Another space race victory

Aussie_Lurker said:
BASIC physics might prevent it, but I am still waiting on the word from HYPERSPATIAL physics ;)!

Aussie is somewhat right: right now some basic laws of phisics are being questioned because our galaxy only has 30% of the matter required to hold it togeter, which means there has to be black matter. Also, a sattelite that was launched in the 1970s is MUCH closer to earth than it should be! We are moving in opposing directions but some sort of gravitational pull has kept it from going at the expected rate.
 
I don't see why they make the Apollo Program lead to Alpha Centauri in the first place. After all, the moon landing was what "won" the Space Race (historically). And it was called the Apollo Program (historically). And the technologies in the Modern Age obviously wouldn't lead to Alpha Centauri, since those technologies exist right now, and we couldn't possibly go to Alpha Centauri right now. If I were to make a civ3 space mod, I would make it possible to do similar things once you research a tech called "String Theory" or something of the like.

Also, I think if a future era were included, it should be possible to disable it, for people like rhialto. ;)

rhialto said:
launching a spaceship to another star and expecting it to arrive within the next thousand years is NOT PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE. It isn't even a what-if. Basic physics prevents it.

This bothers me :( You are acting as if we(the human race) know everything about the laws of physics in the Universe. We might, but there would be no way to tell if we are truly correct(as a matter of fact, we do know that our current theories are incorrect). There are plenty of things that current scientists admit they have no explaination for at the moment. For instance, at the singularity of a Black Hole, when spacetime bends back infinitely on itself, they suspect that the very basic laws of physics would be broken or changed. Also, they haven't discovered how to link Gravity to the Electroweak force, so no Grand Unified Theory. People are currently researching String Theory, an attempt at resolving the conflicts between the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. These three things could alter our views on, as you put it, "basic physics." Could we move faster than the speed of light? The Theory of Relativity (our current view) says no, but who knows? A theoretical physics breakthrough could prove that it's not only possible, but perfectly accessible as well.

In the past, scientists (such as Ptolemy) have made breathroughs, and then used their models to explain things definitively. In the present, scientists are making theories, but we know (from past experience) not to rely too much on them, since they are likely to be proven incorrect. Not only should we assume that our theories are possibly incorrect, scientists have found things that they can't explain using our current theories, meaning they are certain that they are incorrect to some extent. (for example, serious descrepancies with the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics)

In short, the only thing that we understand is that we don't understand. :)
 
I think a scientific theory of the lack of water on Mars is that there once was a hydrated atmosphere there, but due to a sharp loss in magnetic field there, it blew away (evidence is in the crystal structure of lava rock samples, which indicate magnetic field at the time of their cooling). Saw this on a PBS "NOVA" show last year.
 
@wakiki
Yes, you're right, I am basing my calculations of that 1000 year trip on current known physics, except I assumed for that calculation (yes, it was a real calculation done, not some back of envelope or top or head figure) that we would invent some unfeasably high efficiency rocket engines.

And you're right that we could some day come up with a model for space transport that makes rocket theory a waste of time. But that would turn civ into an unashamedly science fiction game. In a game which is meant to be SF, that is fine, but civ is first and foremost a game about history, and putting blatant speculative SF elements into such a game feels wrong. Basically, Im against Alpha Centauri trips for the same reason I am against war walker style battlemechs - it relies on extremely speculative SF concepts to work.
 
the Alpha Centauri space victory does need some extra techs, ie. stasis chambers, fusion power, antimatter containment, etc. I like the idea of a staged space race victory, and I like the Civ2 idea of victory only when the ship has arrived safely.
 
Personally I think they shoul scrap the current AC victory and make it one of these other victories:

Mars Colony - Would require you to have completed a Mission to the Moon, have a satellite network, have a Moon Base, and have a Mission to Mars. Should require research as well as shields to build(for gameplay balance, so industry does not automatically win).
 
I agree with rhialto, Civ should be based off of history. I would prefer if they changed going to Alpha Centauri to going to the moon. Besides, it's not like there is anything to "colonize" in Alpha Centauri (it's a binary system and if it has planets, they certainly aren't habitable.)

And besides, the name for the moon landing program was the Apollo Program; why would they add the same thing in, at the same tech level as history, and change the destination? Makes no sense to me :(

And also, historically, landing on the Moon was what "won" the space race of the United States vs. the Soviet Union.

What I'm saying is, there are plenty of historical reasons to change this to the Moon landing.

What I really like is the idea of being able to launch satellites, which could produce commerce and be able to give you vision of areas of the map, and launching space stations. I don't know what benifits these would have,

Another idea is for each thing you launch into space, you would prestige. This could mean improving your reputation, or something of that sort.
 
I agree. Going to moon is more an option to conquer more land in postmodern age and to give the game a new challenge. But it doesn't let you win the space race.
However, the space race in Civ3 is actually more boring than before. There's really no challenge in building some improvements and start a rocket.

I personally liked more the way before: usually I tried to build a better/faster spaceship to win the spacerace against the early launched, but weak AI-ship.

So I would suggest a spaceship challenge: the arrival on Centauri has a possibility from max. 40% at the beginning with early ships, you can improve them by better technologies for a rate up to 80%, so to have a save spacerace victory you must send at least a fleet of either 4-5 early ships or 2 late ships...
 
So here is my suggestion:

First Satellite
First Man in Space
Man on Moon
Space Station
Man on Mars
Orbiting Colonies
Mars Terraformation --> Space Race Victory

or add

Terrestrial Planet Finder
Alpha Centauri --> Space Race Victory
 
t'd be interesting to do multiple space programs instead of one huge one. Like KenScott said, it should be in a staircase. I think it would be good to have space exploration form at these levels:
stars
star mapping
planets
orbits
<insert guy who came up with formula to calculate where and when a star is>'s Formula
rocketry
small sattelite in space
animal in space
man in space
man on moon
exploring sattelite (planets)
exploring sattelite (to other stars)
medium (Cellphone/TV) sattelite in space
<insert random planet name> rovers
large sattelite (Hubble
space station
Man on <insert planet name> (wins game)
 
Now, isn't that SORT of what I have been asking for from the beginning here? In this system, you don't simply put 'all your eggs in one basket'. Instead, you slowly increase your technology, and launch ever more risky-yet valuable-space missions, in order to accumulate points towards your final victory. The ultimate victory points, though, are not some arbitary cut-off point like with culture, but are determined at the time the game comes to an end (which could be anytime between say 2100 and 2500 AD).

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
 
Well, my thinking was that, once a certain % of the major nations in the game enter the modern era, an RNG determines the number of turns left before the game finishes-this could be anything from 50-500, for instance, but you simply will not know for certain!! Also, a player can go for any or all of the victories in the game, though the more he invests his resources into, the less chance he has of winning at any of them. When the game finishes at its random date, the player that wins the most number of victories is the overall winner of the game-with ties being sorted out by demographics.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
 
Actually, rihalto, certain new ideas for drives permit 10% speed of light travel; they are currently under serious if occasional consideration by several scientists. This means that the timeframe of SMAC was actually pretty good, if they use these drives. And someone came up with a theoretical basis for near-lightspeed drives...but it would require the perfection of zero-point (aka vacuum) energy.
 
rhialto said:
I was with you until this line. launching a spaceship to another star and expecting it to arrive within the next thousand years is NOT PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE. It isn't even a what-if. Basic physics prevents it.

Hmm? Let's assume the closest earth-like planet is found at 1 light years.
Light speed is about 300 000 km/s, so if we simplify and assume
the spaceship travels at 3000 km/s (1% of lightspeed) it would take 100 years to get there. We can use Newtonian equations with this low speed.
Now, we can only get less than 20 km/s speed or "deltav" with current chemical rockets, and if one wants to actually stop at a remote planetary system, the total deltav would be 6000 km/s. The best exhaust velocity we have is with ion engines, about 80 km/s, so the mass ratio would be about... 10^32. Considering earth's mass is 10^24 kg I see what you're aiming at. We couldn't launch even a gram if we used the whole earth's mass of propellant.

With a 1000 year trip time the mass ratio would be about 2000, which is still ridiculous, but not outright IMPOSSIBLE.

Then there's speculation of bussard ramjets scooping interstellar hydrogen etc...

I still don't know why you call it physically impossible, maybe tell me something more.


Okay, with that still pending, I still can say, the civ3 interstellar spaceship is stupid in so many ways. It is started to being built on the basis of the moon program (come on? it's like starting to build airplanes on the basis of canoes), and is generally just quite uninteresting.

They could have made it like you have to do robotic exploration missions with robotics and then construct the whole spaceship somewhere out of earth, like say in some jupiter's moon, all done with endless autonomous robot factories churning out robots that would scoop the raw materials and feed the factories to construct more robots and building blocks that would be used to construct the ship. The culmination would be sending the people from earth to the ship and launching.

That would, even how odd it seems, be more realistic and awe-inspiring than building some planetary party lounges. All in all, I don't know how much would change in practice, but just the idea of it should change. Graphics and names.
 
No one is going to find an Earth-like planet within 1 light year of our solar system, with no stars other than the sun in this region. The nearest star, Proxima Centauri (part of the same triple-star system as Alpha Centauri and Beta Centauri) is 4.3 light years away from Earth. Assuming for no particular reason that there is a terrestrial planet there, though, we could feasibly get there in under a millennium with sufficient technology. Even traveling at an average speed of 1% the speed of light the trip could be done in 430 years.
 
I think the point is that we do not even take cheap trips to our own orbit. You have to be Justin Timberlake or an astronaut in order to fly in space most of the time. It would be decades before self-sustaining trips beyond Mars would be practical. Considering most of the Civ 3 techs have already been researched or are in developement, an interstellar colonizing craft is just stupid. Change the goal to Mars Colony and we would all be at least a little happier. Make it a multiple part project that requires research, moeny, and shield input so its a challenge that way.
 
sennomulo said:
No one is going to find an Earth-like planet within 1 light year of our solar system, with no stars other than the sun in this region. The nearest star, Proxima Centauri (part of the same triple-star system as Alpha Centauri and Beta Centauri) is 4.3 light years away from Earth. Assuming for no particular reason that there is a terrestrial planet there, though, we could feasibly get there in under a millennium with sufficient technology. Even traveling at an average speed of 1% the speed of light the trip could be done in 430 years.

Ah, but as the previous poster noted, to accelerate a single gram of payload to 1% c would take the entire mass of the Earth as fuel, with a mass ratio of about 2000:1 if we extend the travel time by a factor of ten (its a non-linear relationship).

So by his figures, we could reach AC in 4300 years if we assume that 99.95 % of the vehicle is fuel mass. And given the need for structural integrity, that kind of ratio seems improbable.

btw, the fastest we have ever sent any macroscopic object is not even 1% of 1% c.
 
Well, as I said above we don't need to wait hundreds or thousands of years the spaceship arrive to a earth-lihe planet, the game simply end when spaceship is launched like in Civ3. That launch is just the ended of a space exploration in the game.
By this way a a race exploration victory wich is a dated to 60's between US and USSR to land a man on the Moon is replaced by a space exploration victory like culture victory type. Of course the victory if given by a score included the points that space exploration gives.
 
mhIdA said:
Well, as I said above we don't need to wait hundreds or thousands of years the spaceship arrive to a earth-lihe planet, the game simply end when spaceship is launched like in Civ3. That launch is just the ended of a space exploration in the game.
By this way a a race exploration victory wich is a dated to 60's between US and USSR to land a man on the Moon is replaced by a space exploration victory like culture victory type. Of course the victory if given by a score included the points that space exploration gives.

I think part of the discussion boils down to this, make space victory:

1) a self-sufficient Mars colony - possible earlier, ~1980's technology.
I don't know if a Mars colony sounds so marvellous that it would actually be rewarding to win the game with that. Bonus is, it's not so sci-fi and fits to civ.

2) Interplanetary mission launch - possible later, future technology.
On the other hand, the interplanetary mission requires (my educated guess) some extrapolated technologies like autonomous extraterrestrial production and antimatter handling. These technologies would "realistically" have other effects to the nation like being able to produce practically unlimited amounts of any goods or energy and send it back to earth. So I don't know if it's believable as a whole. Maybe as a peaceful victory.

3) Just make space missions give culture in some form of wonders so they add up to the cultural victory, and you can remove the special space victory type alltogether. You could add more small wonders (voyager, viking, venera, hubble, galileo, mars rovers, cassini-huygens or all previous just lumped to general robotics exploration, and mir/iss space station) and make the Apollo program a great wonder, because there really could only be one (who wants to be second to the moon?). It really is the modern equivalent of the sistine chapel or the hanging gardens, still living in pictures and soundbites and being talked about. Of course all this should be reflected in the cultural victory screen.
 
Top Bottom