|  | 
| 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
    
 |  | 
 
 
	
		|  |  |  
	
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 12:09 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 General |  | 
					Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA 
						Posts: 3,070
					 Thanks: 13 
		
			
				Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 
	Quote: 
	
		| narf poit chez BOOM said: I have difficulty understanding what religious opinions have to do with planetary types. 
 |  Makes perfect sense to me. People regularly argue over Star Trek canon.  
				__________________Cap'n Q
 
 "Good morning, Pooh Bear," said Eeyore gloomily. "If it is a good morning," he said. "Which I doubt," said he.
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 12:51 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Captain |  | 
					Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: USA 
						Posts: 806
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 Slightly off topic:It seems to me that most solar systems should have LOTS of tiny no-atmosphere or thin-atmosphere planets, especially around the fringes.   In other words, a Kuiper belt.
 
 Also, if you're going to aim for realism, then planets must have temperature attributes.  I would think that the extremes of temperature would be more important for colonization than atmosphere type.  If a planet's climate at its equator is like Antarctica in winter, then you're not going to get undomed colonies of humans even if the atmosphere is nitrogen/oxygen.  Conversely, if a planet is very Earth-like except that it has little atmospheric oxygen, then colonists just need to carry an O2 supply/generator when they go outside -- domes aren't really needed.
 
				__________________Give me a scenario editor, or give me death!     Pretty please???
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 01:25 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Shrapnel Fanatic |  | 
					Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Southern CA, USA 
						Posts: 18,394
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 Planets have gravity, temperature and radiation values, but they don't have any actual effect. |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 01:39 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Captain |  | 
					Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: USA 
						Posts: 806
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 I forgot some stuff: 
Huge planets should always have several Tiny planets nearby.  These would represent very large moons like Titan.
 
Making None atmospheres common (in order to be more realistic) would mean a big advantage for None "breathers."  So to compensate you'd have to make sizeable None planets extremely rare, which is probably realistic anyway.  (That would make None races very interesting to play.  Lots of room for expansion in every system, but lots of planets to defend.)  
 
If planets had temperatures, these would generally get more frigid the further away planets were from their star.     
And while I'm talking about realism: what's up with having two (or three!) main sequence stars close together, at the center of a star system, surrounded by planets?    
				__________________Give me a scenario editor, or give me death!     Pretty please???
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 01:47 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Shrapnel Fanatic |  | 
					Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Southern CA, USA 
						Posts: 18,394
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 How else would you do binary stars? There isn't a whole lot of room to place them far apart.
 The planet temperatures do get colder as the planets get farther away from the star, based on type even (in FQM anyways). Its a nice geometric formula, with distance^2 instead of the silly distance used in stock:
 
 Name                := Formula Planet Terr Temperature
 Formula             := MAX(-240, 100 - ([%HexDistanceToCenter%] * [%HexDistanceToCenter%] * 3) + Random(-50, 25)) + (([%NumberOfStars%] - 1) * 50)
 
 Name                := Formula Planet Ven Temperature
 Formula             := MAX(-240, 360 - ([%HexDistanceToCenter%] * [%HexDistanceToCenter%] * 3) + Random(-50, 25)) + (([%NumberOfStars%] - 1) * 50)
 
 Name                := Formula Planet Moon Temperature
 Formula             := MAX(-240, 80 - ([%HexDistanceToCenter%] * [%HexDistanceToCenter%] * 3) + Random(-50, 25)) + (([%NumberOfStars%] - 1) * 50)
 
 Name                := Formula Planet Ice Temperature
 Formula             := MAX(-240, 20 - ([%HexDistanceToCenter%] * [%HexDistanceToCenter%] * 3) + Random(-50, 25)) + (([%NumberOfStars%] - 1) * 20)
 
 Name                := Formula Planet Gas Temperature
 Formula             := MAX(-240, 40 - ([%HexDistanceToCenter%] * [%HexDistanceToCenter%] * 3) + Random(-50, 25)) + (([%NumberOfStars%] - 1) * 25)
 
 
 Compared to the lamo (excessive) stock formula:
 
 Name                := Formula Planet Temperature
 Formula             := IIF([%HexDistanceToCenter%] <= 3, 500 - ([%HexDistanceToCenter%] * 100) - Random(0, 100), IIF([%HexDistanceToCenter%] >= 7, 0 - ([%HexDistanceToCenter%] * 20) - Random(0, 50), Random(-50, 50))) + (([%NumberOfStars%] - 1) * 100)
 
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 02:25 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 National Security Advisor |  | 
					Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Toronto, Canada 
						Posts: 5,624
					 Thanks: 1 
		
			
				Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 Woohoo for the inverse square law of radiation.   |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 02:28 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 First Lieutenant |  | 
					Join Date: Jan 2005 
						Posts: 689
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 Wouldn't Gas Giants argueably never be 'un-domed' if one were aiming for that kind of realism? |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 02:38 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Shrapnel Fanatic |  | 
					Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Southern CA, USA 
						Posts: 18,394
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 Lots of space for floating cloud cities? |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 02:42 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Captain |  | 
					Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: USA 
						Posts: 806
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 For binary systems, the game could allow travel from one sector to the other without warping.  Of course, in that case, if one star went nova it would need to wipe out BOTH systems.
 I didn't realize that the temperatures go down with distance as you say.  But that doesn't affect gameplay in the slightest, right?  Could one, in principle, set a formula for conditions so that planets with nice conditions would always be located within a "habitability zone"?  Then conditions would automatically be bad for frozen or scorched planets.
 
				__________________Give me a scenario editor, or give me death!     Pretty please???
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				September 14th, 2007, 02:46 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 National Security Advisor |  | 
					Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Toronto, Canada 
						Posts: 5,624
					 Thanks: 1 
		
			
				Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Expanding Atmosphere Types 
 Unfortunately, conditions are determined outside of the formula for temperature, gravity, and radiation. |  
	
		
	
	
	
	
	
	
	| 
	|  Posting Rules |  
	| 
		
		You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts 
 HTML code is On 
 |  |  |  |  |