Planets and Resources

[Gregstrom]

Well, why not have a generic 'asteroid base' colony that can be fitted into unused parts of a solar system? That way, the game only has to represent planets, gas giants etc. You could have colonisation zones for the Kuiper Belt, Oort Cloud and so on (whatever use that might be).

[MattII]

Originally Posted by Gregstrom

Well, why not have a generic 'asteroid base' colony that can be fitted into unused parts of a solar system?

Fine by me, I'm just looking for size thresholds.

How many facilities for those asteroid bases do you think, just 3 or 4?

[Gregstrom]

Realistically, a pretty large number. A hollowed out asteroid of decent size (20+ km radius? The solar system has thousands in this size bracket, I believe) could readily hold a population of some millions and employ them all usefully. It'd be pretty vulnerable compared to a planet, though.

[MattII]

So if we're sticking 2-3 facilities on an asteroid*, how many on a planet the size of Pluto (~55 times the surface area)? How many on a planet the size of Earth (~500 times the surface area in land alone, ~1700 times if you include the seas)?


* Personally I wouldn't go for anything much smaller than 150km across, our asteroid belt has about 75 of that size that we know of, and an asteroid of that size gives a rough land area of 100,000/150,000 Km^2 per facility (for 3/2 facilities)

[Gregstrom]

With asteroids, surface area would presumably include the interior - thus the possibility of fitting a whole lot of stuff inside an asteroid. They're easier to hollow out than planets are

[Gregstrom]

After further thought, why not abstract asteroid belts somewhat? Treat a beltas a single location with effectively unlimited space, but with costs being very different from planets.

They'd start out ferociously expensive to build facilities/colonies in, but as tech levels improve (artificial gravity, cheap tech that lets you hollow out and reshape rocks, etc.) costs reduce. Eventually, asteroid belts end up holding most of a system's production etc.

[MattII]

Originally Posted by Gregstrom

After further thought, why not abstract asteroid belts somewhat? Treat a beltas a single location with effectively unlimited space, but with costs being very different from planets.

Nah, if you treat it as a single location how are you supposed to attack any particular asteroid?

They'd start out ferociously expensive to build facilities/colonies in, but as tech levels improve (artificial gravity, cheap tech that lets you hollow out and reshape rocks, etc.) costs reduce. Eventually, asteroid belts end up holding most of a system's production etc.

There's only a fraction more volume in a 100km diameter asteroid than in a 50m deep (a height/depth that was nothing to people even half-a-century ago) subterranean complex with the surface area of the USA, and said complex wouldn't need to provide its own air or food either.