While We Wait: Writer's Block & Other Lame Excuses

[Lord_Herobrine]

A or C

 

[KaiserElectric]

I honestly like all three ideas. As for the topic of handpicking, I don't agree with it. See Sam's post above for my explanation.

 

[Gem Hound]

A or C, No handpicking.

 

[Symphony D.]

All the people currently voting A showed zero interest in SysNES2 and thus by the power vested in me I declare them awful.

 

[Luckymoose]

I vote B, because A is not what you think it is.

 

[Shadowbound]

I vote B, because the odds you'll be able to do A with any accuracy are low.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Don't listen to this crazy, this stuff doesn't matter at all for the level of development in question.

I'll totally invent an alien biosphere if Kozmos wants me to.

 

[Symphony D.]

The only reason the ecology of the planet would matter in the slightest is if there is some product it produces that is difficult or impossible to get (or manufacture) anywhere else which may be of value to the more advanced exoplanetary polities vis-a-vis trade, e.g., Dune's spice. Or it presents an extremely notable hazard. (Protip: nobody would send a big important colony mission to such a planet. Probably.)

Nobody is going into stazNES XI, for example, really giving a damn about the distribution of yaks or tuna, because it's not important to a 21st century level understanding of geopolitics, international relations, or economics. So if the planet in question has a wonderfully unique weird chiral silicon-based biome that exists in uneasy tension with Earth-based carbon life but otherwise does nothing exceedingly economically useful, great: it isn't important at the level players will be operating at. You can spend time describing it, but it's frankly a waste of effort.

Economy in worldbuilding. Stuff That Matters First.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Just trying to keep up.

 

[talonschild]

I'd vote A, if only because I've been working in that direction for about half a year and would like to see an attempt at it to guide me. Also because it sounds cool.

I'm curious, Luckymoose, if you could explain what you think it is, and what you think we think it is.

 

[Luckymoose]

I'd vote A, if only because I've been working in that direction for about half a year and would like to see an attempt at it to guide me. Also because it sounds cool.

I'm curious, Luckymoose, if you could explain what you think it is, and what you think we think it is.

It is less important to note what I know it is compared to what you lot think it is.

 

[Arrow Gamer]

Honestly, reading the post, I've seen nothing to indicate it isn't hard science fiction.

It doesn't contradict science in any way I can see. Perhaps you can enlighten us instead of being pedantic?

 

[talonschild]

I'm still curious about both.

 

[Nuka-sama]

Most heinously B

 

[Kozmos]

So vote tally shows all three options have decent amount of support. C seems slightly ahead the other two. This does not exclude the possibility of B or A at some point in time, just it puts them further back in priority. Glad to see there is interest in playing which is what I needed to know whether to commit to it.

 

[ork75]

C sounds like a lot of fun/interesting.

 

[Tsoate]

B) Soft SF NES in mid to late 21st century. Giant Death Robots and silliness likely. Think INES/GoobNES and the like.

 

[Thlayli]

The only reason the ecology of the planet would matter in the slightest is if there is some product it produces that is difficult or impossible to get (or manufacture) anywhere else which may be of value to the more advanced exoplanetary polities vis-a-vis trade, e.g., Dune's spice. Or it presents an extremely notable hazard. (Protip: nobody would send a big important colony mission to such a planet. Probably.)

Nobody is going into stazNES XI, for example, really giving a damn about the distribution of yaks or tuna, because it's not important to a 21st century level understanding of geopolitics, international relations, or economics. So if the planet in question has a wonderfully unique weird chiral silicon-based biome that exists in uneasy tension with Earth-based carbon life but otherwise does nothing exceedingly economically useful, great: it isn't important at the level players will be operating at. You can spend time describing it, but it's frankly a waste of effort.

Economy in worldbuilding. Stuff That Matters First.

Flora and fauna are only important insofar as the players understand what biomes they're living in; a civilization starting in a region with two-hundred foot tall trees is going to have a significantly different economy and flavor than one starting on a sub-arctic taiga. Flora is probably a little more important since it plays into agricultural productivity.

 

[Tsoate]

I think Symph was meaning when comparing planets in a Space Age setting, not Stone Age. If you are already fully space age developed, and only dropping in and raping a planet for its minerals, you won't really care how tall the trees are, or if there is a suitable pack-horse analogue. Taiga or jungle, you'll suck it dry and leave.

 

[Sonereal]

I think Symph was meaning when comparing planets in a Space Age setting, not Stone Age. If you are already fully space age developed, and only dropping in and raping a planet for its minerals, you won't really care how tall the trees are, or if there is a suitable pack-horse analogue. Taiga or jungle, you'll suck it dry and leave.

The environment of a planet is still pretty important even when doing this. How well you operate in an environment is very dependent on the environment itself and operating a mining operation on a frozen planet presents a slew of different economic challenges than a desert death planet and jungle planet.