Planets/Moons types

May Player
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:47 am

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby May Player » Mon Sep 24, 2012 1:55 am

Of course, it makes perfect sense :D

GoranXII
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:35 am

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby GoranXII » Mon Sep 24, 2012 1:15 pm

One potential planet type that seems to have been missed here, water-worlds (or liquid-worlds, ie worlds where 80+% of the surface is covered in water or some other liquid), such would provide its own unique challenges and opportunities to colonists, in fact possibly more than would an ice world to a rock-dwelling species.

So now we have 4/5 planet types:
Rock, Ice, Gas, Magma and Liquid.

Another thing to think about would be the ambient temperature, it's no good trying to colonise a world like Venus when you prefer worlds with temperatures like that of Earth or Mars. Or not, we don't want to make the game overly-complicated.

Haji
Hearty Supporter
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:42 am

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby Haji » Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:55 pm

Thangulhad wrote:
Cruxador, if you look at the larger moons in our solar system, none of them have any sort or atmosphere even close to terran.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moons_of_Jupiter

And I would say these qualify as massive. You would need to have a gas giant orbiting in the belt likely to produce life. The Goldilocks case of not too hot and not too cold. Even then the moon would have to have a short orbit around the moon, otherwise the time on the darkside would freeze everything to death.


The problem is, that we Solar System itself isn't sufficient sample to use. For example, we know of a great many gas giants that are located very close to the star. Kuiper-11, for example, have six gas giants within 100mln km of the star. There are great many gas giants that are within liquid water zone.

And to be honest, the moons found is Solar System may very well be small. For example, Earth is the biggest "rocky" planet in the solar system - but we have found dozens planets bigger than that around other stars. It stands to reason, that Earth-sized moons may exist out there - they may even be common. And moons that big would have no problem with retaining their atmosphere.

Valeroth
Hearty Supporter
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:37 pm

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby Valeroth » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:42 pm

If you want to go with a more simplified approach I would go for the following planet (or moon types) that follow MOO2.
Toxic, Radiated, Barren, Desert, Tundra, Arid, Swamp, Ocean, Terran, Gaia, Gas Giant (with large moons). And you could probably add in a few more. That would be fine, and be true to the MOO2 franchise. You could throw in a few others… Molten, Ice with Sub-surface Ocean, and others… This simplifies things, but takes a very humanoid approach in assuming all space fairing life is much like human life.

However, similar to other ideas above, I think it would be much more interesting to give each planet a set of characteristics:
Size, Surface Temperature, Gravity, Atmospheric Composition, and Atmospheric Pressure

Size: How big is it? Has an effect on how much population is can support, especially in comparison to the size of your original homeworld.

Surface Temperature: A factor how distance from star, tidal forces, internal heat, and athmosphereic pressure and composition.

Gravity - A factor of size, and geological composition.

Atmospheric Composition: Ranging from No Atmosphere, to listing the 3 most common gases present. Say, HCl(38%),Cl2(32%),F2(30%).

Atmospheric Pressure: Ranging from None, to some high amount.

Obviously it’s easiest for the user to represent gravity and pressure in earth terms. Then we’ll assume your races home-world is ideally suited for their living. To raise all the way to a spacefaring race would assume that the planet you started from is pretty ideal for your development. There might be one step that would be better “Gaia” but you would need any addition tech to settle there.

So lets say your Alien Homeworld has the following conditions:
Size: 12 (let’s say 12,000 Kilometer diameter)
Gravity: 0.91g (Earth being 1g)
Atmospheric Composition: HCl(38%),Cl2(32%),F2(30%)
Atmospheric Pressure: .5 (with Earth being 1)
Average Surface Temperature: 240C

Now when you set out to colonize other worlds…
Size: Does not matter for setting up colonies, but the size of the planet compared to yours might affect how much space there is to grow.

Gravity: Anything outside of a certain range from your own (+/- 100%) would probably cause a industry/farming penalty, and outside a larger range (+200%) would be need for some sort of gravity affecting technology in order to settle. Other advacements in gravity technologies could eliminate these penalties.

Atmospheric Composition: This would be the biggest factor in life support. Each race would have a gases that is needed, and a gas that is poisonous to it. There could be certain racial perks that remove the need for a gas to be present, or make you resistant to all gases. You could also add additional gases (at random) to the required or poisonous list as well as penalties. Then if a required gas is not present, or a poisonous gas is you would need a certain technology to overcome it.

Pressure and Surface Temperature would work much the same with the further the pressure and surface temperature is from your homeworld the more and different types of life support you need to settle there.

Living with such heavy life support requirements in place should put penalties on planet population size as everyone has to live with so much life support structure built around them, however that then opens the door for terraforming.

Every time terraforming is worked on it moves the planetary conditions closer and closer to the homeworld, thus removing the need for life support structures allowing the planet to support more population. Somethings like gravity and size are pretty hard to terraform, but they also don’t affect the ability to live on the planet as much. Terraforming should also be very expensive, and very advanced technology.

So in the end game with every race possessing terraforming technology you get all the races trying to move conditions closer to their homeworlds…
Early game though you could have races peacefully overlapping as some planets in a system might be perfectly suitable for one race, and other planets for others. You might even get strange alliances… with say a Methane breathing races, and a Chlorine breathing races agreeing to co-exist but use different planets.
I generally also like the idea of Moons gaining these characteristics… sure most moons may have no atmosphere, and erratic temperatures… but the occasional one might be suitable for colonization.

I used to run a PBEM game (long long ago) that setup a star cluster in exactly this fashion (and have the code for it laying around somewhere), and it was very interesting to see the alliances that formed. It did mean that most races needed some sort of life support tech to settle anywhere outside their homesystem, with some planets requiring very little tech and others requiring a god awful amout.

You’d want some way to boil the details to simple descriptors for those you do not want this much detail (though do those people play 4x games?).
And having said all that… I’d probably be happy with the MOO2 style as well… though it doesn’t seem as compatible with your largely increased variation of races.

Thangulhad
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:16 pm
Location: Village of Lakewood, IL

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby Thangulhad » Sat Oct 13, 2012 1:13 pm

Haji wrote:
The problem is, that we Solar System itself isn't sufficient sample to use. For example, we know of a great many gas giants that are located very close to the star. Kuiper-11, for example, have six gas giants within 100mln km of the star. There are great many gas giants that are within liquid water zone.

And to be honest, the moons found is Solar System may very well be small. For example, Earth is the biggest "rocky" planet in the solar system - but we have found dozens planets bigger than that around other stars. It stands to reason, that Earth-sized moons may exist out there - they may even be common. And moons that big would have no problem with retaining their atmosphere.


Haji, you are parroting exactly what I said. You have to have a gas giant in the liquid water zone to be able to have a terran moon. That is what the goldilocks theory is. The planet/moon needs to be in the life sustaining belt from the star and be of sufficient mass to have the gravity to maintain its atmosphere.
-Thangulhad

Haji
Hearty Supporter
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:42 am

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby Haji » Sun Oct 14, 2012 1:54 am

Thangulhad wrote:
Haji, you are parroting exactly what I said. You have to have a gas giant in the liquid water zone to be able to have a terran moon. That is what the goldilocks theory is. The planet/moon needs to be in the life sustaining belt from the star and be of sufficient mass to have the gravity to maintain its atmosphere.


I thought that you said, that there should be very, very few Earth-like moons, because Solar system moons are small. What I was saying, is that we don't really have much data, so we can allow our imagination to run wild (like having many - at least relatively - Earth-like moons) without this being unscientific.

Considering that our own Solar system planets (aside from Earth itself) aren't really that much better than our moons (well, the planets are a little larger on average, but not much) I'd say that Earth-like moons are only slightly less common than Earth-like planets.

Thangulhad
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:16 pm
Location: Village of Lakewood, IL

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby Thangulhad » Sun Oct 14, 2012 3:21 pm

Haji wrote:I thought that you said, that there should be very, very few Earth-like moons, because Solar system moons are small. What I was saying, is that we don't really have much data, so we can allow our imagination to run wild (like having many - at least relatively - Earth-like moons) without this being unscientific.

Considering that our own Solar system planets (aside from Earth itself) aren't really that much better than our moons (well, the planets are a little larger on average, but not much) I'd say that Earth-like moons are only slightly less common than Earth-like planets.


I said terran moons would be fewer from the simple fact that they would need to be of sufficient mass and in the liquid zone. Those two factors alone wil make terran moon possibilities far less.
-Thangulhad

May Player
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:47 am

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby May Player » Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:25 am

All that we know is that we do not know 99.9999% of our galaxy!
I propose for most part the game keeps to what we know or can see via telescopes. As to the rest - it could be freakishly surprising... ;)

Haji
Hearty Supporter
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:42 am

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby Haji » Mon Oct 15, 2012 3:37 am

Thangulhad wrote:I said terran moons would be fewer from the simple fact that they would need to be of sufficient mass and in the liquid zone. Those two factors alone wil make terran moon possibilities far less.


But this is the problem - those are the same requirements as for planets. The reason you said moons have (usually) less mass than planets (meaning, that fewer moons will be Earth-like) is because in the Sol System moons are small - but we don't know if that's the case in the rest of the universe. For example, please look at this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:G ... table_zone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Goldilocks_planets

As you can see, not only there are more gas giants than super-Earths in the habitable zones, the gas giants tend to have more moons. So I'd argue, it's more likely to find Earh-like moon than Earth-like planet.

Thangulhad
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:16 pm
Location: Village of Lakewood, IL

Re: Planets/Moons types

Postby Thangulhad » Mon Oct 15, 2012 6:21 am

Haji wrote:But this is the problem - those are the same requirements as for planets. The reason you said moons have (usually) less mass than planets (meaning, that fewer moons will be Earth-like) is because in the Sol System moons are small - but we don't know if that's the case in the rest of the universe. For example, please look at this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:G ... table_zone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Goldilocks_planets

As you can see, not only there are more gas giants than super-Earths in the habitable zones, the gas giants tend to have more moons. So I'd argue, it's more likely to find Earh-like moon than Earth-like planet.


Haji, once again you are PROVING my point in attempt to refute it. I am simply stating to have a terran moon it needs to be in the liquid belt and of sufficient mass. Moons of insuffucient mass or outside the liquid zone would not be terran.
-Thangulhad


Return to “Galaxies, Planets & Moons”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest