38 replies to this topic

[Ra-ul]

One thing I´ve noticed over the history of Mechwarrior games (except MW2 maybe) is the likeliness of the maps to our planet earth. I think it´s a pity to not go wild and take the opportunity to design completely new ecosystems. Nobody will tell you it´s not realistic. How many have visited foreign planets?

Beginning with the star class and composition of atmosphere, light color would be different on each planet, thus the appearance of the surroundings. Plants could have all different colors depending on radiation and light intensity to make photosynthesis work.

Visibility (already mentioned in another thread) would depend on weather and atmosphere. Planets with no or very thin atmosphere would have unlimited or nearly unlimited visibility distance.

Gravity would influence the size of vegetation. Low gravity planets would have bigger growing trees and vegetation, while planets with higher gravity would most likely only have shrubbery.

The variety is endless and I invite everyone to bring in their ideas.

[SGT Unther]

That sounds interesting, I do see your point that it really could make some interesting maps.

I'll say this that MWIV environment was not very inspired, however us humans who are used to a certain gravity and a certain atmosphere will likely pick those planets with similar qualities to earth first. This does not mean that other planets are not colonized I just think the heavy populated (I think that majority of urban fights will happen in) will be very similar to earth. I do also think we'll be fighting over useless dirt or ice balls because they are close to the borders (in MW2 one of these planets had winter for 2 standard years). Heck they might even getting use to fight in space with our mechs, MW2 had a couple space missions.

I do think there will be a limit to the type of planet we fight because we as humans and the machines we create have limits on the type of environment they fight in let alone able to survive in. You do bring up a good point though, saying that should be variety to the maps. That's my 2 cents on this.

[MaddMaxx]

I can't remember exactly which game or when but there was a Map (perhaps it was a player made one) for MW, back in the day, that was a representation of a Petrified Forest (due to graphic limits it was just wire Mesh Poles) but it reminded me of how Cool it would be to fight on a Forest Planet and when I say Forest I am talking Old Growth Red Wood forest like on the West Coast of Canada.

Huge, ancient trees and running and gunning amongst them. But done in a modern day Engine, say like the Cry@Engine3 perhaps.

Like in the opening of MW:Vengeance. It shows the enemies approach through a Forest but from FPV. That would be quite cool.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 14 December 2011 - 07:43 AM.

[VYCanis]

take a look at some of MWLL maps, especially some of the user made ones
maps like like helsgate, extremity, inferno, and outpost, really hit the alien landscape vibe.

[AlanEsh]

Many planets will have similar color vegetation and similar geography, as they should, because they were chosen by humans to support human life. Sure there are planets used as bases and mining outposts etc which don't support carbon based life, but if there is a population breathing the air and farming the soil, you're likely to see green foliage and blue skies.
(and sky color is more a function of the atmosphere's composition than the "color" of a star)

[Evgeny Bear]

Hmm well i think most planates habitaed by Humans are terraformed by former starleague.
But I think supplydepos and tech vaults can be found at unhabited worlds, as well as recharge stations for drop and jump ships.
So I can think of Zero Gravity barren planetoids and moons to fight on, or poisonous amoniak athmosphere deserts.
So this could affect the actual mechcombat (heatsinks, ballistics, jumpjets) or when cockpit glass get a hit from an LBX/AC.
Mechs have preasurized cockpit with livesupport, but well if it gets damaged in combat, you should be screwed.

Edited by Andar89, 14 December 2011 - 10:15 AM.

[Mchawkeye]

Angelicon, on 14 December 2011 - 09:33 AM, said:

Many planets will have similar color vegetation and similar geography, as they should, because they were chosen by humans to support human life. Sure there are planets used as bases and mining outposts etc which don't support carbon based life, but if there is a population breathing the air and farming the soil, you're likely to see green foliage and blue skies.
(and sky color is more a function of the atmosphere's composition than the "color" of a star)

That was SG-1s reasoning for why every planet looked like canada.

Fact is, mechs are pressurised systems capable of operating in all sorts of atmosphere and environments. if there is gold in that thar planetoid, an inability to breath the atmosphere isn't going to stop anyone inventive enough.

I say bring it. all of it. funky seas, funky atmospheres (methane based ones? youch) blue hills, purple valleys, red snow and black deserts. it's all possible. And I would love it if they were more reactive with the mechs. methane might be a silly extreme, but imagine flammable atmospheres, or a planet with an unusual magnetic field render gauss and ppc (maybe even lasers) pointless...or something. something more than heat sinks work better here. or worse here.

[Dihm]

My understanding from reading the TechManual recently, without stuff like HarJel that the Clans have, mechs ain't that great in hazardous environments. Especially when they start taking damage. Not really all that well sealed. When I get a chance I'll browse back through the life support section, not finding anything on Sarna.

Also... on uninhabitable planets, there aren't a whole lot of things to fight over.

Edited by Dihm, 14 December 2011 - 01:02 PM.

[Mchawkeye]

Dihm, on 14 December 2011 - 01:02 PM, said:

Also... on uninhabitable planets, there aren't a whole lot of things to fight over.

curious...what makes you say that? any rock could be full of precious minerals, strategically relevant (close to borders for example) amoungst others. They do have to be inhabited, just important.

[Dihm]

True, they don't have to be inhabited to be important, but what are you going to do with a mech regiment on an barren, desolate husk? Why have mechs on it? Just keep them in the dropship/jumpship. How do you garrison it if people can't live there? What's the cost of doing so?

I don't recall any regiments being posted to worlds like that, not saying it doesn't happen, but not off the top of my head.

Even mining on planets like that... unless there is some cost effective way for corporations to manage it, they won't bother. With all the thousands of worlds they CAN inhabit, there's bound to be much easier mineral wealth to gain.

[verybad]

GraySho, on 14 December 2011 - 05:29 AM, said:

One thing I´ve noticed over the history of Mechwarrior games (except MW2 maybe) is the likeliness of the maps to our planet earth. I think it´s a pity to not go wild and take the opportunity to design completely new ecosystems. Nobody will tell you it´s not realistic. How many have visited foreign planets?

Beginning with the star class and composition of atmosphere, light color would be different on each planet, thus the appearance of the surroundings. Plants could have all different colors depending on radiation and light intensity to make photosynthesis work.

Light color will appear white to people on a planet after an initial period of adjustment. There is only a limited selection of stars that will ever have planets arround them that have life.

Large (giant) Stars live for far too short a period and release too much radiation for any planet around them to have a life span long enough to develop life or a viable biosphere.
Smaller than Yellow Dwarf stars (our star is a yellow dwarf) will release too little energy for planets arounf them to have an atmosphere (Earth around a red dwarf would recieve 1/10 the energy Pluto recieves).

Quote

Visibility (already mentioned in another thread) would depend on weather and atmosphere. Planets with no or very thin atmosphere would have unlimited or nearly unlimited visibility distance.

Agreed, there is little reason to inhabit planets with no atmoshere however. In most games, the visibility isn't due to the condition of the planet, but of the engine and hardware to display beyond a certain point without ruining performance. This is still a concern even with modern technology.

Quote

Gravity would influence the size of vegetation. Low gravity planets would have bigger growing trees and vegetation, while planets with higher gravity would most likely only have shrubbery.

Below a certain level of gravity, atmosphere won't remain, thus there will be no vegetation at all. Higher gravity will reduce sunlight to planets, removing the amount of vegetation and changing the nature of the atmosphere to one less earthlike. Neither of these conditions need to be very far from our gravity for this to change.

Quote

The variety is endless and I invite everyone to bring in their ideas.

The variety for humans to be able to subsist on a planet are far narrower. While some differences are certainly possible, Terran life requires an extremely thin set of conditions. Life around a giant start is impossible (they go supernove in 10-100 million years, far less time than needed for planets to stabilize and develop biospheres. Dwarfs smaller than Yellow Dwarfs release so little energy that life would only be possible on planets orbiting extremely close to the primary in that system. They would be tidal locked (one side always facing their star) and life would be...different...to say the least.

Conditions for life are narrow, for space they're enormous, but in a Universe with infinite resources, the only thing of value really is the people and planets that support them.

Edited by verybad, 14 December 2011 - 01:18 PM.

[Mchawkeye]

Dihm, on 14 December 2011 - 01:11 PM, said:

True, they don't have to be inhabited to be important, but what are you going to do with a mech regiment on an barren, desolate husk? Why have mechs on it? Just keep them in the dropship/jumpship. How do you garrison it if people can't live there? What's the cost of doing so?

I don't recall any regiments being posted to worlds like that, not saying it doesn't happen, but not off the top of my head.

Even mining on planets like that... unless there is some cost effective way for corporations to manage it, they won't bother. With all the thousands of worlds they CAN inhabit, there's bound to be much easier mineral wealth to gain.

That is all true, I suppose. but there is very little in the BT universe that makes 21st century sense.

And there is nothing wrong with a little out there imagination, which, lets face it, is what BT was built on.

[Dihm]

Mchawkeye, on 14 December 2011 - 01:15 PM, said:

That is all true, I suppose. but there is very little in the BT universe that makes 21st century sense.

And there is nothing wrong with a little out there imagination, which, lets face it, is what BT was built on.

I was just thinking as I posted, "Man... "logic" just isn't fun some times."

[Evgeny Bear]

Dihm, on 14 December 2011 - 01:02 PM, said:

My understanding from reading the TechManual recently, without stuff like HarJel that the Clans have, mechs ain't that great in hazardous environments. Especially when they start taking damage. Not really all that well sealed. When I get a chance I'll browse back through the life support section, not finding anything on Sarna.

Also... on uninhabitable planets, there aren't a whole lot of things to fight over.

the Livesupport is described in serval novels.
Also that not every mech has an escape Pod. so some mechpilots cannot eject.
At " The Rock" Phelan fought on a planetoid barly habitable.
And Aidan Pryde fought for his bloodname and killed a rival as he cracked his cockpit with an LBX as I remember.

mechs are also viable as they protect mining operations on planetoids against Bandits.

Edited by Andar89, 14 December 2011 - 01:34 PM.

[Ra-ul]

MaddMaxx, on 14 December 2011 - 07:43 AM, said:

I can't remember exactly which game or when but there was a Map (perhaps it was a player made one) for MW, back in the day, that was a representation of a Petrified Forest (due to graphic limits it was just wire Mesh Poles) but it reminded me of how Cool it would be to fight on a Forest Planet and when I say Forest I am talking Old Growth Red Wood forest like on the West Coast of Canada.

Huge, ancient trees and running and gunning amongst them. But done in a modern day Engine, say like the Cry@Engine3 perhaps.

Like in the opening of MW:Vengeance. It shows the enemies approach through a Forest but from FPV. That would be quite cool.

I think you refer to the Wolcott mission in Ghost Bears´Legacy.

Angelicon, on 14 December 2011 - 09:33 AM, said:

Many planets will have similar color vegetation and similar geography, as they should, because they were chosen by humans to support human life. Sure there are planets used as bases and mining outposts etc which don't support carbon based life, but if there is a population breathing the air and farming the soil, you're likely to see green foliage and blue skies.
(and sky color is more a function of the atmosphere's composition than the "color" of a star)

Please read my post carefully, I haven´t said that the sky color depends on the star class. In fact I know quite well that aerosols in the atmosphere filter and scatter some light wavelengths (colors) more than others.
Stellar classification is already tied into the BattleTech universe. Check this link for example.

verybad, on 14 December 2011 - 01:15 PM, said:

Light color will appear white to people on a planet after an initial period of adjustment. There is only a limited selection of stars that will ever have planets arround them that have life.

Large (giant) Stars live for far too short a period and release too much radiation for any planet around them to have a life span long enough to develop life or a viable biosphere.
Smaller than Yellow Dwarf stars (our star is a yellow dwarf) will release too little energy for planets arounf them to have an atmosphere (Earth around a red dwarf would recieve 1/10 the energy Pluto recieves).

Agreed, there is little reason to inhabit planets with no atmoshere however. In most games, the visibility isn't due to the condition of the planet, but of the engine and hardware to display beyond a certain point without ruining performance. This is still a concern even with modern technology.

Below a certain level of gravity, atmosphere won't remain, thus there will be no vegetation at all. Higher gravity will reduce sunlight to planets, removing the amount of vegetation and changing the nature of the atmosphere to one less earthlike. Neither of these conditions need to be very far from our gravity for this to change.

The variety for humans to be able to subsist on a planet are far narrower. While some differences are certainly possible, Terran life requires an extremely thin set of conditions. Life around a giant start is impossible (they go supernove in 10-100 million years, far less time than needed for planets to stabilize and develop biospheres. Dwarfs smaller than Yellow Dwarfs release so little energy that life would only be possible on planets orbiting extremely close to the primary in that system. They would be tidal locked (one side always facing their star) and life would be...different...to say the least.

Conditions for life are narrow, for space they're enormous, but in a Universe with infinite resources, the only thing of value really is the people and planets that support them.

Is that based on your opinion or experience? I guess our knowledge about what´s possible at universal scale is quite limited. I also guess a planet can be inhabited by an alien race before it´s able to develop intelligent beings. The narrow gravity window you claim to make plant life possible doesn´t convince me either.
Anyway, after your scientific lesson it surprises me to see you on a forum about 31st century Mech combat

Edited by GraySho, 14 December 2011 - 01:54 PM.

[CaveMan]

GraySho, on 14 December 2011 - 01:50 PM, said:

The narrow gravity window you claim to make plant life possible doesn´t convince me either.

He's right about the gravity thing. Too little gravity, there's not an atmosphere and you won't get complex life. That's why there's a tree line on earth. Air's too thin above a certain altitude. Too much gravity, the atmosphere will be extremely dense and not enough sunlight will reach the surface, plus the temperature/pressure may be too high for life forms more complex than bacteria. It'd be like living at the bottom of a hot ocean. And in any case, if gravity is super-low or super-high humans won't be able to live there without genetic modifications. Imagine weighing 500kg.

Don't use the whole "we dont know anything about the universe yet" cop-out, either. The universe, the entire universe, operates by a pretty simple set of rules. We know most of those rules by now (it's the little details, like whether there's a Higgs boson, that give us trouble). Based on what we know, earthlike or even semi-earthlike planets are going to be rare in the wild.

That said, it's documented that the Star League did quite a bit of terraforming back in the day, so the majority of the inhabited planets closer to Terra should be fairly earthlike. Farther out toward the periphery, the environments will be more extreme. In the deep periphery you'd have people living in sealed bunkers like in Mass Effect because the environment is too hostile to go outside without a space suit.

[verybad]

GraySho, on 14 December 2011 - 01:50 PM, said:

I think you refer to the Wolcott mission in Ghost Bears´Legacy.




Please read my post carefully, I haven´t said that the sky color depends on the star class. In fact I know quite well that aerosols in the atmosphere filter and scatter some light wavelengths (colors) more than others.
Stellar classification is already tied into the BattleTech universe. Check this link for example.



Is that based on your opinion or experience? I guess our knowledge about what´s possible at universal scale is quite limited. I also guess a planet can be inhabited by an alien race before it´s able to develop intelligent beings. The narrow gravity window you claim to make plant life possible doesn´t convince me either.
Anyway, after your scientific lesson it surprises me to see you on a forum about 31st century Mech combat

I'm familiar with battletechs use of non yellow dwarfs. In most cases, they're simply for solar charging jumpships however, which don't relie on life supporting planets.

Low gravity doesn't hold atmospheres thick enough for our form of life) to be able to live in. Heavy planets will gather too much atmosphere, and there will be less visible light available at the ground.Greenhouse effect will result in extreme pressures as the atmosphere is very sensitive to gravity. Half again our gravity would result in a much thicker atmosphere except under very unusual conditions.

Why should my interest in extra solar planetary physics, as well as the life of stars make me less interested in battletech? Battletech is what got me interested in such things back in my teens.

Granted, it's a game, so some thigns can cerrtainly be stretched, but if you're going to use Astronomy as a method for change, then you should be prepared to see Astronomy be described to the best of people that are interested in such things ability. I assure you that there are many, many people that like battletech/mechwarrior that are also highly interested in various scientific fields, and in some cases involved in such professionally.

Edited by verybad, 14 December 2011 - 10:43 PM.

[Blastcaps]

all of the classic battletech story books have a shed load of discriptions, planatary maps etc....

[Ra-ul]

verybad, on 14 December 2011 - 10:39 PM, said:

Granted, it's a game, so some thigns can cerrtainly be stretched, but if you're going to use Astronomy as a method for change, then you should be prepared to see Astronomy be described to the best of people that are interested in such things ability. I assure you that there are many, many people that like battletech/mechwarrior that are also highly interested in various scientific fields, and in some cases involved in such professionally.

I´m interested in astronomy myself and not claiming to be an expert, but I really believe there´s room for a bit more variation without violating the law of physics. I did not intend to convince anyone about life being possible on planets with 2G or 0.5G for obvious reasons. Battletech fiction normally doesn´t talk about such extreme conditions anyway.

Here are some interesting articles regarding this topic (or part of) to proof that it´s not just a wild idea of an ignorant grunt:
http://www.solstatio...fe/a-plants.htm
http://www.nasa.gov/...rum_plants.html
http://www.orionsarm...kyonalienworlds
http://www.xenology..../Xeno/5.4.2.htm

To make a long story short, in essence I tried to say that I´d like to see something different to average north american landscapes in MWO and made some suggestions, inviting others to do the same.

..Peace..

Edited by GraySho, 15 December 2011 - 05:23 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

GraySho, on 14 December 2011 - 01:50 PM, said:

I think you refer to the Wolcott mission in Ghost Bears´Legacy.

By gummer that is it. You is sir are a genius or just have a good memory. Your pick for sure.

It even had tree skins rendered. Ahhh! the good old days. Blue balls and all.

Now I Pine for a Map like that even more (pun intended)

P.S. The only thing needed with Stars and habitable Planets is a "GoldiLock" zone, and water and atmosphere etc etc etc. lol lol

Edited by MaddMaxx, 15 December 2011 - 10:29 AM.