| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rebel Witch
Minmatar
Red Federation
   |
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:20:00 -
[1]
I first want to applaud CCP for the changes to planets and moons graphics, they look amazing.
I want to suggest something to help with realism. I passed by some systems that had "life-bearing" planets and when you read the info of the planet they have around 24kelvin or 50kelvin average temps. Some are also very distant from the star such as 20au (which is 20 time further from a star than earth is to the sun). I don't think a planet like that can be "life-bearing" or look much like earth with cloud patterns and flowing oceans.
So I was going to suggest making all the life bearing planets be put in "habitable zones" of the parent star. roughly 270kelvin-310kelvin avg temps and around 1au from the parent star.
I know it is a minor detail but I thought I would suggest it if it helps :)
|
Windows ME
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:27:00 -
[2]
I disagree having such a little reality tweak without having everything ELSE changed. life bearing systems don't cluster themselves so closely anywhere in the real universe like New Eden... the space also doesn't change a different background for every solar system.
plus i guess it will create a lot of consistences for the written stories and RP bios etc so, i think it isnt worth doing it at all.
|
z0de
The Bastards
The Bastards.
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:21:00 -
[3]
You think those oceans are water?
á
á
|
Finistri Nirum
Caldari
Blue Republic
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 19:56:00 -
[4]
A lot of the planets that have been actually colonized are not exactly like Earth. Take Seylinn I as a good example: The Gallenteans built the colony there underground to protect the colonists and miners from the intense heat.
The possibility of actually finding an Earth clone is astronomically low, but there are plenty of "Earth-like" planets out there in New Eden. "Ancient Terran" technologies may have included many forms of terraforming... climate control, carbon dioxide/water seeding, genetic engineering, and the like.
To top it off, the major races' homeworlds were close enough to Earth-like conditions... they had to be in order for life to prosper there. Perhaps those terraforming projects mentioned above had something to do with it.
-----
"Friendly fire ain't."
---Unknown soldier |
illford baker
Pilots of Damnation
death from above..
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 20:39:00 -
[5]
are you taking into account the size and temp of the star? its still off but the range of the habitable zone is anywhere from .1 au to 9 au. then there are other factors like the planet itself. greenhouse gasses and such.
|
Arous Drephius
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 22:40:00 -
[6]
All the planet stats are broken and need fixing. Try calculating their gravitational field strength and you'll see.
|
Drakarin
Gallente
The Abyssmal Spire
Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 22:40:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Drakarin on 13/12/2009 22:41:17
The universe is not so static. A planet can be 20 times further from it's parent star and yet, that same star could be 20 times the intensity of the sun. Or they could be highly advanced technologically, to the point of using geothermal energy to maintain shelters from the extreme cold.
|
Rhiane Yhira
|
Posted - 2009.12.14 00:48:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Rhiane Yhira on 14/12/2009 00:48:49
Planet stats are broken. No way Luminaire IV (Caldari Prime) or Amarr VIII (Oris) could be homeworlds. It is true that planet stats don't affect gameplay, but would be nice to have at least supposedly life-bearing worlds have stats that support life.
|
Soden Rah
Gallente
Rapier Industry and Technology
|
Posted - 2009.12.14 01:00:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Soden Rah on 14/12/2009 01:00:42
 Originally by: Drakarin
Edited by: Drakarin on 13/12/2009 22:41:17
The universe is not so static. A planet can be 20 times further from it's parent star and yet, that same star could be 20 times the intensity of the sun. Or they could be highly advanced technologically, to the point of using geothermal energy to maintain shelters from the extreme cold.
Sort of right; but the light intensity goes down as an inverse square law wich means for the planet to be 20 times farther out the star would have to be 400 times brighter to receive the same light intensity. I personaly would like to see the planets wich claim to be habitable in the habitable zone of the star and the light levels actually drop significantly when you get a long way out, but then i'd like ships that went faster than a cesna. reality is not really a game feature ;-)
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |