole is just one big sheet of ice and snow. The south pole has continental land with ice and snow, but a lot of the ice sheet extends out into the water. Now whether MOST of the ice is on land or on water, I'm not sure. But it would seem to me if the entire north pole is just one big sheet of ice and only part of the ice on the south pole is on land, most of the ice is in the water --therefore not affecting ocean levels if melted. I love arguing. [This message has been edited by Colonel Kraken (edited December 28, 2000).]

Oops, I was a little off. Oh well, can't always be right.

Just kidding about the arguing thing.

[Pintello]

Hi All,

Just thought I would throw my 2 cents in here. If all the ice sheets in the world melted it would raise the sea level about hundred feet or two hundred feet at the most. Maybe even less than a hundred feet. This is bad for low lying areas like Florida, Netherlands, New Orleans, etc., but it would not be enough to flood the entire planet, just alter the coastlines by a couple of hundred miles in many areas. Other areas that have mountainous coastlines would change much at all.

On a side note, last I heard, we don't know how much of the ice in the Antartic is floating and how much is on land, because we are not sure what what the land mass of the Antartic is shaped like. There is too much ice down there for us to see the land under it, even with advanced radar satellites. That is why there is so much vagueness about how much the sea level would rise if it all melted.

Anyway for the purposes of this scenario, the polar ice caps melting isn't sufficent cause for the who planet to be under water. There is however, enough water trapped in the mantel of the Earth as what is called sublimiated water to flood the whole planet or at least most of it. So for the purposes of this scenario, you can say a astroid or some kind of strange earthquake/volcanic occurance resulted in all the water that was subliminated in the mantel of the Earth to burst out and flood the planet.

Or here is an idea, the people of the future were trying to raise a new contenient so that they could populate it when something went terribly wrong and all the water subliminated in the matel of the Earth burst out flooding almost all of it except for the highest mountains. That sounds like the kind of stupid thing we people would do. You can then have just a few cities, maybe one for each surviving civilization located on these "islands" that were formerly mountain tops. Then you can setup the condition of the scenario such that in order to survive these last remaining people must learn to master the sea and build great cities in the deep.

There are also several possible victory conditions you could come up with. One condition could by that the first civ to build a certain number of underwater cities of a certain size wins. Another possible victory condition would be uniting the world either through alliances or conquest. Still another victory condition could be that the first civilization to discover a technology to reverse the catastrophe caused by man's foolish ancesters wins. You could even tie this to a Tile Improvement. Say the Obelist in the original game spread over a certain percentage of the planet.

Just a few ideas there, but don't ask me how to implement them, I have never been real good at that. :-)

Regards,
Timothy Pintello

[Colonel Kraken]

Wow! That sounds like great fun!
I look forward to playing it.

[Depp]

Good scenario idea.
But the stuff that would happen first is that the water movement that moves warm water from the south around tha globe to warm up the wheather will change it´s course, makin the world alot colder in most places, this due to the fact that all the cold water from the melting north pole disturbs the flow.
Scandinavia and northen USA for example would be like Sibiria. That could also be a cool scenario, the fight for resources when the changes destroy much of the world.

[heardie]

Thanks for the comments (though it did get OT there)

Mark - I am not sure whether that is possible. In-fact I doubt it. Anyone?

I am startinig to form some ideas in my head. I'll post them in a week after a gget back from a llovly holiiday

[Colonel Kraken]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 12-28-2000 02:12 AM 2. Should the scenario be a realistic one, or a sci-fiction one? flood by global warming is clearly realistic

Actually, flooding caused by the melting of the polar ice caps is a bit of a misnomer. Since most of the ice is already floating, its melting would no more raise the level of the oceans than ice melting in your cup of tea would make the contents spill over.

Although there probably would be some flooding due to melting of snow/ice from the south pole. It would probably only cover coastal areas of the world at most. But I could be WAY off. After all, I'm no geological scientist.
[This message has been edited by Colonel Kraken (edited December 28, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Colonel Kraken (edited December 28, 2000).]

[heardie]

Bump
Getting to work today. expect my brainstoriming ideas tommorow or the next day.