Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tarran]

By the way, how it is planned thus to have a base on The Moon (in the real world I mean), if low gravity is such a problem?

The reason a base is being planed is because in Real Life currently we don't know if 1/6th (.17g) of the earth's gravity would be a problem or not(since all the tests to date were done in zero g environments) and also because we want to find out. It could be okay, but it could also not be okay. Aurora considers flat out anything lower or higher then the racial limit to be a problem. And the moon happens to be bellow the limit.

Anyway, I'm not the best person to ask. You'd want to ask Steve those kinds of questions since, well, he created the game and thus must have his reasons.

[forsaken1111]

If it really bothers you this much, either use the ability to create a new species of your people who can survive in low gravity or build an orbital population center at luna and call it a domed colony in your mind.

[MrWiggles]

Mmmh, I can understand what you say ... because gravity can't be altered on the surface of a planet, you say that infrastructures can also represent Domes. Yes, I can accept that ... except that this is a sci-fi game which has technologies like jump gates and shields. So why not gravity generators? And thus, I demand (I'm joking) that infrastructures also allow the creation of artificial gravity, so I can colonize Luna with them.

By the way, how it is planned thus to have a base on The Moon (in the real world I mean), if low gravity is such a problem?

Its a huge fucking problem. As huge as the radiation exposure. They'll be loosing bone and muscle mass every day their in micro and less then one g gravity.
They'll have to work out hard for several hours each day, everyday. Even then, their max time on the base is going to be less then 100 days.

edit & addenda: I believe that what I'm trying to say is ... I can with enough infrastructures have colonists on worlds that are ante chambers to Hell, like a world with a temperature of 400°C, extreme tectonic, atmospheric pressure of 100 made of sulfuric acid ... right?

But I can't drop a domed outpost for say my scientists on Luna. Why? Because gravity is not ok...

that's my problem... This is a sci-fi game. I would have expected that there was also a tech allowing to control gravity, or whatever, so I can put some closed labs on Luna...

Why?

It would go against the basis of the game technological basis, of transnewtonian elements. These new elements, which allows for interstellar travel, and lasers, and shields, and all the other Sci Fi, completely ignores gravity. IE no gravity generators.

[forsaken1111]

Exactly. The same rationale could be used for anything. It's a sci-fi game, why can't I shoot lasers out of my ass and crush planets with my mind?

Because it doesn't make sense in the Aurora paradigm. He has a setting and a specific set of rules he is working off of.

[vorpal+5]

that would make no sense!! Your ass should be used to crush planets and your mind would be shooting lasers, not the reverse, you got it wrong 

Ok seriously, I have questions. Do you have answers?

1. what can be the interest for a stat like a factory bonus on a naval officer?
2. are civilians companies able to refit their ships to newer models?
3. if I destroy/scrap a ship at Earth, will the minerals be returned?
4. what does (A) and (T) means beside a ship?
5. Does REP ground units have a special role? More generally, why build REP as their stats are lower than marines and they are costlier... Do heavy armor (low tech) have a special roles? Do any units except engineer have a special role?
6. what is the role of fleet training? I'm training my fleet since some months but fleet experience remains at 0.

thanks...

[forsaken1111]

2. are civilians companies able to refit their ships to newer models?
3. if I destroy/scrap a ship at Earth, will the minerals be returned?

2. No, as far as I know civilian shipping lines will use a ship once purchased until they retire it. They don't do refits, AFAIK.
3. If you destroy a ship, it will create a wreck which must be salvaged by a ship with a salvager. If you scrap it at the shipyard, you will get some of the minerals back. I don't know the % retention.

[Eduren]

that would make no sense!! Your ass should be used to crush planets and your mind would be shooting lasers, not the reverse, you got it wrong 

Ok seriously, I have questions. Do you have answers?

1. what can be the interest for a stat like a factory bonus on a naval officer?
2. are civilians companies able to refit their ships to newer models?
3. if I destroy/scrap a ship at Earth, will the minerals be returned?
4. what does (A) and (T) means beside a ship?
5. Does REP ground units have a special role? More generally, why build REP as their stats are lower than marines and they are costlier... Do heavy armor (low tech) have a special roles? Do any units except engineer have a special role?
6. what is the role of fleet training? I'm training my fleet since some months but fleet experience remains at 0.

thanks...

1. Most (if not all) of your administrators will come from naval positions, and once they are an administrator, their bonuses will be applied to the population they administrate.
5. I never messed with ground units that much, but I believe they allow you replace empty spots in combat battalions without going through costly training. So before a big campaign you stockpile replacement battalions so that you are not training completely new infantry halfway through the war.
6. It primarily decreases the delay between when orders are given, and when they are executed. There is an option in the beginning to turn it off, effectively having perfect crews.

I have to agree forsaken, reading all of this again really makes me want to give Aurora another try. Too bad I no longer have the right kind of screen.

[Mini]

1. what can be the interest for a stat like a factory bonus on a naval officer?

Factory bonus makes jumpgates build faster. At some point officer generation code was edited to make sure that you never had an officer with a stat that would never get used, such as a civilian administrator with a ground combat bonus.

[forsaken1111]

Presumably Steve will add factory ships in at some point as well. Right now its pretty much not possible to have a ship produce anything like a factory as all of that is tied to populations and populations are tied to system bodies (moons, asteroids, planets, etc). Orbital Habitats were shoehorned in by simply adding to a population, you cannot just park a habitat in deep space and have people on it though that should be technically possible.

I would love Lagrange habitats.

[Thexor]

I would love Lagrange habitats.

It's an interesting concept, but what value would Lagrange habitats be? Orbital Habitats let you colonize distant worlds, but that's so you can mine/build on them. Save for an above-average concentration of asteroids, what good would an L4/L5 station be?


To answer my own question, potentially defensive outposts. And there does tend to be a lot of 'roids in the area. Still, unless space-based factories are implemented (and there's some decent reason to use them over planet-side ones), it seems like Lagrange habitats would be slightly... useless. 

[Demonic Spoon]

Umm, so hi, I decided to try this out, it looks pretty cool. BUT, my resolution is to small and I can't change it. I've tried to go to resolution and advanced and monitors and uncheck the box but the box is greyed out for some reason(this is a laptop btw). I;ve tried the 360screen thing they put up there but that only allows for scrolling horizontally, not vertically. And it's vertically that I need to scroll. Help?

[Osmosis Jones]

@Demonic Spoon, there are programs you can download to get around that (ResizeEnable seems to be popular IIRC), but otherwise there isn't much you can do. Steve doesn't want to rewrite the display code anytime soon, so we're kind of stuck with it as is.

Re; Gravity discussion, what was the fluff for how they ignored acceleration effects again? I mean, the hulls are built with TN elements, sure, but how the hell do you get a ship up to the 1.3c or whatever the photonic drive could do without pulling ridiculous g's on the crew?

Re; deep space habitats... Lagrange habitats not so much, but a deep space civ resupply/manufacture centre would be damn useful in large empty systems. Back when I used to play, I had one massive, practically empty system, with all my jump gates huge distances from anything remotely colonisable. Given that it was something of a interstellar hub, it would of been nice to be able to have a permanent station there.

[Demonic Spoon]

Thanks.

[forsaken1111]

I would love Lagrange habitats.

It's an interesting concept, but what value would Lagrange habitats be? Orbital Habitats let you colonize distant worlds, but that's so you can mine/build on them. Save for an above-average concentration of asteroids, what good would an L4/L5 station be?


To answer my own question, potentially defensive outposts. And there does tend to be a lot of 'roids in the area. Still, unless space-based factories are implemented (and there's some decent reason to use them over planet-side ones), it seems like Lagrange habitats would be slightly... useless. 

Defensive outposts is one possibility, but the major attraction of Lagrange habitats is that Lagrange points are where the gravity of two large bodies cancel each other out. Even in high orbit, you have some gravity. Not much, granted, but you do have some. That is why it is called a microgravity environment. Lagrange points are the only places in the solar system where you can have very-nearly zero gravity.

Why does this matter? Some experiments require the absolute minimum outside interference possible. Lagrange habitats would be ideal for scientific research.

In addition, a Lagrange habitat would need minimal station-keeping drives because they would naturally stay in place due to the gravity curve.

[Osmosis Jones]

In addition, a Lagrange habitat would need minimal station-keeping drives because they would naturally stay in place due to the gravity curve.

Not quite; at the L-points, g ~= 0, yes, but the equilibrium is an unstable one. If you slightly displace the station, g increases, and pulls the station still further off the L-point. That said, any g's will start off miniscule, and thus it wouldn't take much to maintain position assuming constant monitoring of said position.

So yes on only needing weak position thrusters, no on the naturally staying in place.