SPACE EXPLOITATION ver 2.0 hosted by Smilo

[NotLikeTea]

A little clarification of my anti-space rantings, since it seems that the comment in the introduction of the summary is the only mention of this view

I would like to see less future in CivIII (well, just as much as CivII, but less than most people here are advocating)

Why? Civ is an historic game, and the future is a domain of SF, for the moment at least. Games that try to combine history and SF usually do a poor job at both.

Also, consider this. CivIII is one game in their "Sweep of Time" trilogy. SMAC is another game in the series. What would be the third? It could take place before Civ (unlikely, as there isn't that much to do before civilization exists), it can take place at the same time as SMAC (on earth, but unlikely since SMAC deals with the death of Earth) or it can take place after SMAC.

The third option looks most likely, but even the second is plausible. In both cases, planetary exploration, colonisation, mining, etc would fit in perfectly! These are all good ideas, but they belong in their own game. In Civ, they could only seem to be poorly grafted on. I look forward to seeing them eventually, but not in this game.

Mind you, space is important for the game.. like I mentioned before, things like Sputnic, the first man in space, the moon landing, probes to the planets, and even simple, primitive colonies on the Moon, and manned missions to mars (as wonders or projects) are all fair game in this game. I don't want to see new maps for all the planets, for example. I thinbk that this is going too far.

[Ecce Homo]

NotLikeTea, I agree on your point that most of the space stuff should be left for the third SoT game.

However, sending 40 000 colonists to AC is an advanced project, which would require centuries of research and preparation, including colonization of the solar system. Why go to another solar system as long as most of this one is untouched?

Another idea about the AC race:
Building a spaceship when at war would be dangerous. It is likely to be attacked by your enemies. You should have the choice of where to assemble it - under ground on Earth (easy to build but hard to launch), orbiting Earth (vulnerable, easy to launch), under the surface of Moon or an asteroid (hard to build, but safe).

[EnochF]

The more I hear about Test of Time, the more I become convinced that space exploration in Civ III is not only plausible but indispensible.

Okay. Concept #1: The Extended Game
There is an option to turn this off. Meaning that Civ III can be played just like Civ II, with the voyage to Alpha Centauri taking place directly after the Apollo missions. Of course, we all know the people who turn off the Extended Game are the world conquerors and deity players, but the option for Alpha Centauri will still be there.

But for those of us with loftier goals, there's the Extended Game, which consists of colonizing the habitable bodies of the solar system and exploiting resources. In Test of Time, you may end up in a conflict with aliens to keep things interesting. I don't happen to think aliens are necessary to keep players interested, but it would be an interesting twist. Maybe you'd discover microbial life living on Titan and develop the science of exobiology (xenobiology), which would come in handy when dealing with the more developed alien life on Alpha Centauri. The Extended Game would also include a number of future technologies based on extrapolations from present-day cutting-edge techs and possibly SF sources. Less emphasis on the military: we don't want this to turn into Robotech or Star Blazers, though a handful of space units are okay.

Concept #2: Multiple Maps
Test of Time already has multiple maps, four of them! It would be simplicity itself to take this concept and apply it to the colonization of the solar system! Let's say we have six base maps for an extended game. Earth, Moon, Mars, Titan, Ganymede, Alpha Centauri Planet. Each of these maps can be any size and randomly generated. The Moon map will always be the satellite of the beginning planet, but the Mars, Titan and Ganymede maps can be any size (or even not exist depending on how many planets were randomly determined to be in your solar system) and contain all manner of exotic terrain. The Alpha Centauri Planet map will always be the same size as the Earth map and will contain terrain not to be found anywhere in the other solar system maps.

Plus, multiple maps opens up a lot of great ideas for city improvements, units and abilities. A city improvement that transports units between maps like an airport. A unit that can transport other units between maps. (The Unity might be an actual, physical spaceship you could control!) And considering that each planet would have its own level of "space" (high orbit) to colonize with space cities, the possibilities are endless!

[EnochF]

I just spent a little while in a foreign set of forums... er, can't remember just which at the moment... I sort of stumbled onto them while following a string of links from a Gamespot review of Birth of the Federation.

In any case, John (the same one who answers questions in Apolyton's Test of Time forums) was dropping hints about possible uses for multiple maps.

One of his suggestions really fired me up for designing scenarios: Time travel. Each map could represent the same planet at a different period in history!

Mostly this would be a scenario-related thing. But it's also another argument in favor of multiple maps, which means it's an argument in favor of colonization of the solar system.

(Or maybe the Extended Game could include time travel. After all, by 1950 or so, most expert Civ players are at the top of the power graph, but what if a competing civ sent a handful of modern units back in time to fight your Civ back in the days of crusaders and musketeers? It might be a good challenge for jaded Deity players. I know, I know, it opens up a whole can of worms we don't want to get into... it's just an idea.)

[Tornado7]

Back to the Top.
Maps for the solar system:
Moon
Mars
Venus
Mercury
Galilean Moonsm (Ganymede, Callisto, Europa, Io)
Big Asteroids(Ceres, Pallas, Vesta, etc.)
Titan
Pluto/Charon
Maybe Triton
Alpha Centauri
The goal of the game could be to make contact with the Centaurians and exchange enough techs that you develop FTL together.

It wouldn't be all that hard to generate all the terrain, either. Most of the "space" terrain could be recycled from map to map. A crater is a crater, whether it's on the moon, mercury or on a asteroid. The only maps that would have to be really unique would be Mars, Titan, parts of Venus, and maybe Europa(Which could be a linked map with the surface and underwater)
And for the unimaginative pansies that can't handle creativity, you could just turn it off.

------------------
Truth is stranger than fiction, and people are weirder than both.

[Harel]

Develop FTL with the centaurians? You do remember it's civ, right? Which was BEFORE alpha centaury? People didn't GO to alpha centaury to become centaurains yet.
Besides, expansion over the entire solar system, beside being too time-consuming ( remember, the game need to end by 2050 ), it's, well, just un-civ. Even the futurisitc SMAC only centred around one single planet.
If you space conquest, I suggest birth of the federation. This isn't for Civ. I still say that colonization of mars and the moon should still be a wonder.

At the risk of starting another Harelite War, I'd like to make a comment about nuclear propulsion.

<u>nuclear drive</u> A uranium rode hitting up a Zinc-based engine ( a high-bulk matter, very good movement ratio ).
Tech: 1990
Cost: Normal
Upkeep: 1 per 5 fuel-units.
Enviroment: Very bad. Radio-active.
Reliabiltiy: Low.
Speed: 0.15 G' acceleration, 400 fuel-units

I'm really confused by this. I've been studying nuclear propulsion as a hobby for… 10 years, anyway. I've never heard of any serious proposal for using a light metal as the reaction mass, but it might be suitable for "smaller, faster, cheaper" robotic exploration missions (on which I am not current).

I can't guess how to translate what I know (Isp = specific Impulse, the length of time one lb-mass of reaction matter can produce one lb-force of thrust) into "movement ratio" (huh?) "fuel units" (arbitrary) and "G" (strictly dependent on payload size). For reference, LOX-LH2 engine produces Isp of 600 seconds.

There are two basic forms (with variants): solid core and gas core. Solid Core typically uses a "bed" of fuel pellets coated with a carbide protective layer. Reaction mass (typically H2 or CO2 seeded with microscopic metalic carbide particals for heat transfer) is heated to conventional temperatures to produce Isp in the 800 sec (CO2) or 1000-1300+ sec (H2) range. The reaction is controlled by the concentration of pellets in the bed. This is little different from the NERVA engine built and tested in the 1960's. Snazzy future tech might produce somewhat higher Isp with superior fuel control & heat transfer.

Gas Core has the best potential for the forseeable future. UF6 gas in a fused silica/diamond sphere is the reactor. The reation mass would again be seeded H2 or CO2. Temperature limitations of fused silica (marginally possible with today's tech) yield an Isp in the 2000-3000 sec range. The biggest problem at present is isolating the unused fuel in heavy shielded tanks, temperature, and controlling the reactor. Fused silica with diamond protective layers (forseeable) might boost Isp to 5000 sec. Diamond reactor and engine parts (far but feasible future, 100+ yrs) could yield Isp as much as 20,000 sec.

Neither design has notable contamination of reaction mass with fission products, but malfunction or attack could release radioactive pollution. Non-military use would likely be confined to space only. In a less squeemish future society (as might be encountered in a Civ3 game) nuclear propulsion for military aerospace weapons platforms would be awesome.

<font size=1>(I'll correct the Isp figures if necessary when I get home)</font>

------------------
*a friendly note from your favorite heretic

[Harel]

I like wars Don don
No, just kidding. It's nice to see a serious post. I can say I learned something.

First, on of the earlier SF books described an atomic missile using Zinc as reacton mass. Since it's heavy, and got good momentum/energy cost ratio I listed it up. I also remember seeing a movie on discovery about nuclear engines prototypes back in the 70's, but I didn't rememebr enough to post it here.
Ofcourse, the values I put in are arbitery and completly fictional. Just like the difference between a foot soldier and a plane in civ model was not like real life, we have to drift from the real figures here. The difference in a flight from Mars from a catapult drive to a fusion engine ( or even FTL drive ) is too great to show realisticly. The values I listed were, ofcourse, made up figures ( just like movement ratio in civ ) and only make sense in compersion to the other suggested means of transportion.

I have a simple idea: Allow asteroid mining. Not with a wonder, but normally. You can mine up to 100 asteroids. You can also use asteroids as space stations.

[dinoman2]

BUMP

Harel, noramlly I agree with you, but this time... Are you so unimaginative that you have to make the game end by 2050? You have to follow the story line THAT exactly? I'm sorry to say this, but no matter hoow many neat features are put into Civ III, if it doesn't go into the future, it won't be THAT much different from civ II, and may even be a step down from ctp, which is saying quite a bit.

------------------
"Idealism is the despot of thought, just as politics is the despot of will"
-Mikhail Bakunin

I don't think the civ format/engine is capable of doing justice to space except by generalizing to the point of the abstract. I didn't like the orbital intallations in SMAC; they just don't make sense. Why have orbital hydroponics? In orbit you have to build an air-tight environment and lift water and organics at huge expense. Nonsense. Hydroponics works on the planet surface, you know.

[Harel]

To The Ellimist:

"Allow atroid mining normally".
First off, many people allready suggested that. And secondly, how do you "normally" mine astroids?

Dimo:

I would LOVE for the game to continue to the deep future. And yes, stepping down from CtP seems like a troubling thougth.
However, I am trying to be realistic. With all the plan on "sweep-of-time" i think that thier is no chance Sid and BR would break the chain as it happened on SMAC.

Don don:

Here here.

[dinoman2]

Don don

Why would someone do it? Hmmmm......
Ok, let's say your nation's population is growing fast. Thus, your cities are taking up more room. Thus your farmlands are getting replaced by cities. Thus your population is getting less food. Thus lots of people are dying of starvation. Thus you need to find a new place to farm. Thus you use orbital instillations. How would a crisis like this develop? I don't know, but I DO know that it is developing across the world today, making sky hydroponics labs a more realistic proposition

------------------
"Idealism is the despot of thought, just as politics is the despot of will"
-Mikhail Bakunin

[smilo]

Some food for thought (to keep the discussion going).

Even if our planet can generate enough food & water for a massive population eplosion, what about materials like oil, metals, ... ?

[Harel]

Dino, that would never happen. Don don is right, brining mass amount of water to orbits cost way too much, regardless of your technology. Even fusion power would find that task daunting.

No, technology is much easier, better and cheaper applied on Earh surface.
Even today, thier is hardly a problem to make enough food for the entire world. The problem is money.
The farmlands on Texas alone can supply the entire world with enough food: however, creating so much food would reduce the cost per ton-wheet/corn too such a low level, thats it would not cover the cost of harvesting and transportion.
The problem is economics, not technological.
Not to mention that geneticly altered plants would generate much much more food ( with better crops and better nautrinat value ).

And even if that won't be enough, the entire world popultion could be fitted into huge archologies that would cover only a fraction of the surface now used.
If we assume that you can built 4-5 archolgies per square kilometer, then one Squared KM could house, with comfort half a million people.
Even if the world popultion would double, it could still be fitted into 150 X 150 kilometers. That's right. Sounds odd, doesn't it? But true.

[dinoman2]

Don don, Harel, I conceed your point about food. However, smilo ALSO has a point about other materials. Unless we use ONLY sillicon or hydrocarbon based items in the future(which actually is possible considering the strength of advaced plastics, but it is also unlikely.) we will need to get our materials from somewhere other than Earth. And finally, even if we DO use arcologies, there will not be enough room on Earth's surface for humans. At the current rate of population growth, which is small compared with growth in recent history, the human population will reach 950 BILLION!!!! That's over 95 times our current population (and you thought New York was bad now....).

[Gordon the Whale]

Duck, everybody, here come some worms.

Harel, at one point, you said "I am a physics student, and a big reader and author of science fiction. You will NOT find me wrong." The two are not necessarily compatable; you may be quoting excellent Sci-Fi and still be dead-wrong physically. I am also a Physicist and reader of Sci-Fi, although I must admit I have very little knowledge of the cutting-edge theoretical physics that actually lets us do all the fun things we'd like to do... Or, it lets us in computer games anyways. But it bring sup a good point; Assuming there is Space Exploitation in Civ3, are we after Sci-Fi or reasonable speculation? I certainly don't think we should get into interstellar exploration. SMAC is clearly a game about the first interstellar craft launched from Earth, and the Big Boys want SMAC to come after Civ3. (I do wonder how they're planning to follow up SMAC, if that is indeed what they want to do. Not much of a game once humanity has reached transcendance, eh?) So we're stuck without an Interstellar Drive, except our one prototype, at the end of Civ3. It stops us from using fun clean fusion engines and warp drives and harnessing the Vacuum Fluctuation Force, as well as String Theory. Oh well. We don't really understand those things anyway. If we did, we'd be out colonizing the galaxy instead of playing computer games, eh? But if we stick to ion drives and chemical rockets and solar sails and laser sails and skyhooks, and stay in-system, we're standing on relatively sound scientific principle. In other words, I'm dead against going past the solar system in Civ3. Now, I think colonizing the moon, Mars, etc. would be a lot of fun. Even more than a lot of fun, it would be a lot of micromanagement. I'm a micromanager. When I have 200 cities, I'm still micromanaging. I don't actually think I've ever finished a game of Civ2. I've all but taken over the world, then left the last enemy to whimper in his one city, I've built the spaceship and waited to launch it until it will arrive on the last turn I'd get anyways. I've gotten scores over 200% in the 1700s. (and projected to hit 1000% in plenty of time.) But I never really get around to playing that last 50 turns or so... What would it be like if I was given another planet? Even if it was Mars, and not terraformed, that's so much SPACE to expand. And although I always think to myself "I wish I could colonize the rest of the solar system," I'm not sure I would actually like it if I could. I've not played CtP, so I don't know much about it's "streamlined interface," but before Civ3 goes into space, it needs to get really easy to control, and Firaxis has to do a lot of research. I don't think they should take anything anybody has said about ANY future technology as even remotely plausible without checking upon it, and I don't know if they want to spend all that ime when they've already GOT a sci-fi game.

In response to mixing history and sci-fi and gettting something that's good at neither, I have to say that tacking extra advances on to the end won't change the historical part. But it won't necessarily make a good Sci-Fi part. What I've heard about CtP is that it just gets silly. I don't want it to get silly. another problem with space colonization, and a continuing tech tree in general: How many Future tech do you discover in a turn? I can sometimes get about 5. Now, it's true, they do need to get harder as time progresses, but still. How many techs do you get from 1850 to 1950? You shouldn't have to get less from 2000 to 2100. But how can Firaxis come up with enough advances to do that? If the game can run to 2500, they've got to have as many Future advances as they had historical ones! Sure, we can project the Ion Drive. (there's one in space right now, as I recall) But we can't predict societal and economic techs, and without those, the game stops really being Civ. Sadly, the game has to end sometime, and I think the present is the best time to do it. However, linked map support, for all those customizers out there, is a must... Do it as an expansion.

That was a disorganized, rambling post, and I apologize.

[Harel]

Dino, i am getting annoyed.
950 billion?! Are you using your head?

Several FACTS.
Check it in the UN.org databse for popultion size.
Everyone loved SF movies like blade-runner, where the world popultion is over runned, mineral deplated. World is choas, destroied.

NEVER WILL HAPPEN.
You know why? Our society changed. Greatly. People, in every country in the world ( check it! Please! ) have less babies. MUCH. In old days a normal family had more then 6 babies. Do you know many people today that have that many children?
The growth rate of popultion is rising in primitve countries because of more advanced medine. However, is highly developed countries the growth rate is DECRESSING. Germany is exactly losing people every year: it's poputlion is shrinking. Same thing with Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, and many east european countries.

According to all REALISTIC studies, the world popultion would reach a maximum level at 2070 at 9.8 billion people, and then will shrink constantly, at an increasing rate.
If anything, scientist predict that the future would have a problem with a TOO SMALL POPULTION. Goverments would give formal bonus to familes to bring children ( which they normally don't want. Children, in an go-getter economy are a pain in the side ). And, genetic cloning would probaly be used. Think when only a billion people, with futuristic technology, would start to spread along the galaxy. The amount of people left on earth will be far too small.

About smilo point for metals and oil. First off, oil will be gone in 20-30 years. Not depleted, just won't be used anymore.
If the highly un-likly event we won't get fusion power ( atleast deutrium/tritium "heavy hydrogen" fusion ), solar and wind power and increasing in effiency.
In, quite honstly, once we will master the technique, creating c-60 will be much cheaper then digging up iron, and only 100 times stronger and 5 times lighter .
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Harel (edited July 28, 1999).]</font>

[Gordon the Whale]

BTW, about neutron emmission: It is radiation, just like the emmission of any particle is radiation. However, it's not Alpha radiation, that requires the emmission of an Alpha particle, or Helium 2+ ion. Beta radiation, however, is caused by the decay of a neutron, which has a halflife, as I recall, of about 12 minutes (or is it 12 seconds) once it's out of a nucleus. I don't know about a neutron and proton being different states of a nucleon... Certainly they are both nucleons, as "nucleon" is a word whoch refers to any particle found in the atomic nucleus. When undergoing Beta decay, a neutron does turn into a proton (as well as an electron and an electron neutriono). I hope that clears things up a little for anyone who cared, which may be very few...

[dinoman2]

(Dinoman backs down quickly)

Again, I conceed your point, Harel, but methinks the U.N. figures to be a tad unrealistic as well. Besides, why would ANYone trust the U.N. My figures were probably (way) incorrect as well, but yours were also (slightly) incorrect. Ignore all words in parentheses(joke).

P.S. If you want to know where I got my figures, check out the non-fiction book The Millenial Project, by Marshall T. Savage. The previous figures where but a blemish in a well thought-out book.

[Harel]

THE NEUTRON RADIATION

Ok, Gordon asked, EnochF asked, so i might just as well explain.
Neutron radiation, but itself is no, ofcourse, alpha radiation. I was refering to a deutritium/tritium fusion cell.
Proton and neutron ARE two states of a particle called neuclon, which is comprised by quarks. This may be a rarily-known fact, but it IS a fact in the end.
The proton is the original state of the neuclon: when an electron is forced to merge with a proton it created a neutron.

Why does a deutritium/tritium cell creates mass amount of alpha radiation?
A pure fusion cell fusion hydrogen to helium, and by the process convert 1/270 portion of the matter mass to pure energy.
4 hydrogen atoms, 4 proton and 4 electron are compressed into one helium: 2 proton, 2 neutron and 2 electron. 2 electros are assimilted into the neuclos and convert the protons to neutrons.
Notice, if a neutron can be thought as a neuclaon+electro then:
4 neucleon + 4 electron = 4 neuclon + 4 electron.
Radiation is comprimsed by energy which is lost due to ineffinecy. The process itself is 100% perfect, but some energy is lost in alpha, beta and gamma radiation. This is how our sun works. This fusion reacton requires an internel heat of atleast 50 million C, and at optimum of 200 million C.

Fusion of deutritium/tritium mix. Those mix are found in modern fusion reactors, a mix of 50%/50% each.
A modern fusio reactor is a half-a-meter radius cylnider made of high-tempure polymers and surround by high-power elctro-magnets.
Those magnets create a pressure by "defelcting" ( as elctro-magnets can repel just as they pull ) in a pressure which, in simple words, can lift off the ground 10,000 tons.
The pressured hydrogen ions are heated up to the point of 4-5 million degrees, were the fusion process takes place. Since the atomic links of deutrium and tritium are much weaker then a hydrogen, the fusion process can be done in a much lowered tempture.

one atom of deutrium and one of tritium are comprimised of a total of: 2 proton, 3 neutron and 2 electrons. With the extra neutron expled, they can convert to helium.
However: what can 4 neutrons create? 4 neutrons are 4 neuclons with 4 electrons. When two electros leave the neuclos, it's a helium atom. 2 proton, 2 neutrons and 2 electrons outside. alpha radiation.

In order to perevent radiation, and gain energy, those lose neutrons are used, by friction to generate energy.
Since the energy cost to maintian the mangtic field is so huge, and the energy created inside the cell is only suffiecnt to sustain the process, the only way to make fusion reacton energy effiecent is to use the energy from the neutrons, which will heat up ( and then be used in a steam-combine ) are the helium created earlier in the fusion process, cooled to liqued helium and stored around the cell to cool it further.
This matter will be heated by the neutrons.

Currently, the only reason why modern fusion reactons don't work is the lack of a more "neutron-trasnspernt" matter for the cylnider cell. Too many hit the cell and heat it up to critical levels. Reaserch into a better polimer is under-way and due to end in 15-20 years. And then, finally, we would have a working fusion cell.

world popultion: for dino

First off, the UN figures are true. The world doesn't really have x-files: the UN isn't lying to anyone. Those figures are for real.

For the last 200 years, number of babies per couple is dropping steadily, in a straight line. Think off Y=10-x. As time passes by, prosperity is being kicked down. This arrow is going down, with no intterptuon, at every place at the world, without one exception.
The discovery of anti-biotic medicine in the 1950 jumped life-longlivty into an astronomical high value. In 1940, life period was around 40. Today it's around 75. When medicne jumped up so high, so fast, growth jumped with it: people that should have died are still kicking with andrenalin.
However, the rate in which medicne jumped up is slacking now, and the toll of the lower birth-right is again in place.
Like I said, germany allready has a -0.9% growth rate, and so those several other countries.

Let's think about the USA. Every body knows, the US had 2.4 childern per couple. There is even an american TV comdey show called 2.4 childern.
BUT, if a couple has 2.4 children and they dies, how many childern are profit?
0.4. 2.4 -2 is 0.4
Now, let's think that the number was 1.9, not 2.4. Not very far from one antoher.
If the USA had 1.9, then all the medicne in the world won't help: in the end, the popultion would decresse.

About size:
Since the decreese in "childern-per-couple" is going down steadily, the only room for statistical error is just how much medicne would evolve in the next century.
With retro-active virus, which can implamnt new DNA streams, nano-medicne and what-not, the life period can just as well pass 100 next century.
So, the value flux, between 8.5 billion tops and 12, and the point in which is would start to lower: 2060 to 2090.
However, no matter what will happen, in the last days of the next century the poputltion would decreese, normally.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Harel (edited July 30, 1999).]</font>

[Gordon the Whale]

Is there a club for people who don't know when to quit? I'd like to subscribe to a lifetime membership...

You are right, Harel, a Fusion reaction puts out all sorts of god-awful radiation, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, you name it. I'd misunderstood and thought you were trying to say that Beta-decay could create Alpha-particles.

I'm sure you know everything I am about to say, Harel, I just want to know how this fits with a single particle called a "nucleon" with multiple states... And I am going to have to pull out a textbook because it's been years since I studied Beta decay, or QCD.

Beta decay is the name for any reaction going between protons and neutrons, which of neccessity also include Electrons and Positrons, because charge must be conserved. The possible reactions are:

1) p+ + e- -> n0
2) n0 -> p+ + e-
3) n0 + e+ -> n0

There is also a neutrino in cases 1, and an anti-neutrino in cases 2 and 3. By e+ I mean a positron, as I don't know the code for an e with a bar over it.

Now, this could be interpreted as one particle which can flip between a + and 0 state with emmission or absorbtion of other particles. However, it's not a particle to begin with, per se, as they're both made up of quarks.

The proton is made of 3 quarks, Up, Up, and Down, and the neutron is made of 3 quarks, Up, Down, and Down. Up quarks have +2/3 change, Down quarks have -1/3 charge, so the proton (like everybody knows) has +1 charge, and the neutron is electrically neutral. So why are these the same particle? An interaction with a lepton (in particular, an electron or positron) will convert one to the other, but that's true of lots of things. But the electron is NOT "inside" the neutron... When a proton absorbs an electron and becomes a neutron, that up quark didn't just decide to hang out with the electron... They combined to become a Down quark, which is a fundamental particle and as such has NO constituent particles (Unless something has changed while I wasn't looking. Quarks are still fundamental particles, right?) Is your argument that a neutron is an alternate form of the proton based upon the fact that the proton is stable and the neutron isn't? Are sigma and lambda particles then also different forms of a proton? After all, if a proton absorbs a pion, it can become either one of those. Is a meson so different from a lepton? Neither is a virtual particle, they're both real. Leptons are fundamental, true, and mesons are made out of quarks, but so? Proton absorbs lepton to become neutron, proton absorbs meson to become lambda... Either way, one quark changes (lambda is Up Down Strange, as I'm sure you know) , and the product isn't stable. So are ALL baryons actually just different states of the proton? I fail to see why. You may just be repeating what you have been taught, which is a different way of looking at particle Physics. The argument may be more philosophical than physical (does it really matter whether they're the same particle anyways? They act the same regardless) but I don't understand how considering a "Nucleon" to be anything other than the name you give to the particles that exist in an atomic nucleus. If you had an atomic nucleus with Lambdas instead of neutrons, then darn it, those Lambdas would be nucleons! Of course, such nuclei would last approximately 2.6 * 10^-10 seconds, but who's counting?

I promise promise promise that even if you do reply again, I won't respond unless it has something to do with Civ3, which I realize this absolutely did not and I apologize to everyone who has to read it.

On the other hand, EnochF, give him a break. The world isn't made for native English speakers, you know, and neither is Civ3. Everyone should get their input. I bet we'd all do much worse if the thread was in Hebrew than Harel does in English.

[smilo]

Me as thread manager :
Enoch,Gordon,Harel

Ok I believe it's time to point something out to you girls/guys : if this is not going to be the thread with most replies, it is certainly going to be the longest and toughest one to read. It will be the most interesting one scientifically speaking BUT will aslo be the thread with the least valuable ideas for the upcoming civIII.

We will all understand how to build super-duper space engines, but we will not know how to incorporate it into the game.

So, please reread what you have written and give some opinions on how to get it into the game.

And .. Enoch,Harel you both are wrong : it is just a matter of time to be proven wrong after being right.

[EnochF]

Uhhhhh... Hebrenglish gives me a headache... I've got to sit down... wait, I am sitting down...

I think I'll go relax by reading my VCR manual...

[Harel]

Enjoy EnochF!
And if you finish it, i can mail you some new manuals from the new addition.
And some more.
Hell, I'll subscribe you myself!
Beacause, as long as you are occipied, we won't need to read your intersting, intrigiung and alluminating posts.

[Tornado7]

Ok, maybe I went a little overboard on the list of maps, but consider this: Most of those would be WAY smaller than the Earth anyway, which does make things a little easier to handle. I mean, most of the moons would be at best somewhere between small and medium in civII.
As for micromanaging, how about putting in a production quere, and stuf like that? In addition, you could combine alot of the basic city improvments together to simplify things in space. Not on Earth, though.
Just a thought.
M@ni@c's idea was a really good one too, and could probably be applied to a couple other bodies in the solar system as well. In addition, an future engineer unit could build some types of terrain improvments to help speed up the process, as well. Stuff like solar panels, hydroponic farms, etc.

[Harel]

Smilo, i am not so sure you are right... well, sure, we can show up all this great ideas and how they should be added to the game ( hey, i just thought about a FTL quantum displacement, and it could give you +1 to movement! ). Some of them may even be very good ideas.
But, let's face it: civ III would include less things from this thread then any other one. It's not SMAC, and not going to be. Beside, as thread master, no one expect you to add all this debates into the summary.

Not a single person here can say he didn't learn nothing: Don don post on nuclear engines told me some new things I didn't know, and who knows, maybe even I added a little to your information bank. Hell, maybe even EnochF learned something! ( I doubt it, thought ).

I don't think we should be critized and hushed. There are many long, unrelated debates over this forums: Maniac can tell you about our debates on the social modifactor channel, on the civilazation thread had so many arguments I have no idea what the sides are now, not to mention who is "winning".
We learn something here: this is community of people. We might be here to make a better civ III: but civilazation is, in the end, about us. We might as well learned something for ourself, and on ourselfs.

Besides, I think I told my opinion on BR request ( ways to implamnt the new ideas, like stirrup gives +1... ). If we are reduced to giving numbers and strict way in the civ II, nothing is going to change.

You know what? I prefer to just tell you how the ( pardon my tongue ) bloody fusion cell works: let Firaxis think of a new, unique way to add this to the game.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Harel (edited August 01, 1999).]</font>

[dinoman2]

OK, here are some of my ideas.

1( Instead of using the ctp version of orbital maps, have a seperate map that you switch to, and that uses orbits for the various orbital colonies and space units.

Advantages: More realistic, less clutter on the regular map.

Disadvantages: Difficult to tell what's going on in space, more clutter on the space map.

2)I like the idea of using various maps for all the different planets.

Advantages: More room to grow, more difficult late-game conquering strategies, more interesting games.

Disadvantages: Takes up more memory space, difficulty of switching between maps.

Also, one question: How do you get those big fonts?

[Maniac]

Harel, I like unrelated debates, off course,the more the better, but if that is the only thing we do here, Civ3 is going to be a disaster.
If we don't interfere I think Civ3 will be Civ2 with new graphics( and even they won't be good if you have to take SMAC as an example).
So now and then we should do some serious work.

BTW, one of your interests is science. Don't you know a way to get rid of that nasty CO2?

Do you know a thread where Diodorus comes regularly? I desperatly need him at the SE thread. And I think I would annoy people if I posted everywhere :
"Diodorus Siculus needed at SE thread."

[Maniac]

Dinoman2 and Tornado7 : I think we may be glad if Firaxis gives us one extraterrestrial map.
BTW, do you really think you have the time and resources to colonize all that planets and moons?
Before a colony ship has reached Ganymedes you could have already built a new ship to reach AC or have conquered the world.

Another note about victory conditions : I don't think becoming supreme leader and winning a diplomatic victory should be based on how much population you have as in SMAC.
In SMAC it was possible to win a 'diplomatic' victory by only your own population. Bad.