HyperKat Support and Tester Forum
Mars Colony Frontier => Have your say on the new version => Topic started by: Hyper on August 02, 2013, 06:51:39 PM
-
If this gets too long winded I will delete babble and just keep important content.
I will add other subjects as I need to know so for now lets just keep this about the base, construction and how to let players edit the layout.
So here are a few caveats.
1. the parts have to fit like building blocks. I think we can all agree building containers in situ will have to be modular. Currently we have hubs and connectors. I want to keep the same theme there but may add round modules like the ones Dr Zubrin suggests with mars direct. So suggestions welcome here.
2. An editor to let the user do the layout. Gui 2d based or live in game ghost plan like Star Wars Galaxies. Or give me a idea.
3. How to implement the actual construction. They just appear, go through a build anim, or what?
The economy required to obtain the modules will be discussed in a different board.
Please dont write a book on every post, I have a lot on my plate and I need fast reading.
-
I think the build animation should be kept very simple but I think it would be important to have one. Perhaps a tent/tarp over the build area with dust that comes out when people are working on it or something.
The Build interface itself probably should use ghosted green wire-frame outlines of the building being built at 50ish % alpha as it would allow players familiarity with most other games and help in positioning the modules.
I think a live 3D with a floating not user attached camera when someone enters the build menu that works within 10 meters of the user. (Have to put the limit to avoid using it for exploration =p ) The floating camera is useful for getting an overview of the placement though.
-
What about a kind of "Construction-container"- only coloured black with yellowstripes- warning signs and so on. it can show some bright light through windows that simulate welding-work with some heavy sounds. not too much work on that animation.
the idea with the green frame should work for everybody. lots of build up games got a similar system. the green frame could be highlighted when it is in position that fits.
-
I can put a fly camera in and as you say only allow activation near a registered "build" site. Good idea. The ghost would be helpful because you know someone would build off a cliff.
Lets lock that in for now, I will test implementation.
-
I like the ideas for 'ghost buildings' to help placement, and of the 'construction tent' since it makes sense in several ways.
Another stray idea for the building cam idea to aid in limiting its 'exploration' potential, such as having a 'fog of war' to block seeing to far when in build mode. Or maybe have the camera go into a mainly top down view viewing a viewing area wide enough for 3 structures to fit (or 4-5 for wide screen displays).
A stray suggestion/idea relating to base building.
Building Grids:
A 'building grid' made of (1m?) squares could be visible when in 'build mode'. Structures would (or could) snap to the grid. Hopefully easier than just having the game itself try to figure out what places may or may not be suited for different types of construction. Also allows a little extra 'variety' of structures and require a bit extra thought and planning of what gets built where.
There would be several types of 'spaces', based on the terrain/location. The down side is it could limit building rotation to 90 degree increments unless the grid is more of a 'building guide' without a 'snap to grid' restriction.
'Clear' squares (empty square on the grid). Ready for building with little effort. Default build time/cost.
'Usable' squares (square with a '-' in it on the grid). Terrain is firm/level enough, needs some prep. Basic structures/equipment - default time/cost (basic default 'foundation' included). Standard structures - small time/cost increase for basic foundation prep.
Heavier structures/equipment - moderate time/cost needed for sturdy foundation prep.
'Rough' squares (square with a '/' though it). The terrain is poorly suited for construction. foundation prep cost/time would be significant (and prohibitive) for most structures. Only basic/lighter structures/equipment can be placed without extensive foundation/terrain prep.
'Unusable' squares (a square with an 'X' through it on the grid). The terrain is not suitable for anything for any number of reasons. If it is at least 'level' enough, then 'portable' stuff or basic equipment like navigational lights could still be placed there.
Special exceptions: Things that 'set' on the ground, like covered pipes leading to the rover fuel station in 1.x might be able to handle many terrain types, so long as they are 'level'.
Another would be a basic platform resting on several pilings. They could be built in difficult terrain, but be poorly suited for structures, meant more for creating a level places to put (semi) portable equipment, or even just setting stuff on. Such a platform could be built over grades of 30-45%. They would also be the ideal location for special semi-portable shelters.
Should I hold off on posting actual ideas/suggestions for types of structures that could be built? Or could I mention those in this thread also? (I got like a page worth, some practical, some sensible, some that might be more for immersion/decoration without supporting aspects being in game...)
-
The easiest solution for me is to open a dialog and give the user a top down 2d view with parts they can select and place as they wish. That way they get a nice view of the layout.
I dont want to get into the economy in this thread but our meetings here have pointed us to the fact that users will not build the base all at once. Suggestions have been made to let the users purchase units as the game progresses and they can add to the base using this 2d dialog based editor. And they can change the layout of what they want all they want except for the units they have already placed. Does that make sense?
-
Yes, that actually makes sense I think..
1. You can not change the layout once you have built something, but you can select where new things go.
2. You will select what you want from a top down 2d box
3. There will be some form of resource that allows you to build. What it is has yet to be determined.
Oh! Hey I know this is not the proper place for this, but Hyperkat is seriously missing something that is very important... Now please do not laugh, cause I am serious..... You are missing a Facebook page for the company (at least as far as I have seen).... I know it seems silly, but I have over 1000 friends, and I know many of them who really do not leave facebook or follow links, but if you had a page I could at least share it and expose them to some hard science fun... I admit most would not appreciate it... but I do know at least one who would.
-
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hyperkat-Games/134921960018697
Didn't want to go over economy at this point but we are looking at a couple ways.
1. Users supply the main base with materials for marsbucks or credits and you can purchase modules. Rare material gets more cash.
2. the game will send messages about shortage of plant material for algae (example) you supply that for bonus.
At any rate you go to the main base and pick up a load of materials to be manufactured into a hub or module.
OR you send in a request for the material to be delivered.
Player decided to add a life support module at some location.
Player selects build and credits are deducted, AI crew comes out and builds the unit
So since we opened that can o worms I will start that thread....
-
Thanks Hyper, Did not know you already had one =)
-
Shapes of the modules... What do you think of the basic shapes I use now? I will probably add a cylinder like the ones in the demo game. Any thoughts on dimensions? Hubs are 8 meters at this point.
-
The shapes of the modules are not important in the slightest.. They can be triangles, domes, whatever.. it will be how they are filled and how closely they resemble something we can recognize as something not in this world.
The current modules feel really lifeless (obviously due to the limited amount of money and time that can be spent on art assets.) I do have to say though, the current habs look like they were never designed to be pressurized, and if they really had 15 PSI in them they would explode into shrapnel... But that is just my opinion....
The hub modules for example are about perfect in size but they are quite lifeless and feels like the only use the room has is as a connector..... I mean.. here is an ISS node module.. Yes, it is designed as a connector.. but it also has use otherwise...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Unity_module_interior.jpg
Some beds, shelves, a desk... storage.... Dont really matter, as long as it can be jumped to that there is a logical use for it.. Some working shelves actually would be nice.
A desk with a computer on it would also seem logical.
-
I have to agree on lifeless. You can't imagine how hard it was to describe this to the artists. My description was a submarine interior like this
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://th02.deviantart.net/fs11/PRE/i/2006/167/e/1/Submarine_Interior_18_by_Silvermoonshade.jpg&imgrefurl=http://silvermoonshade.deviantart.com/art/Submarine-Interior-18-34865505&h=774&w=1032&sz=185&tbnid=EfBNJ2D7w7X-mM:&tbnh=95&tbnw=127&zoom=1&usg=__52Qne-LntmXl5etod2IPuP-z3aA=&docid=GLtdn1zfD_cXDM&sa=X&ei=nngFUuSyIIeU2AXHzICwDQ&ved=0CFwQ9QEwDg&dur=1874
and you saw what I got..
Which module is a "hab" ? I can prove the connector modules can hold pressure. I worked with a plastics expert on the design using interlocking fingers that seal tighter under pressure.
-
By Hab I meant all the long habitation modules in the base, they just looked to me like they were never designed to be pressurized, they lacked the banding I would expect, they are an odd shape and.. You know.. I really dont know how to describe it, but they do not look like they could hold the 648 ish+ tons of pressure that would be pressing against the walls and ceiling of the structure from the inside.. I would at least expect some steel bands or something to keep it together...
The picture of the sub, Yeah, that is more of like I would expect. Maybe not quite that busy, but yes, more like that. A lot more plastic and less metal obviously, but yeah something like that.
I hate giving you a half baked answer like this but I have to be honest I really dont know what I expect a mars base to look like.. I just dont quite think I am seeing it... Let me think on this for a while.
-
The walls of the base are filled with mars dirt. The arch will support a lot of weight and there are bands inside and out for keeping the thing from blowing apart. I have been assured that pressure disbursed over the entire surface area of the interior would not be that hard to contain. 10 to 14 psi wont hardly supply enough pressure to support a 3,000 lb vehicle. I realize there is nothing to restrict the expansion on Mars but I think it is valid. I will pass this along to some friends at MIT and see what the issues would be.
-
It seems like 3D printer technology, if developed enough, would mean using Mars dirt would not be needed for structural components... except maybe as raw materials to actually make stuff...
Would the basic concept of using regolith (sp?) on the Moon to make building/structural components be applicable in any way on Mars?
I was watching some videos on YouTube relating to assorted concepts, which might be handy for some inspiration for building module designs.
Such as the ATHLETE and RATS stuff NASA is working on and have concepts for Cylindrical modules with connection points on the ends and on either side, to be moved and put in place by freaking spider like vehicles with wheels for feet...
An awesome video showing how they do analog testing on Earth, it shows the basic concept I am talking about. They also discuss the option of inflatable shelters to a limited degree.
Analog Video 12 08 HD720p (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPCNVoZNCdc)
The ATHLETE concept video, moving and positioning the cylindrical modules on the Moon.
ATHLETE Trailer HD720p (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb0_GNyczCA[/url)
Canned Sardines in Space is one way of describing the living space of the module in the video.. which is basically the same as older style submarines.... except nicer looking...
Baring that stuff above, a huge mess of stuff I wrote down that I almost threw into the building grid idea post...
basically, base module ideas, which fall into 'shapes' they might have... sort of...
Base layout ideas.
Base Module (variations).
(These will likely need better names than I can think of). I am assuming the 'basic' stuff would be '1x1' on a 'building grid'. (being 8x8m? Placed anywhere initially, otherwise 'centered' on a 'core module' of connected to an existed module or groups of modules?)
Hub Module (1x1): The default 'hub'.
Connector Module (1x1): The default module that goes between hubs. Some basic space for equipment on either side of the 'walkway'
Hub Corridor (1x1): A simple + shaped corridor intersection, cheap but no real space for equipment.
Strait Corridor (1x1): A simple strait corridor, cheap but no real space for equipment.
Bridge Corridor(1x3, 3x1): A 'corridor' that has a raised middle section that has enough ground clearance to allow rovers to pass underneath. Spacing between support posts on either end would be a little wider than is needed for two rovers to fit side by side.
6 Point Hub (1x2, 2x1): Effectively 2 hubs side by side. In essence, 2 connectors on the two longer sides, 1 connector on the two narrower sides.
8 Point Hub (2x2): Effectively a larger 'hub' with 2 connectors each side, but as one central structure. (heavy structure? capable of supporting additional levels?).
Large Hub (2x2): Also the same ground coverage as a 2x2 hub, but only a single connector point centered on each side. (heavy structure? capable of supporting levels?)
Core Base Hub (3x3, heavy structure): A 'large' hub that is (or could have a) roughly Octagonal layout, with a single connector each side. This is a 'big' structure, with the potential for supporting (or starting with) several levels. Not meant for initial construction without substantial logistics support being in place ahead of time. Air tight doors in several places lessen risk from decompression (accidental or otherwise). A central point (where stairs could exist for multiple levels) would double as an emergency airlock in case of a wall breach in one section. (even if the latter is not added as an actual in game mechanic).
Buried Modules: A module that has less insulation/radiation shielding, which is covered in Martial Soil after completion. Cheaper in term of resources needed, not in terms of time and manpower (and rover fuel?) needed. Could lead to their own challenges, like how to allow for 'windows'. Could require 'proper soil composition' to be near the construction site. (just as a requirement, without any sort of 'terrain deformation' being needed.)
Raised Corridor (1x1): A corridor to connect a pair of structures on the second level (if such structures will be possible/allowed). Has enough ground clearance for rovers to pass underneath.
Tower (1x1, or 0.5x0.5): A stand alone 'watch tower' like structure with ladder (or stairs around the sides) to a small platform on the top. An idea place for observation, and for installing weather monitoring equipment and basic communications relays. Could be 9m tall for the top 'platform', 12m tall including secondary antennae/weather sensors.
Raised Platform(varies, multiple sizes, as small as a few meters, to being as big as 2x2): A simple platform located on adjustable legs or fixed pilings. Less meant for structures, and more for placing fixed equipment, by allowing for a nice, flat surface to 'store'/place things on otherwise rough/uneven/soft terrain. Only the most basic and light of structures can be supported. Otherwise heavier items would have to have a framework that could better transfer their weight to the legs/pilings themselves. Using legs, grades can be no more than 5% can be handdled. Using pilings, grades of 30-45% could be handled for a smaller platform (1x1 or smaller), or 10-15% for a longer/wider platform (2x2).
Remote Shelter (1x1 or smaller?). A 'stand alone' structure designed to be semi-portable with rugged construction. It is basically a small ELS with small attached airlock and a rugged reinforced structure, and designed for minimal footprint. (alternative airlock interior layout needed, maybe built along the 'side', rather than 'sticking out' like on the default base?) Power is supplemented by small solar panels and vertical wind turbines on the roof, accessed via a side ladder. Included equipment is same as the fixed base ELS, plus small food (MRE) and medical storage lockers, small 5 gallon water tank, and a 'transfer' system to replenish (or draw from) its O2, water and power storage systems. The water tank would have multiple 'heating probes' and a flexible case to prevent issues from the water freezing during prolonged periods of not being used. The bottom of the framework doubles as a built in foundation and includes 6 removable 'legs' (4 corners of the 'shelter', other 2 at the end of the airlock extension) that can be adjusted to different lengths to handle uneven terrain. The legs can be removed so it can be placed on a Raised Platform. To get more technical/complex, there could also be a special 'self propelled' trailer (designed to also load/unload the shelter) used to transport it 'in game' (with the trailer needing to be 'pulled' by a rover).
Optional base module ideas (maybe more for immersion than anything else)
Lander Module (1x1? 2x2?): For some reason, a lander is available (perhaps based on the Dragon capsule?). Could be a support module for initial construction. Or just as a basic habitable structure meant mainly for decoration/immersion.
Landing Pad Module (1x1? 2x2?): Rather than a lander, a designated place for a lander... No 'connection' nodes, a stand alone structure, best placed at least a short distance from structures. Even if just for decoration/immersion.
Lander Docking Module (1x2? 2x3?): A reinforced/hardened 'structure' with a landing pad on top, it has connection points (or maybe 1, opposite of the landing pad), with 'access' adjacent to the landing pad for personnel and refueling equipment. Useful even if just for decoration/immersion.
Vehicle Refueling Station: A big 'stand alone' structure with large storage tanks. Stores a LOT of oxygen, hydrogen, and methane. Fits well near a landing pad, even if just for decoration/immersion (while remaining as a huge storage thing for rover fuel). Might fit well with a 'trade base' or 'convoy pit stop' themed base. Maybe include solar panels on the roof and radiators on the upper sides (to keep the 'contents' cool).
MMEV Berth: A big module with a raised 'retractable airlock bridge' and big 'parking spot'. For larger vehicles to 'dock' to (like the Manned Mars Exploration Vehicle, which will likely be a good 'work horse' for transporting heavy equipment and lots of materials based on some Mars colonization concepts). Maybe needed if trade with other bases becomes a thing that needs to be handled with actually using rovers to transport larger equipment. Otherwise, a big fancy structure just for decoration/immersion.
-
The dirt is part of the radiation barrier.
Everything there will probably be building blocks, panels of various lengths used to build everything. A machine that spits out building components as flat panels, tubes, I beams etc would be the way to go. So parts that assemble into other parts like erector, leggo, kinex etc...
When we get the ability to smelt iron for steel and make that a viable choice for building. So when does this game take place? Do we have steel mills in the game? Have to put it into perspective, game starts at how many years after the first landing? I see a dependency here on when this takes place.
I personally like the raw gritty explorer scenario but I am only the builder..
-
The raw gritty explorer scenario works really well for giving the player something to do and not requiring a team of players to feel like it is not completely out of place for a single person to operate the things.
That said... If more people were in a colony at once the more developed it can be before it starts feeling weird... Because if you are in a full martian colony with what looks like room for 10,000 in the middle of the day and no one is there it breaks the immersion.
I think for now the explorer works... But... You should definitely work on a matching system so that 1-3 people will join your game if you make it public, it is a large time investment probably to make such a thing, but just one other person would make it feel like a mission, and give a crucial element. Maybe an auto-join by default the first time you play as well after you customize your avatar.
-
New version will allow dedicated server so groups of people could sign up and run it. Starting a new thread on that...
-
The dirt is part of the radiation barrier.
Everything there will probably be building blocks, panels of various lengths used to build everything. A machine that spits out building components as flat panels, tubes, I beams etc would be the way to go. So parts that assemble into other parts like erector, leggo, kinex etc...
A 3D printer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printing) would be the ideal machine for the task.
I think present concepts from NASA include using 3D printers as a possible means to construct rovers on other worlds. I think the one lunar rover they are working on was made with parts meant be easily produced via a 3D printer.
When we get the ability to smelt iron for steel and make that a viable choice for building. So when does this game take place? Do we have steel mills in the game? Have to put it into perspective, game starts at how many years after the first landing? I see a dependency here on when this takes place.
I personally like the raw gritty explorer scenario but I am only the builder..
The 'gritty explorer' thing, along with videos I saw of the old Mars Colony Online, did make me think of an idea for a sort of 'Phase 0' or 'survey mission'. (my latest overly large post over in the Gameplay thread)
One scenario pops into mind, for how things could be well established, yet still lacking in some way.
Perhaps the initial main base did have some sort of small scale steel melting and alloy producing system, but due to some sort of mishap it was damaged beyond repair (maybe someone outsourced computer components to save money and a supply lander landed in the wrong place without bothering to slow down first).
Perhaps the incident in question damaged multiple large pieces of equipment at the main base, stuff that could not initially be repaired/replaced with what was locally available (maybe they had the capability, but it got wrecked also). The main base would of course have backup systems made up of smaller and less effective equipment that was brought along for the initial colonizing efforts.
The backup (smelting) system would be in place that can operate on limited power, but with very limited capacity, and long charging periods between each batch due to the limited power available from solar, wind and basic nuclear sources.
Due to the size and weight of the equipment, replacements cannot be sent by a 'standard' supply lander.
Due to the initial excitement of colonizing Mars having wore off, Earth is not very enthusiastic and in no hurry to allocate the time and money needed to prep a 'heavy cargo lander' that would be needed to deliver replacement equipment.
That way things can be 'well established' and still have the 'gritty' feel due to basically having arrived to find out the main base has suffered a serious setback at a time when Earth is not really enthusiastic enough to put efforts into sending proper replacement equipment.
This would require some effort to be made to repair or replace the affected system(s).
Option 1: Find a way to 'convince' Earth to send a replacement (requiring a pair of heavy rockets, one to put a 'heavy cargo lander' into orbit, a second to get the 'transit stage' into orbit to actually get the heavy cargo lander to Mars. So expensive and time consuming. Could probably cram several entire resupply missions into the heavy cargo lander, to give an impression of how big and heavy the equipment is)
Option 2: Find a way to develop replacement equipment locally that won't require large amounts of energy, or perhaps can operate partly or mostly via some locally produced 'fuel'.
Option 3: Have R&D efforts to develop a new power system that can generate a sufficient amount of power, such as locally made nuclear reactor, to power the backup system consistently or to otherwise greatly reduce its down time.
Option 4: Generate sizable amounts of materials/resources needed for the main base to fabricate the components needed to get the larger and much more efficient system back online, or to otherwise rebuild it from scratch.
Option 5: Work toward having additional 'backup' systems built and sent to other bases. The other bases would use their own surplus energy to charge up small scale systems for brief periods of time. While not the most efficient option, it would likely be a more easy to reach stop gap measure, and help to decentralize production so problems do not occur should the main base's backup system break down.
They could be cumulative.
Perhaps R&D is able to locally source materials needed to make a nuclear reactor to allow the backup system to operate more consistently, while another base is able to produce materials needed to refit the original damaged system to operate on locally produced 'fuels'. So with time and effort, the player(s) can work toward having the main base actually being more productive, effective and efficient than it was in the first place.
It could also be optional.
So players can choose if they want to start.
Maybe they want to take things easy in a setting where things are well established and ready to go.
Or perhaps a bit more of a challenge and start in a setting where the Mars colony is a bit down on its luck, and in need of expanding its capabilities and rebuilding Earth's interest in the Mars colonizing efforts.
For those who really like a challenge, maybe a setting where something went horribly wrong, and the player is part of a mission to 'reactivate' a previously abandoned Mars colonization effort. A mission requiring even more time, effort and resources to get things going and get the colonizing effort on track, where initially Earth would be hesitant to deploy even a smaller supply craft based on an old rover delivery design with barely enough room for a footlocker full of supplies. An initial goal for this could be to take some leftover pre-fab materials, and get basic food, water and life support production online ASAP at an already prepared site with basics in place (sort of like the present Phase 1 and the Phase 6 based demo, but with more to do/setup/repair/replace). The supplies would be needed to help support initial efforts of the team that drew the short straw and got stuck with trying task of fixing up the run down main base itself. Then after that, the player(s) can start working on expanding their initial meager base, and working toward being able to establish a full base at another location.
Maybe the later might work as a sort setting for a tutorial. A mishap having caused a secondary base to be abandoned and fall into disrepair and then be damaged by a bad storm. The player(s) gets walked through the basics as they have to rebuild the base, getting it fully operational and made self sufficient.
-
ha.... a machine that spits out the needed parts.... that what i need here... yes -that would be great. much place for own ideas how the base should look like and very much place for fatal mistakes--so that will bring up the game-play.
what about the ability to build a kind of train- or monorail vehicle for faster transportation to bases that were already established?
-
Trains and monorails require huge investments of time, materials, and energy to build on mars.. It is not like earth where area's are relatively flat, mars is like the Swiss alps almost every where. We would probably not see them until after the first 500K colonists were on mars unless there was a really pressing need. Autonomous rovers that slowly traveled as electricity from solar panels or something was available would be the most likely, but even bulldozing the terrain on mars to make dirt roads would be out of our colonists ability's....
http://rack.0.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEzLzAxLzAzL2ZmL01hcnNTdXJmYWNlLjhmN2I1LmpwZwpwCXRodW1iCTk1MHg1MzQjCmUJanBn/94f1affa/672/Mars-Surface.jpg
(Oh yeah those rocks are about .3 to 1 Meter high. Without erosion that we have on earth, almost everything is a boulder there. )
-
I could see a sort of 'train' being possible... of a modified rover that 'controls'/tows a number of self propelled trailers that are basically modified rovers that lack any sort of seating, being mainly flat beds for hauling cargo, cargo containers, etc, connected to each other in a train car linkage type of setup.
As an alternative to roads (or a precursor for roads) might be placing lots and lots and lots more of 'navigational markers' that could be easily followed by manned and automated rovers until actual 'roads' could be made (or plowed) after however many years (or generations) that might take. The makers might also be of use since there are probably won't be much relating to GPS.
Would Thorium be usable for making effective ASRGs or MMRTGs? If so, it would be useful for automated rovers. They would have a little more energy during the day, and wouldn't need to conserve (much if any) energy to prevent from freezing up during the night, and allow them to cover more territory in the same amount of time.
One possible thing for road making.
An MMEV type vehicle with very large 'snow plow'/dozer type blade on the front, and a dedicated nuclear reactor with steam turbines (or at least steam engines, which might be easier to make) driving generators for power, so as to not need absurd amounts of oxygen/methane to fuel it. The reactor also helps weight the vehicle down so it will have extra traction for pushing stuff around. Although it would probably take a good bit of R&D efforts to get even an effective MMEV type vehicle built and configured for such a task, before even touching on a nuclear powered engine or even just an extra large oxygen/methane fueled engine.
I wonder if a super sized version of the Landmaster (or whatever it was called) from the movie Damnation Alley, with extra high ground clearance, would be able to handle 1m rocks well... At the very least, it would make a cool transport vehicle since the thing is long enough to have an airlock in the back and still have space to sleep people (or carry lots of supplies)
-
The problem with bulldozing rovers that would be solid enough to push through the rocky terrain is they would weigh 50 to a 100 tons or more(More like 300 tons because of martian gravity, but it could have weight packs filled with rocks or something for the traction needed but the actual blades and dozer unit would need massive reinforcing to break the rock formations so not less than 50 tons of structural weight). Sending that kind of mass from earth is simply not feasible. The mars colonists could build one or one could be fabricated in space if we had a space based industry of course, but it just really could not be sent from earth.
Remember these bulldozers would need to be built to a massive strength compared to earth, because on earth there are few rock formations, and bulldozers almost always push material that is loose either originally or blasted that way by explosives. Neither would be likely on mars.
-
They make 'big' bulldozers already.
The Caterpillar D10 and D11. The D10 is 90 tons, the D11 is 120 tons.
<HYPER> Glad you are paying the fuel bill to get it there. Oh and diesel engines dont run well on Mars.
To quote Scrooge McDuck, "Work smarter, not harder."
That said, why move big rocks when you can move smaller rocks?
Tools that come to mind.
Excavators (even if not that large) that can use tools to help break up the rocks. Stuff like jackhammers.
Drills with small explosive charges like used in quarrying/mining, adapted for Mars .
Go old fashioned (if there is water to spare), crack rocks a little, pour in water, let the freezing water do its trick, heat up rock with something like waste heat from an ASRG/MMRTG, rinse and repeat until rock splits or has more manageable chunks fall off.
It simply comes down to adapting what is available, to achieve the maximum effect for minimal effort.
It seems like it should be possible to scan every last part and component into a digital format, so 3D printers could assemble the majority of the 'solid' parts on Mars, only shipping what has to be made on Earth, and any needed materials (such as specific alloys?) that cannot be produced/created on Mars.
Based on the Mars Constellation concept, they 'could' move a lot of stuff to Mars, by sending up the payload and the actual drive sections separately.
The Ares V is to have a payload capacity of 188 tons to Low Earth Orbit.
The Shuttle Derived Heavy Life Launch Vehicle was to have a potential payload capacity of around 90 tons max.
The Skylon based 'Mars Mission' involves a similar concept, except stuff is put into orbit in smaller packages and assembled in a sort of small 'space dry dock'. It could be useful for the transit stage, to get the same amount of mass to Mars with a bit less fuel, while also throwing a reusable 'first stage' into the mix.
Since Mars is like 1/3 gravity of Earth, shouldn't landing a heavy payload be a 'little' easier than getting it up into space in the first place?
Otherwise, just adapt ATHLETE concept for Mars, since it can just 'step over' larger rocks. Have a few of them play 'follow the leader' for an improvised road(less) train... worry about the road idea some other time when manpower and resources are expanded enough to make it more feasible, or sooner in areas that might not be horribly cluttered with large boulders...
I wonder if boring machines would be feasible in any way on Mars... digging under the rocks might not be any slower than trying to move them in the first place... but then comes the question of what the heck would be used to reinforce the walls of the resulting tunnels...
::)
Or maybe adapt a tunnel borer based design on a smaller scale with multiple smaller units side by side and and just 'mine' their way through big boulders on the surface? Then you just got a lot of smaller rocks and gravel and such to move. Not exactly fast, but it might work...
-
I am really surprised you did not make the next leap yourself. Do you hear what you are saying? Taking a jackhammer (Something that requires massive energy to run) and manually breaking up huge area's of terrain? Drills with explosive charges? How many hundreds of tons of explosives would we need to send? Freeze weathering rocks?
I mean all these things are possible but at what expense of manpower and logistics. Hell even the bulldozer from earth is possible, but what is the realistic chance a space agency is going to sink 2 billion dollars to send one to mars? (The D11 is insufficient for the task since it is not built strong enough for shearing rocks from bedrock, even if it had a hydraulic thumper to break them up)
Automated rovers are of course possible as well, and I think likely, but I was discounting the idea's that roads would be simple to build, not that the terrain would be traverseable with the right design.
As for boring machines, they weigh 15,000 tons + and the heads themselves which would need to be replaced every few hundred feet can weigh 50 tons in themselves. They also require an immense power plant to run them.
Oh yeah, landing the weight I didn't even consider, it is problematic, but nothing crazy, it is all getting it off earth and to mars where the expense is.
-
Have to agree profit. People have a hard time understanding the problems we will face on Mars. I can see moving some surface rocks out of the way and making a pathway (road) but any large material movement will be almost impossible. Again we have to go back to what year this takes place. 2240 ok I can see some heavy equipment there but I am sure it will all run off electric much like the power shovels of today. Will there be nuke power? Sure at some time in the future and I do hope it will be a molten salt thorium reactor. I see micro reactors the norm. Look at the first submarines or destroyers. Small light reactors will be ganged for our needs.
Lots of research....
-
I was trying to think outside of the box, with a basic idea to adapt stuff where needed.
Not simply taking something from Earth, and ship it to Mars.
Also, going 'steam punk' has come to mind...
Would it be possible to adapt steam engines, using an enclosed system to minimize water loss, to drive generators for a nuclear power source? It seems like it might be useful as an easier to make and maintain option to steam turbines. At least for building nuclear reactors locally on Mars until more complex and precise stuff can be reliably made.
Would a basic steam engine of small size be a viable source of mechanical energy, or be enough to power generators for at least 'hand held' tools, maybe using something similar to a hydraulic of pneumatic system? Or would those be impractical on Mars and make mainly electrical systems a better choice?
Water expands when it freezes. If I am not mistaken, that was applied in stone quarries in ancient times to help break loose slabs of rock. I think it is also behind stuff like pot holes in roads.
Dozers, take two:
Make them hybrid electrics, or just electric. Provide power via oxygen/methane generators, or nuke power. Or would an oxygen/methane generator be to inefficient to be up-scalled or used in groups to produce sufficient energy to compare to at least a several hundred horsepower diesel engine?
Maybe some sort of dozer (or other 'utility') like vehicle that is like a train, multiple wheeled or tracked 'pusher' vehicles, for maximum traction, helping to push the main vehicle. The pusher vehicles could include ASRGs and such for both weight and power. Or 'reverse' it for pulling heavy loads...
Don't need to win any races, maybe just something that is a multiple purpose system for moving heavy stuff, be they rocks or large pieces of equipment.
Drilling and explosives, take two.
Isn't placing explosives into small holes supposed to maximum how much force is applied to rock while using as little explosives as possible?
I know with doing it the not so effective way, you can just pile up explosives, and do things like make cement trucks 'vanish' and not crack much rock.
Could locally sourced elements be used to make effective explosives needed just for 'difficult' jobs?
Would thermal shock be usable, applying something like thermite to the usually 'freezing cold' rocks?
Boring machines, take two.
As I said, adapting them to a much smaller design.
Don't need to make a Chunnel or anything, just a few small scale machines, maybe each no wider than a minivan, working side by side, to deal with spots that can't just have rocks pushed aside. Locally sourced metals and recycling used drill heads. Again, less about winning races and more about being a possible option.
Jackhammers via steam power?
Like a steam powered bunker pile or whatever the are called. Not fast, but better than nothing. Just need to keep a supply of spare water and pile bunker rods on hand, and recycle used ones to make new ones. A long term goal at best. Could either be done with building up steam pressure for a single 'shot' at a time, or use a basic steam engine driving some sort of hydraulic/pneumatic system for a handle held system, or directly via mechanical energy for a vehicle mounted system?
Not that any of it matters beyond trying to approach problems from different angles. (it gives me something 'creative' to do...)
Just sticking with something like NASA's ATHLETE concept kind of makes much of it a moot point anyways... (the whole 'go around/over rather than through' thing...)
Random stray idea for smelting.
Adapting hydrogen/oxygen based 'rockets engines'. Just need to figure out how to recapture the 'exhaust' and condense it back down for another run through a separator... well, more crazy then practical, but it's an idea for the 'out of the box' point of view.
Would using the same basic components used for making structures, be adaptable to make small bridges or short raised roadways over terrain features that would otherwise require heavy equipment and a lot of time to move/fill/overcome? Such as terrain features that would require a very long time to make a detour to go around?
-
I was trying to think outside of the box, with a basic idea to adapt stuff where needed.
Not simply taking something from Earth, and ship it to Mars.
Also, going 'steam punk' has come to mind...
Would it be possible to adapt steam engines, using an enclosed system to minimize water loss, to drive generators for a nuclear power source? It seems like it might be useful as an easier to make and maintain option to steam turbines. At least for building nuclear reactors locally on Mars until more complex and precise stuff can be reliably made.
Would a basic steam engine of small size be a viable source of mechanical energy, or be enough to power generators for at least 'hand held' tools, maybe using something similar to a hydraulic of pneumatic system? Or would those be impractical on Mars and make mainly electrical systems a better choice?
Steam tools would probably not be viable, but pneumatic ones probably would work. The nuclear power sources probably will use gas turbines/Stirlings not steam
Water expands when it freezes. If I am not mistaken, that was applied in stone quarries in ancient times to help break loose slabs of rock. I think it is also behind stuff like pot holes in roads.
As I said, it was possible, but water and the manpower to do it on a large scale will be in short suppy
Dozers, take two:
Make them hybrid electrics, or just electric. Provide power via oxygen/methane generators, or nuke power. Or would an oxygen/methane generator be to inefficient to be up-scalled or used in groups to produce sufficient energy to compare to at least a several hundred horsepower diesel engine?
Maybe some sort of dozer (or other 'utility') like vehicle that is like a train, multiple wheeled or tracked 'pusher' vehicles, for maximum traction, helping to push the main vehicle. The pusher vehicles could include ASRGs and such for both weight and power. Or 'reverse' it for pulling heavy loads...
Don't need to win any races, maybe just something that is a multiple purpose system for moving heavy stuff, be they rocks or large pieces of equipment.
The power source to me was always a minor consideration next to the problem of transporting it to mars when it is going to have to weigh so much
Drilling and explosives, take two.
Isn't placing explosives into small holes supposed to maximum how much force is applied to rock while using as little explosives as possible?
I know with doing it the not so effective way, you can just pile up explosives, and do things like make cement trucks 'vanish' and not crack much rock.
Could locally sourced elements be used to make effective explosives needed just for 'difficult' jobs?
Would thermal shock be usable, applying something like thermite to the usually 'freezing cold' rocks?
I dont think thermal shock would work, and I assumed that they would use the drill/detonate method already since there is no way to pile explosives on top of rock and get the desired effect.
Boring machines, take two.
As I said, adapting them to a much smaller design.
Don't need to make a Chunnel or anything, just a few small scale machines, maybe each no wider than a minivan, working side by side, to deal with spots that can't just have rocks pushed aside. Locally sourced metals and recycling used drill heads. Again, less about winning races and more about being a possible option.
Once again possible, but not viable in the near term
Jackhammers via steam power?
Like a steam powered bunker pile or whatever the are called. Not fast, but better than nothing. Just need to keep a supply of spare water and pile bunker rods on hand, and recycle used ones to make new ones. A long term goal at best. Could either be done with building up steam pressure for a single 'shot' at a time, or use a basic steam engine driving some sort of hydraulic/pneumatic system for a handle held system, or directly via mechanical energy for a vehicle mounted system?
There is no reason a giant thumper machine could not be built that breaks rocks up, but it is just impractical for small colonies to be expected to source the hundred tons of metals and the like.
Not that any of it matters beyond trying to approach problems from different angles. (it gives me something 'creative' to do...)
Just sticking with something like NASA's ATHLETE concept kind of makes much of it a moot point anyways... (the whole 'go around/over rather than through' thing...)
Random stray idea for smelting.
Adapting hydrogen/oxygen based 'rockets engines'. Just need to figure out how to recapture the 'exhaust' and condense it back down for another run through a separator... well, more crazy then practical, but it's an idea for the 'out of the box' point of view.
In order for rocket engines to work, the propellent must exhaust outside of a vehicle. It can not be recaptured without it pushing the vehicle down as hard as it is pushing it up.
Would using the same basic components used for making structures, be adaptable to make small bridges or short raised roadways over terrain features that would otherwise require heavy equipment and a lot of time to move/fill/overcome? Such as terrain features that would require a very long time to make a detour to go around?
I am certain for some of them, but remember some of the terrain features are like grand canyon times 5 and make mount Everest look like a pile of dirt. /color]
-
With the progress being made on 3D Printing technology (some variations could make even food or medicines), it seems like a lot of needed components would be able to be produced locally. All that is needed is to get the resources, the main of which would be whatever would be used for the framework/structure of any 'heavy duty' vehicles. That would minimize what needs to be shipped from Earth to any rare elements or more specialized components that cannot be acquired/produced on Mars.
I am guessing a giant 'condenser coil' for rocket exhaust is out of the question. What of many tiny 'burners' focused on a central unit, with a 'space' separating the burners from the walls of whatever container the to be heated materials are in, with some sort of condenser system and pressure relief valves to try and recapture at least some of the 'exhaust'? But I guess I am straying more into the realm of 'mad scientist' (again)
It is to bad steam might not be viable for use on Mars.
I wonder if modern developments for submarines (be they diesel-electric, nuclear, or air-independent) would be of much use on Mars outside of helping to house lots of people in small places for extended periods of time.
-
With the progress being made on 3D Printing technology (some variations could make even food or medicines), it seems like a lot of needed components would be able to be produced locally. All that is needed is to get the resources, the main of which would be whatever would be used for the framework/structure of any 'heavy duty' vehicles. That would minimize what needs to be shipped from Earth to any rare elements or more specialized components that cannot be acquired/produced on Mars.
That is a far more likely scenario, but still, do you have any idea on how to find a large source of iron ore, break it loose, transport it, smelt it, and create steel on mars? I admit they will probably do it before long, but do you really think they will do it to any volume. A 10 kilo block of steel will not cut it, we are talking blocks of steel weighing several metric tons. Even if they can print them in those shapes do you really think people on mars even with the nice reduction in gravity can machine assemble and machine things like that in a frontier environment? Sure after they have a sizable industrial base, but not until then.
I am guessing a giant 'condenser coil' for rocket exhaust is out of the question. What of many tiny 'burners' focused on a central unit, with a 'space' separating the burners from the walls of whatever container the to be heated materials are in, with some sort of condenser system and pressure relief valves to try and recapture at least some of the 'exhaust'? But I guess I am straying more into the realm of 'mad scientist' (again)
Sorry, no, physics still applies and any capture will cause loss of propulsion. In order for the exhaust gasses to be collected, they would have to be collected after the atmosphere or the planet has dissipated their inertia and energy.
It is to bad steam might not be viable for use on Mars.
Not sad at all, it changes very little, and it is viable, just not in the ways you mentioned yet.
I wonder if modern developments for submarines (be they diesel-electric, nuclear, or air-independent) would be of much use on Mars outside of helping to house lots of people in small places for extended periods of time.
Certainly some, just as modern space exploration has helped create submarines that are able to run longer, quieter, faster, with more crew if desired. When you brighten the light of science anywhere, it brightens it everywhere.
-
I am guessing using things like carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes or honeycomb based structures (with 'filler' material in the honeycomb spaces?) won't be of much help in terms of getting as much structural strength as possible for as little refined/processed material as possible.
At least stuff like the Lunar Electric Rover/Space Exploration Vehicle based design being made of many 3D printed parts will at least mean there will be an option for flexible vehicle designs, even if they might not be suited for any serious heavy duty work.
Speaking of which, an interesting article on that subject.
http://www.shapeways.com/blog/archives/1686-mars-rover-runs-on-3d-printed-parts.html (http://www.shapeways.com/blog/archives/1686-mars-rover-runs-on-3d-printed-parts.html)
Could materials like ABS or PCABS (whatever those are) or polycarbonate be something that could be made/produced on Mars? Or if there might otherwise be Mars produced equivalents of said materials useful for 3D printing? Such as algae based plastics could be used for 3D printing?
If something like ceramet (proper term for metal fused into ceramic?) were possible, would it also be possible to use some sort of plastic/polymer based material as a binding agent for some sort of ceramic that is powdered, mixed with the polymer and then pressed/cooked into its final form?
I still have to think about the potential of what all could be shipped to Mars if the Constellation project were a major aspect for the in game Mars colonization effort. (even if just for the initial main base setup and so have little direct affect on what players can do).
Like if the cargo landers (even smaller ones) could be made of useful materials that could be later tore down and recycled for said materials.
Edit:
For the hydrogen/oxygen rocket idea. It was not for propulsion, but as an alternative for heating up a smelter system, so 'propulsion' is not the goal, heat is. That is why I was talking about re-capturing the exhaust, since I heard the 'waste' from a liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen rocket is supposed to be water.
On the subject of rocket engines. Would it be possible for a lander to have, or include, engines that use liquid hydrogen/oxygen? So that they could be refueled using locally produced hydrogen/oxygen? To either be used to help ship smaller payloads (samples and such) back to Earth (or to get them into orbit to meet up with a craft heading back to Earth), or to otherwise 'remove and reuse' said rocket motors to make a basic rocket to deploy a small payload like a Mars made satellite into orbit?
-
Smelting using oxygen / gas might not be the way to go there. Oxygen will be super premium gold on Mars so I see electric cookers with no oxygen since lack of oxygen would create a more pure product.
Most likely we wont use hydrogen. Methane / Oxygen would be the way to go since it wont be as dangerous and methane will be easier to make in the quantity we need.
Have a look at Dr Zubrin and the Mars Direct story.
-
Although I do think a 3D printer will make the journey to mars, I want to remind you that the 3D printer NASA used weighed 3 tons, without the generating system, environment system, or thermoplastic.
To ship one of these to mars means the habitat needs to be built strong enough to support the weight of this during transit and shipment (3 tons becomes 30 tons during liftoff)
It has to have an environment system to screen out the gasses that are produced, plus dissipate the massive heat load.
It will also need a significant source of power... About 10KW to run for an hour.. That power will have to be perfectly pure and without interruption at 230 volts. On mars, that would mean you would need a ton of solar panels charging a battery system for 10 hours to run it for one. (the weight for a system that produces about 1KW on mars would be a little over a metric ton.) And it will need to run for many hours for some parts. The weight of 100KWH of lithium ion batteries is about a metric ton, maybe a little less. Not terrible, but still significant.
Now I am not saying any of this is a deal breaker, because it is not... But... Just some challenges that need to be considered, and why early visits to mars will maybe not have the capability.
-
Edit:
For the hydrogen/oxygen rocket idea. It was not for propulsion, but as an alternative for heating up a smelter system, so 'propulsion' is not the goal, heat is. That is why I was talking about re-capturing the exhaust, since I heard the 'waste' from a liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen rocket is supposed to be water.
Ahh, I did not realize that. No, Smelting will probably be done via inductance or resistive heating. Almost certainly inductance.
On the subject of rocket engines. Would it be possible for a lander to have, or include, engines that use liquid hydrogen/oxygen? So that they could be refueled using locally produced hydrogen/oxygen? To either be used to help ship smaller payloads (samples and such) back to Earth (or to get them into orbit to meet up with a craft heading back to Earth), or to otherwise 'remove and reuse' said rocket motors to make a basic rocket to deploy a small payload like a Mars made satellite into orbit?
They would probably use liquid methane because it has a higher energy density for hydrogen. (Which is extremely rare on mars) Other than that, the extreme labor requirement to remove a rocket engine would prevent it, but there is no reason a single stage vehicle could not be built on mars with it's significantly lower gravity. So.. The lander could go back into orbit.
The labor requirements would be to hook all these connections up perfectly after mating the engine to a new body. It would be hard work and the engines are heavy.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/XLR-99_Rocket_Engine_USAF.jpg
-
Since less effective sunlight reaches Mars than Earth would it be feasible to utilize some sort of solar heating system to assist with smelting?
Basically like with some solar power systems that use a whole bunch of sun tracking mirrors to focus sunlight on a central tower, except rather than power, it would be used for extra heat generation.
When not used for heating, perhaps it could be used to heat molten sodium for power generation purposes, which has been done before by solar power plants in the past.
The biggest down side I can think of is getting all the equipment/materials to Mars in the first place. But maybe (a really big maybe) a small scale system might allow making things a little easier with some very small scale smelting?
Or perhaps some sort of 'nuclear heat pile' for smelting stuff with lower melting points (depending on how hot iridium clad plutonium fuel pellets or similar can get without melting other stuff, anyways).
Back to one thing I mentioned a little bit ago, in case it got missed.
Would it be possible for landers, ones just used to get stuff to Mars and be 'unused' afterward, to be made of parts/materials that could be reused, repurposed or otherwise recycled for useful materials?
-
The effective watts per square meter on Mars is less than half that of earth so it would take many panels to produce the power you speak of. Mirrors would be difficult not for the mirror but the support equipment to hold them and it would take lots. Sandia labs in New Mexico have a working system http://energy.sandia.gov/?page_id=1267
As for using materials that get sent there yes. Matter of fact the design of the landing craft would most certainly be built with that in mind.
-
Would parabolic dishes using a collection of hybrid photovoltaic cells/mirrors focusing light onto an RSG unit be possible? Like a satellite dish as far as basic design, except it would be an RSG system instead of a receiver/transceiver at the end. Or maybe some closed system that heats up a liquid medium that is transferred to an RSG at the base that then feeds the cooler liquid back to the receiver setup.
Just need to keep the dish aimed at the sun, not having to try to keep dozens or hundreds of mirrors focused on a single static point.
To stray toward some inspiration of the old game Outpost...
To drift a little toward the realm of 'sci-fi', park a huge solar satellite in geo-synchronous orbit that transmits energy to the surface via something like a microwave beam or some such thing to a collection/array of ground based receivers (so it doesn't need to be 'to' accurate...)
Maybe if we are lucky, someone will figure out how to make a Tokamak (right name?) that can maintain a stable fusion reaction (or at least last long enough to generate more power than is needed to start it), by 2030... then we could just toss fusion power in as a late/end game goal to research/construct...
I also wonder if the 'cargo lander' from the now scrapped Constellation Mars mission concept would be capable of carrying along something like a small nuclear reactor... if they make reactors and the supporting equipment small enough that is...
-
If you read the docs you find that the RSG = Radio Isotope Decay Stirling Generator. So the radioactive part supplies the heat for one side of the stirling engine and Mars supplies the cold side. The generator is single piston shuttle and there are 4 cylinders per unit. Should produce one kilowatt of power per unit.
-
Oops, my bad, I didn't mean an actual RSG. (I think I was a bit tired at the time of making that last post...)
I meant just a Stirling Generator for the solar power. The issue being getting the heat to the Stirling Generator. I am under the impression the Stirling Engine system might cause some vibration issues for the dish itself if it were directly mounted on the 'A frame' of the parabolic dish and be the direct focus point of the sunlight, due to a video I saw on how fast the piston can move in an ASRG. Otherwise I might have suggested fitting it directly on the dish. Would an 'A frame' be able to have properly insulated/padded mountings to keep vibrations/movement of a Stirling Engine from causing much movement in a parabolic dish?
I also wonder if a Thermal-electric Generator would fit anywhere in the mix, such as in the radiator system that would be the 'cold side' of the system, just to squeeze out as much power as power out of the system...
-
The solid state ones are absolute garbage for efficiency. Hence why Stirling is used instead.
-
Again a radioisotope decay system is much more efficient and will supply plenty of heat for the stirling engine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_radioisotope_generator
The unit in the game is a 4 cylinder linear shuttle engine, requires little maintenance and should generate 1kw each.
-
Hm, I was wondering far as the base goes, and I read through the whole thread and like all the ideas here. But I am curious about worker outposts that are like the base but more like geological work station or archaeological dig sites that have a direct communications uplink to the main base and can be edited to have necessary items like an ELS room, refuel station, cold storage. Look at the science outpost in Antarctica, the major bases are there yes, but there are smaller outposts that have to be build for dive teams, geological teams, wildlife survey crews and the like. So I was wondering if there will be outposts or secondary bases or research stations.
With the Base building in general, I like the idea of how Star Wars Galaxies did it, but maybe top down would be easier than anything else since coding the game so that you'd have to set the base up part by part would take a long time and could get filled with bugs, not to mention be a tedious process in getting that to work. So I am all for the Top down 2d format. Just don't do the cheesy"Island Survival" style. (For those who haven't played that, building something means a stick in the ground with a little square and smashing your hand at it.)
-
The top down 2d approach seems to be the most viable at this time. Once the decision is made where to build the game has to restrict access to that area so we don't build it on top of a player or other equipment so some sort of bound box need put in place.
-
Good idea to do that as it would really suck to get force stuck because someone wanted to troll and build something on top of you from 200 feet away or not be able to get access to important equipment due to someone doing the same thing as stated. Maybe only people of specific rank should be allowed to build? Or only the server owner/appointed moderators with Ban/Build/Lock/Unlock permissions? Seems like a bad idea if anyone who pops in could build/access any system. Will buildings have a smart system of any kind so only appointed personnel would be allowed into specific areas?
-
We have had the discussion before on how to treat Players. Server player is GOD and they will have the tools to kick someone or restrict them somewhat but for the most part the game has to be unrestricted for movement.
Building over a spawn point will be handled at spawn time with a simple check.
-
Something that could work for smelting is an induction furnace with it's own dedicated battery bank. Running on RTGs and solar means it could only be used every few days i suppose...
-
Well.. If it was a small enough volume it would be able to be ran quite often, just would not be able to produce much.
-
This might be one of those "buy extra generators/battery" routines. Looking into such ideas now.
The new version allows base units to be added and I am considering making the parts something to buy as well. Might do a bare minimum that comes with the module and leave extra equipment up to the user.
-
I think parts would be a nice thing to be able to buy even if only to have spares on hand for emergencies. Though some sort of storage rack would be good to keep the base from getting junk left all over the floor.
-
Problem with capitol equipment is the size is greater than a user can carry or move easily. Storage yes, plans in the works for shelves.