Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Distant Worlds is a vast, pausable real-time, 4X space strategy game which models a "living galaxy" with incredible options for replayability and customizability. Experience the full depth and detail of large turn-based strategy games, but with the simplicity and ease of real-time, and on the scale of a massively-multiplayer online game. Now greatly enhanced with the new Universe release, which includes all four previous releases as well as the new Universe expansion!

Moderators: Icemania, elliotg

User avatar
Webbco
Posts: 694
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:15 am

RE: Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Post by Webbco »

....obviously.
User avatar
Wade1000
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:21 pm
Location: California, USA

RE: Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Post by Wade1000 »

Yeah, some times I like to state the obvious. Heh.
Wish list:population centers beyond planetary(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture):Ships,Ring Orbitals,Sphere Orbitals,Ringworlds,Sphereworlds;ability to create & destroy planets,population centers,stars;AI competently using all advances & features.
User avatar
Gargantou
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 7:13 am

RE: Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Post by Gargantou »

ORIGINAL: Wade1000

Yeah, some times I like to state the obvious. Heh.
I hereby declare thee Captain Obvious!

Anyway, I re-read your post about abstractions, and whilst I agree with some of it, I do not find the populations in space 4X games to be abstractions generally, IMO they do quite a good job at making proper estimates on how much population a planet could support before overcrowding and resource logistics become a serious problem!

I prefer to not view it as abstractions in DW but more like that it plays out in an alternate universe with a far less star-populated Milky Way, rather than abstractions. Partly because when I think off everything as abstractions it sorta pulls me out of the game and makes me feel less immersed, but that's just how I work as a person! Besides so far DW seems a lot more connected to 'reality' than most other commercial 4X games IMO, it's real-time, it has proper orbits of celestial bodies etc, no carrier combat(if I recall correctly)!

Damnit, I can't wait for DW, just 8 days to go. Someone put me in a cryotube and wake me up when it's out!
User avatar
Wade1000
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:21 pm
Location: California, USA

RE: Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Post by Wade1000 »

Anyway, I re-read your post about abstractions, and whilst I agree with some of it, I do not find the populations in space 4X games to be abstractions generally, IMO they do quite a good job at making proper estimates on how much population a planet could support before overcrowding and resource logistics become a serious problem!
That statement is totally not related to the point I was making.
 
Game abstractions to me:
 
One population unit does not equal just one person.
To me, one star unit does not equal just one star.
To me, one structure unit on a planet does not equal just one structure on the entire planet. The unit would more like represent various structures spread across the various areas of the surface.
 
In other 4Ex games, like Civilization 4, one soldier unit or tank unit does not equal one soldier or tank. Instead those units would equal like 1000 soldiers and 100 tanks.
 
Those are just my way of thinking of these sorts of games. :)
 
Wish list:population centers beyond planetary(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture):Ships,Ring Orbitals,Sphere Orbitals,Ringworlds,Sphereworlds;ability to create & destroy planets,population centers,stars;AI competently using all advances & features.
User avatar
Gargantou
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 7:13 am

RE: Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Post by Gargantou »

ORIGINAL: Wade1000

One population unit does not equal just one person.
Well most 4X space games I've played makes it clear what number they count in, like Space Empires series makes it clear that "100" in population means "100 million", not just "100"

They do not leave the population numbers to the imagination generally, but usually makes it clear what number the population is counted in, i.e. numbers of thousands, millions, billions.

Anyway, I fully understand what you're saying though I personally would say the Civ series have a far bigger emphasis on abstraction than DW appears to have.
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: Gargantou
There's currently no dramatic changes in the galaxy itself during the game - at least, not naturally caused changes...
That's the way it should be.

This 'stellar evolution' stuff should be up to the player whether he wants them in the game or not. Personally I do not since it's quite unrealistic, given the timeframe one has to think in when one looks at the evolution of stars and so forth.

Personally I'm a bigger fan of 'hard'-style science fiction rather than science fantasy where space is filled with magic anomalies everywhere you go and so forth.

And I know, I know, FTL travel is very much fantasy but it's a sacrifice that I understand because it's necessary to keep the game somewhat decently paced. The ideas of ultra-rapid 'stellar evolution' however, is not.

But, as I said before, I'm fine with it being added to the game as long as it's completely optional, I don't want to be forced to deal with a sci-fantasy universe where stars can go supernova like the ones we get in some other games.

And just to throw some scientific numbers into my rant, a supernovae occurs only approx. once every 50 years, in the entire Milky Way galaxy.

That should give everyone a fair idea of how how extremely low the chances would be to run into a supernova.

So if someone makes a supernova mod, please make an option in it to have it on a realistic scale, i.e. only one starsystem once every 50 ingame years!

P.S. I know I'm crazy, no need to point that out.


I agree with you. Unless the game lasts billions of turns, then the chances of something cataclysmic happening are pretty low. Take a look at our own galaxy, while it is constantly growing, the growth rate is minuscule...change takes much time to be accomplished.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Wade1000
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:21 pm
Location: California, USA

RE: Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Post by Wade1000 »

ORIGINAL: Wade1000
And just to throw some scientific numbers into my rant, a supernovae occurs only approx. once every 50 years, in the entire Milky Way galaxy.

That should give everyone a fair idea of how how extremely low the chances would be to run into a supernova.

So if someone makes a supernova mod, please make an option in it to have it on a realistic scale, i.e. only one starsystem once every 50 ingame years!

P.S. I know I'm crazy, no need to point that out.
Consider, also, that a galaxy consists of billions of stars. In games like this portraying a galaxy each star system represented is likely abstracted to represent an average ,or the best, of millions of stars in it's vicinity. Thus, that supervova that happens every 50 years in real life would be FAR less likely in game...almost to the point of not needing to include supervovas in game or to have it super extremley rare.
I would except supernovas as super extremely rare in game. I won't try to come up with a ratio number chance for them happening in game.

Gargantou, you are not seeming crazy.
Wish list:population centers beyond planetary(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture):Ships,Ring Orbitals,Sphere Orbitals,Ringworlds,Sphereworlds;ability to create & destroy planets,population centers,stars;AI competently using all advances & features.
User avatar
Okim
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:32 am
Location: Russian Federation
Contact:

RE: Stellar evolution? Future possibility?

Post by Okim »

I liked cataclysmic events in MOO2 and  SE4. While the first has not so many stellar events (just a supernova, time anomaly and warp flux) all these events were funny to deal with: develop a star rejuvenator or be suspended for unpredictable period of time building additional firepower to unleash it as soon as flux is gone.

In SE4 it was possible to adjust the strength of events. I always played on cataclysmic level as it introduced supernovas, core instability and other nasty things that cannot be controlled. All you could do is just to evacuate citizens. It provided SE4 an additional juice as you had to fight not only your opponents, but also a universe itself.

I sometimes return to MOO2 as i miss its monsters (especially amoebas) and to SE4 as its extremely devastating events are unmatched by any other 4x game. BTW, when i first saw a monster in DW i was almost happy - space dwelling creatures are a rarety in modern space games )


Post Reply

Return to “Distant Worlds 1 Series”