smart targeting computers, my tuchus.

[TaoLibra]

Neither a Dyson Sphere nor a Ringworld is scientifically plausible. The volume of raw material necessary to build even a small Ringworld (let alone a Dyson Sphere) would require that the builders plunder the complete mass of hundreds, possibly thousands of whole star systems — and then transport all of that mass to the building location, too. Even if that were physically possible, they'd obviously want to take that mass from the nearest star systems to where they were building it — so when they were done, there wouldn't be a single moon, planet, or even another star for thousands of light years in every direction. That Dyson Sphere or Ringworld would be the only object on the entire map.

The only other (ahem) "plausible" way to acquire the necessary mass would be if the builders had direct energy-to-matter conversion — but if they were that powerful, they wouldn't need to build such a thing.

Of course, plausibility doesn't necessarily matter in a game any more than it does in Science Fiction novels; but neither a Dyson Sphere nor a Ringworld could be portrayed correctly in the game anyway, because of the monstrous scale of such objects. It would have to enclose its star, not orbit it, which simply cannot be done in the game.

[Higgsboson]

I just can't let this one pass by...

If you are operating on a sufficiently advanced technological level (i.e. like Weird Worlds), then building a dyson sphere or ringworld is completely possible. It is still a massive undertaking, but the benefits are similarly massive. Consider a standard dyson sphere that uses some standard super-tensile sci-fi metal to get away with a 1-meter thick shell. The sphere would have only 280 times the mass of Earth. If you assume 1-1 elemental material conversion (again, a not-unreasonable assumption for any culture considering actually building one), then you could build the whole thing using just Jupiter and still have ~37 earth-masses of material left over. While you're at it you could filter out all of Jupiter's He-3 and use it to power the entire conversion process.

Of course, dyson spheres are really impractical. For one, your useable surface area on the inside is a small fraction of the actual area. A 1 Au radius sphere would have the internal surface area of 553 million earths, but most of it is uninhabitable. A ringworld is a better option. A ringworld with 1AU radius , a width of 10000km and a thickness of 100 meters has about the same mass as Venus. Even better, since Venus is solid you don't need any fancy atomic conversion stuff. Just send over a few Von Neumann nanobots and le them do their thing for a couple centuries. When it's done you'd still have 18440 times the surface area of Earth.

Some of the above calculations I borrowed from Zubrin's text Entering Space, which is a truly excellent book if this kind of thing interests you at all. Something Zubrin does not consider, however, is the idea of a small ringworld that doesn't enclose its host star. Like the rings from Bank's Cultureverse, these would simply orbit the sun. if you assume the axis of rotation for such a ring is nominally pointed directly at the sun, then inducing a slight axial tilt would allow for day/night cycles without having to add any kind of sunlight interruption mechanism (like on Niven's ringworld). They aren't quite as efficient as a real ringworld, but they are easier to build and you can use the first while building the second, etc. These could also be easily implemented in the game: just replace the planet graphic with a ringworld graphic and the appropriate description.

Regarding the "need" to build such a structure: No matter what kind of power plant is running your fridge, you still need a place to keep it. Having direct energy to matter conversion does no excuse a society from this necessity. Besides, A sufficient;y advanced society might build one because they want one, or just to see if they could do it. Maybe they would want one as a tourist destination, or to impress the less advanced species.
An alternative for modders who just want an impressive planet in-game to place cool tech on is to have a planet with several space elevators linked in geosync orbit. It still looks cool, requires advanced tech to build, and can easily be handled by the game engine.

[TaoLibra]

First of all: Regardless of construction materials (or where you get them), a Dyson Sphere would be useless because GRAVITY is impossible on the inner surface of a Dyson Sphere. {See the Dyson Sphere FAQ, or even the Wikipedia entry on Dyson Spheres.}

Secondly: Building either a Dyson Sphere or a Ringworld requires the ability to disassemble whole planets, the ability to convert matter into energy (and vice versa), and the ability to rebuild matter on an atomic level. So when you allude to "benefits" from building such a thing, you're talking about "benefits" that simply do not exist for anyone capable of building it. Think about it: What exactly are those "benefits?"

Capturing a larger percentage of the energy output of a star? Why would you need it? If you have such godlike technology that you can convert matter into energy, then you already have an endless supply of energy.

18440 times the surface area of Earth? Again, why do you need it? If you can disassemble whole planets, and can control matter with the ease necessary to fabricate your hypothetical (and impossibly dense) Dyson Sphere & Ringworld building material, then why would you waste it building anything that's tethered to the gravity well of a star? You could far more easily build mobile planets orbited by their very own artificial micro-stars.

I repeat: Nobody who could build one would need to build one. It's just irrational.

[Graeme Dice]

TaoLibra said:
First of all: Regardless of construction materials (or where you get them), a Dyson Sphere would be useless because GRAVITY is impossible on the inner surface of a Dyson Sphere.

Unless of course, gravity manipulation is part of having sufficiently advanced technology.

If you have such godlike technology that you can convert matter into energy, then you already have an endless supply of energy.

It's not completely endless. The stars are still converting large amounts of matter into energy, and you will eventually run out of matter to convert.

If you can disassemble whole planets, and can control matter with the ease necessary to fabricate your hypothetical (and impossibly dense) Dyson Sphere & Ringworld building material, then why would you waste it building anything that's tethered to the gravity well of a star?

Because you can?

[Higgsboson]

Regarding the gravity issue, all you have to do is spin the sphere. This will get you a band of living area around the middle or the sphere orthogonal to the axis or rotation. The rest is still pretty unlivable, which is why a ringworld is a more efficient choice.

Regarding need, I've already answered this question. I will add something I felt was already obvious: With such a huge amount of living room, you could support a massive population in relative comfort (think trillions; "We need breathing room!)while only having to defend one system.

[TaoLibra]

Regarding the gravity issue, all you have to do is spin the sphere. This will get you a band of living area around the middle or the sphere orthogonal to the axis or rotation.

No, it will not. "This" will get you nothing but a massive pile of wreckage, because spinning a Dyson Sphere would create destructive stresses that would tear it apart.

And you have not answered the "need question," because there is NO such "need." No race could achieve the level of technology necessary to build even a Ringworld without having already overcome all of the "needs" that might have made one desirable in the first place.

Please stop pretending that you know what you're talking about, and go read the Dyson Sphere FAQ, to which I've already given you a link. Star-enclosing Dyson Spheres are not scientifically plausible; and while a Ringworld might be plausible, it's still irrational because it's totally unnecessary to anyone who could build it. Both of them are Science FICTION.

[Graeme Dice]

No, it will not. "This" will get you nothing but a massive pile of wreckage, because spinning a Dyson Sphere would create destructive stresses that would tear it apart.

If you can build the sphere in the first place, then you already have materials that are likely to survive the stresses. Even if you don't, there's absolutely no reason that it has to be a rigid structure.

And you have not answered the "need question," because there is NO such "need." No race could achieve the level of technology necessary to build even a Ringworld without having already overcome all of the "needs" that might have made one desirable in the first place.

If you want your civilization to still be around a trillion years from now, then you will need to do something about entropy.

Please stop pretending that you know what you're talking about, and go read the Dyson Sphere FAQ, to which I've already given you a link.

The FAQ you linked to isn't anywhere near as hostile as you are to the idea, which is a good thing, or else it wouldn't be very useful.

Star-enclosing Dyson Spheres are not scientifically plausible; and while a Ringworld might be plausible, it's still irrational because it's totally unnecessary to anyone who could build it.

Except, of course, to people who are taking a very long term view of the universe and would rather not run out of energy until it cannot be avoided in any other way. Stars waste huge amounts of energy, and even if you can convert matter directly into energy, you will still eventually run out of temperature differences.

Both of them are Science FICTION.

I'm wondering why this would be a problem.