Results 1 – 5 of about 2600.
|
Search took 0.00 CPU seconds.
|
|
| |
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 23:13:54 GMT, "Tom McDonald"
<radiotitan@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> I think it might be cool to just start with what we *very* generally know
> about how real space is arranged so far, and then let imagination take over.
> That way we could still use some known real names and objects, but are not
> strictly limited to them.
If we start with the just the Moonbase, we can put off making this decision
at least until the second installation is started. If not longer.
> * How about we start with 100 parsecs (pc) / 326 light years (ly)? Too big?
> Too little?
Hmm. Do you mean 100 cubic parsecs? Or a sphere with a radius of 100
parsecs (that's 4.2 cubic mega parsecs).
> Which reminds me: if we use faster than light (FTL) velocities, what kind of
> velocity scale do we want to adopt?
Parsecs per hour? Which might not apply, depending on the technology.
> I also am not against someone wanting to do real research about "what's real"
> though I think that once we establish some sort of map, it should be "first
> come, first served" so that if someone finds out that IRL there's a huge black
> hole where we've put a densely populated set of solar systems, then the hole
> has to be relocated.
Agreed. Not that I expect it to be an issue.
> > > Maybe, if at all, were you thinking to label sections of space with more
> > > proper names, such as "Badlands", "Star Nursery", or after major nearby • stars,
> > > and other terms like that?
> >
> > Something like that. But I'm not feeling a strong opinion here.
>
> I'll go either way about this, just so long as we can agree and document where
> areas are. But please explain what you were thinking, as I'm curious. Start a
> new thread!
I wasn't thinking anything specific, except I wanted to avoid names like
"Space Station <3.45, 4.65, -2.56>".
Steve
|
|
|
| 
moonbase
(score: 0.850)
|
|
| |
On Tue, 28 Sep 1999 21:19:59 GMT, "Tom McDonald"
<radiotitan@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> Good, and I agree. Duane hasn't been as vocal as we have but I know he wants
> that base :-) I do too, and the moon is a great place to start. And again I'll
> just say that I think the first installation should be the Alpha-1 Rocket
> Base. Plus the cool name of "Moonbase Alpha" is applicable too :-)
Hmm. Would we have to mark it as mobile? ;-)
So what's the nature of Moonbase LD-A? Before we decide that, we should
decide on the background environment, so we'll know what's appropriate and
inappropriate. I'll take that to another thread, 'kay?
> My thinking behind using sectional units was only if someone ever wanted to
> map out how space was being populated, or where their "cool spacebase" was, it
> might be fun.
How big a chunk of space do you want to start with? And should use real
space-time, or just make it up? And what method of surveying do would be
best? Where would the origin be? Galactic center? Sol? Something
arbitrary?
I'm against using real space--there's too much research involved. But if
someone *wants* to do the necessary research, don't let me stop 'em.
> Maybe, if at all, were you thinking to label sections of space with more
> proper names, such as "Badlands", "Star Nursery", or after major nearby stars,
> and other terms like that?
Something like that. But I'm not feeling a strong opinion here.
> when replying, umm.. yeah. spamcake. find it. remove it.
Oh no! He drew a blank! Is this the beginning of the end for McSpamcake?
Stay tuned...
Or was it a very subtle, obscure movie reference that I missed?
Steve
|
|
|
|
moonbase
(score: 0.849)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.space, Steve Bliss writes:
> On Tue, 28 Sep 1999 McSpamcakeBoy mentioned:
>
> > I like it, though in order to preserve "Alpha 1", should we wish to do so,
> > everything that has a letter should also have a number; so Surface Base LD-A
> > would really be Surface Base LD-A1.
>
> It could go that way, or LD-A could refer to the installation as a whole,
> and LD-Ax would be specific models within LD-A.
I your idea better.
> If LD-A1 is the whole site, then the first model in the site would be
> LD-A2, right?
I'd rather keep it that 1 means the first thing.
[...]
> My preference would be to apply the
> letters to each installation, in order of chronological appearance. (I'd
> also prefer that the first installation be a Moonbase. ;)
Good, and I agree. Duane hasn't been as vocal as we have but I know he wants
that base :-) I do too, and the moon is a great place to start. And again I'll
just say that I think the first installation should be the Alpha-1 Rocket
Base. Plus the cool name of "Moonbase Alpha" is applicable too :-)
> > We could further modify the ID subcode to
> > mean "sector A, base number 1" or "sector A1", that is, if we want to
> > alphabetize the sectors.
>
> We could, but I'd rather not. That could lead to post office readdressing,
> if the sectors filled in later.
True. That could get ugly.
> > But this also kind of depends on how big sectors are, and how they could be
> > subdivided and/or organized. We know about quadrants eh? How many sectors in
> > are in one? Are sections divisions of sectors? If we manage to
> get more than 26 installations,
>
> My preference is to not do sectors/quadrants/octants/whatever.
My thinking behind using sectional units was only if someone ever wanted to
map out how space was being populated, or where their "cool spacebase" was, it
might be fun.
Maybe, if at all, were you thinking to label sections of space with more
proper names, such as "Badlands", "Star Nursery", or after major nearby stars,
and other terms like that?
> Or at
> least, not to (generally) use them as part of the name of installations.
True again, especially where mobile installations are concerned.
> > Something else too: I think that "LD" might eventually be dropped from • common
> > usage, at it'll be assumed. And it does not seem to add distinction amongst
> > the various installations.
>
> LD isn't supposed to distinguish between the installations. It's supposed
> to unify them. In the same way that Datsville could have neighborhoods,
> but all the neighborhoods would still be part of Datsville.
I get you now. I must've been under medication earlier.
-Tom McD.
when replying, umm.. yeah. spamcake. find it. remove it.
|
|
|
|
moonbase
(score: 0.849)
|
|
| |
On Tue, 28 Sep 1999 McSpamcakeBoy mentioned:
> I like it, though in order to preserve "Alpha 1", should we wish to do so,
> everything that has a letter should also have a number; so Surface Base LD-A
> would really be Surface Base LD-A1.
It could go that way, or LD-A could refer to the installation as a whole,
and LD-Ax would be specific models within LD-A.
If LD-A1 is the whole site, then the first model in the site would be
LD-A2, right?
> We could further modify the ID subcode to
> mean "sector A, base number 1" or "sector A1", that is, if we want to
> alphabetize the sectors.
We could, but I'd rather not. That could lead to post office readdressing,
if the sectors filled in later. My preference would be to apply the
letters to each installation, in order of chronological appearance. (I'd
also prefer that the first installation be a Moonbase. ;) If we manage to
get more than 26 installations,
> But this also kind of depends on how big sectors are, and how they could be
> subdivided and/or organized. We know about quadrants eh? How many sectors in
> are in one? Are sections divisions of sectors?
My preference is to not do sectors/quadrants/octants/whatever. Or at
least, not to (generally) use them as part of the name of installations.
> Something else too: I think that "LD" might eventually be dropped from common
> usage, at it'll be assumed. And it does not seem to add distinction amongst
> the various installations.
LD isn't supposed to distinguish between the installations. It's supposed
to unify them. In the same way that Datsville could have neighborhoods,
but all the neighborhoods would still be part of Datsville.
Steve
(going off to look at Tom's chart,
<http://www.baylug.org/space/installations.htm>)
|
|
|
|
moonbase
(score: 0.849)
|
|
| |
In lugnet.space, Duane Hess writes:
> In lugnet.space, Steve Bliss writes:
> > Sorry for the length on this, I was on a roll...
> >
> > This is a disconnected follow-up to the current discussion about setting up
> > a second project like Datsville, but set in Space instead of Town.
> >
> > Before we start posting models, or defining installations, it would be a
> > good idea to figure out the background environment (culture, technology
> > level, politics, etc.). That way, we'll know what types of models to post,
> > and what installations to create, and how to avoid glaring inconsistencies.
>
>
> I agree
>
> > Here's my write-up of the LD universe. I'm throwing this out in hopes of
> > starting discussion, not because I think it should be this way.
> >
> > My take on this project is it should stay closer to hard science fiction
> > than to space opera, or Star Trek technology. More realistic ships,
> > stations, and equipment. Fewer light sabres, transporters, and force
> > fields. The only truly "fantastic technology" should be interstellar
> > drives. There may even be different kinds of interstellar drives.
Fantastic Technology built science fiction, which eventually built science. I'm
sure many an astronaut/cosmonaut or seaman aboard a
diesel/gasoline/nuclear-powered submarine owes his career to Jules Verne.
However, I'll "try" to keep it simple.
> > The political environment is an interstellar culture, in a period of
> > exploration and colonization. There are currently a handful of independant
> > planetary governments, possibly under an umbrella "United Planets"
> > organization. Some of these governments are former colonies, some are
> > alien species. There are also some organizations which are not tied to
> > specific planets or governments.
>
>
> How about rogue militias, rebel bands and the like? Fighters are a popular
> ship design and there needs to be a use for them if only for intimidation
> and Cold War rhetoric.
Everyone LOVES Cold War rhetoric! How about a peace-keeping/planet-defending
organization that runs completely independent of galactic police units.
Already, I have a group of interplanetary "superheroes" that protect peaceful
colonies/planets from more malevolent forces in space. However, the
transformation technology that some of their equipment carries, as well as the
use of more articulated robots will seem very unique to the rest of the space
scene. In addition, they (as well as their conquering counterparts in my own
plans) will make use of pre-existing TLG vehicles and bases either with new
color schemes or major modifications.
> > There are also a fair number of colonies of various sizes. Each of the
> > planetary governments has some colonies. Some of the bigger colonies have
> > colonies. Depending on the planet, there may be several colonies on one
> > planet, established by different governments.
> >
> > Humans are only one of the two or three main species in the region. There
> > may be any number of other species; they are visitors from other unknown
> > regions, or possibly the expatriate remnants of lost worlds.
Speaking of which, I have a colony in mind which makes use of different species
living together. By the way, how do you feel about a space colony sporting
onion domes?
> > Earth, the home planet of humans, is one of the larger planets, in terms of
> > population and power. There is a world government, but it is a republic
> > built from the nation-states. The world government mostly deals with
> > interstellar issues.
> >
> > Earth maintains a presence throughout the Sol system. No other governments
> > have any installations in our sphere of control.
Actually, my heroes would have one Earth-base.
> > Moonbase Alpha was the one of the first permanent human installation
> > located off-Earth. It remains a vital part of the terran interstellar
> > organization, organizing and controlling the activities of most other
> > non-colonial terran space efforts. At one time, there was a significant
> > Lunar colony, but over time this colony has disappeared; no one wants to
> > live on the Moon. But there is still a large population of government
> > officials and employees, including strong research and military groups.
> >
> > Steve
You know, that's funny. My group has a Moonbase 1, too. :}
James J.
(If you see a version of the Renegade with a purple trim and a second or third
command pod attached to it--RUN! If you see a Moonbase with a small
room-shaped tank attached to it or a blue or cyan space-fighter in your path,
stand back and let them do their jobs.)
|
|
|
|
moonbase
(score: 0.849)
|
More: Next Page >>
|
