World Surveys

[Cptn. Collision Course]

I'm sure someone pointed this out when the new site was published, but just in case like me you haven't seen it before, check out the World Surveys section under the Resources list.

Generic online world generator INCLUDING wilderness encounters!

Nice one guys, and kudos to whoever did the generator.

p.s. have been considering building an .asp page that acts as a Ship's Computer for a group of players (who are occasionally put off by trying to work out how long its going to take to get to safe jump distance etc), which could also have links to Library Data, star maps etc.

Has anyone seen anything like this already?

p.p.s Ship date? :]

 

[hunter]

Glad you find it useful!

I hadn't thought of the ship's computer idea for jump calculations and such. I'll see what can be done

Hunter

 

[Richard]

I've just had a look at the world generator, and there seems to be a problem with it - it only generates stars of spectral type 'M'. Looks terrific otherwise.

 

[Tom Schoene]

Originally posted by Richard:
I've just had a look at the world generator, and there seems to be a problem with it - it only generates stars of spectral type 'M'. Looks terrific otherwise.

I got a fair number of Gs and one A in my trials. Type M stars do seem to dominate, but my recollection is that that is a quirk of the Book 6 system.

 

[Rodina]

If I recall correctly, M's (cool red dwarf stars) tend to dominate the actual universe, too.

 

[hunter]

By far, the vast majority of stars in our galaxy are Red Dwarfs (Class M), thus the system generates those most often.

Hunter

 

[trader jim]

you know if we had a random weather generator AND
a random terrain generator - we could almost explore these worlds SOLO, two or three people could sit in front of the computer and let it REF the game!! the computer could throw out obsticles to over come!! it could be used solo or in groups.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by hunter:
By far, the vast majority of stars in our galaxy are Red Dwarfs (Class M), thus the system generates those most often.

However, I doubt that the vast majority of stars with inhabited worlds would be Red Dwarfs. I know I've cursed the people who added stars to the UWPs retroactively more than once . The number of Earth-norm and Earth-prime worlds I've seen turned into tide-locked frigidaires is far too high.

(Of course, if you stick to the detailed world generation method in World Builder's Handbook, there are no orbits in the life zone around a Red Dwarf, so any world with a biosphere (i.e. a breathable atmosphere) would constitute a canon conflict and a valid reason to change the star type

).

Hans

 

[vegascat]

Why go somewhere if there's no place to put your feet? The universe may be populated by red dwarfs, but if there is no planet, then what does it matter, and why even show it on the map. If the system has a gas giant, or an iceball rock, then by all means, put it on the map, but why go somewhere if there is no reason to?

-----------------------------
In the end, Murphy will rule

 

[Tanuki]

Originally posted by rancke:
However, I doubt that the vast majority of stars with inhabited worlds would be Red Dwarfs. I know I've cursed the people who added stars to the UWPs retroactively more than once . The number of Earth-norm and Earth-prime worlds I've seen turned into tide-locked frigidaires is far too high.

(Of course, if you stick to the detailed world generation method in World Builder's Handbook, there are no orbits in the life zone around a Red Dwarf, so any world with a biosphere (i.e. a breathable atmosphere) would constitute a canon conflict and a valid reason to change the star type

Actually, current research suggests that tide-locked planets may be the most common type of habitable planets. If you can find it, details are in "Simulations of the Atmospheres of Synchronously Rotating Terrestrial Planets Orbiting M Dwarfs: Conditions for Atmospheric Collapse and the Implications for Habitability" by M. M. Joshi, R. M. Haberle, and R. T. Reynolds. It appeared in ICARUS: International Journal of Solar System Studies, Volume 129, Number 2, October 1997

http://www.treitel.org/Richard/rass/tidelock01.txt summarizes it. The actual article is out there on the web somewhere, I have a copy, but I can't find it right now.

Anyway, the World Builder's Handbook is definitely wrong on this point. As part of the Digest Group stuff it's iffy canon anyway. Useful tide-locked worlds is a concept that should be brought into canon. It eliminates the whole red dwarf star problem: such stars can have habitable planets -- and they'll be strange.

 

[Tanuki]

Originally posted by Tanuki:
If you can find it, details are in "Simulations of the Atmospheres of Synchronously Rotating Terrestrial Planets Orbiting M Dwarfs: Conditions for Atmospheric Collapse and the Implications for Habitability" by M. M. Joshi, R. M. Haberle, and R. T. Reynolds. It appeared in ICARUS: International Journal of Solar System Studies, Volume 129, Number 2, October 1997

http://www.treitel.org/Richard/rass/tidelock01.txt summarizes it. The actual article is out there on the web somewhere, I have a copy, but I can't find it right now.[/QB]

Forgot to mention: I do have a pdf of the article. If anyone wants a copy, email me.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Tanuki:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by rancke:
However, I doubt that the vast majority of stars with inhabited worlds would be Red Dwarfs. I know I've cursed the people who added stars to the UWPs retroactively more than once . The number of Earth-norm and Earth-prime worlds I've seen turned into tide-locked frigidaires is far too high.

Actually, current research suggests that tide-locked planets may be the most common type of habitable planets. If you can find it, details are in "Simulations of the Atmospheres of Synchronously Rotating Terrestrial Planets Orbiting M Dwarfs: Conditions for Atmospheric Collapse and the Implications for Habitability" by M. M. Joshi, R. M. Haberle, and R. T. Reynolds. It appeared in ICARUS: International Journal of Solar System Studies, Volume 129, Number 2, October 1997

http://www.treitel.org/Richard/rass/tidelock01.txt summarizes it.</font>[/QUOTE]Interesting. Though I noticed one line in the summary that says: "Liquid water oceans under a breathable (nitrogen/oxygen) atmosphere might even be possible..." (emphasis mine).

I've nothing against a few tidelocked worlds with breathable atmospheres for the sake of variety, but I generally prefer my Earth-like worlds Earth-like. So it is with regret that I see one of my arguments against the (IMO) overabundance of Red Dwarfs take such a heavy wound .

Hans