Type T/ST variant planet types

Discussions about Cosmic Starfire.

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
Cosmic Starfire is being designed by Fred Burton (aka 'Crucis'). Please direct all inquiries to him.

1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Try to stick with the forum's topic. Threads that belong to another forum will be moved to that forum.

Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby Crucis on Sun 09 Dec 2012 17:29

Here's the split off thread, as promised.

Let me start by restating my ideas about T/ST variant planet types, so that we can move on from there...

BTW, pardon me for having a little fun with the font size and colors with the variant type titles... ;)


Desert/Arid Planets: This is a very dry Type T/ST planet. The planet does possess an O-N atmosphere, but possesses a very limited hydrosphere. It is a habitable, but not capable of supporting an overly large population. Call it Type A for Arid. Mass 2 Type A planets would be automatically Harsh environments for T races and Hostile for ST races. And vice-versa, Mass 3 Type A planets would be automatically Hostile for T races and Harsh for ST races.

NOTE: I’m not so sure that this is the right way to handle these planets. I don’t think that the environments are all THAT difficult. It's just that the real problem is a lack of water, which would limit populations, perhaps to Settlement level.

There is limited indigenous life and no intelligent life (i.e. no native NPR’s).
These are direct replacements for T/ST planets, but not for Tidelocked Type M planets.


Water Worlds: Type W/SW? O/SO? W for Water/SW for Super-Water. Or Type O for Ocean and SO for Super-Ocean.

These worlds have extremely high percentage of the planet’s surface covered with oceans with dry land limited to islands and archipelagoes. These worlds have excellent O-N atmospheres, though very much on the humid side. Type S/SW worlds are teaming with indigenous life, most of which is either aquatic or amphibian. And intelligent life is possible, so NPR’s are possible.

O/SO races would find Type A worlds Hostile, if not downright Desolate to the dryness of the atmosphere, etc.
Because dry land is limited, populations are limited on Water worlds to a maximum level of Medium.

These are direct replacements for T/ST planets, but not for Tidelocked Type M planets.


Glacial Planets: This type might be possible, but they should only exist right on the outer boundary of the HZ, which makes them a bit too tightly rare and complex to deal with. Native life would seem to only exist deep in the oceans or in some more temperate zones near the equator. NPR’s might be possible, I suppose. These worlds would probably be considered Hostile for T/ST races, though perhaps Harsh for mass 2 glacials for T races or for mass 3 glacials for ST races.

Were Glacial World NPR’s to exist (Code unknown), they’d find Arid/Desert planets Hostile or Desolate, usually due to the heat. They might also find Ocean/Water planets Harsh, also due to the heat. Not so sure about T/ST’s. T/ST's would probably bee seen more favorably since most would have their cooler regions that races from glacial worlds find more palatable, not to mention glaciers and arctic regions, if the colonists really wanted a taste of their ice-covered homeworlds. (Of course, they might also see equatorial jungles on T/ST's as some sort of "green hell".)

Possible Codes: Type A for Arctic (but then Arid worlds would need to change their code to perhaps D for Desert). I suppose that Type GL would be possible, but some wise-arse might think that they were Green Lantern planets.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby AlexeiTimoshenko on Sun 09 Dec 2012 20:24

I think we need 3 temperature and at least wet/dry for hydrosphere to cover the variant planet types. In my opinion the 4 types laid out would be as follows.

Deserts would be Hot/Dry. Death Valley or the Sahara would be good examples.

Arid would be Temperate/Dry. I'm thinking of the southern Great Plains, say North Texas.

Ocean would be Temperate/Wet.

Glacial would be Cold/Wet.

In addition I would add the following.

Jungle would be Hot/Wet. Think of the Amazon in Eastern Brazil. The idea here is plenty of water but mostly shallow seas with limited deep ocean areas.

Tundra would be Cold/Dry. I'm thinking of the interior of Antarctica where it is effectively a desert due to the lack of precipitation.

For comparison I'm think of Earth overall being Temperate with normal precipitation. I'm taking my ideas from Civ3 where a player could alter the parameters of the game at the start.
Charles Rosenberg.

Alexei Timoshenko is the name of my protagonist in the fanfics, although I wish it could have been me.
AlexeiTimoshenko
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010 21:16
Location: Baltimore MD

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby Crucis on Sun 09 Dec 2012 20:47

AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:I think we need 3 temperature and at least wet/dry for hydrosphere to cover the variant planet types. In my opinion the 4 types laid out would be as follows.

Deserts would be Hot/Dry. Death Valley or the Sahara would be good examples.

Arid would be Temperate/Dry. I'm thinking of the southern Great Plains, say North Texas.

Ocean would be Temperate/Wet.

Glacial would be Cold/Wet.

In addition I would add the following.

Jungle would be Hot/Wet. Think of the Amazon in Eastern Brazil. The idea here is plenty of water but mostly shallow seas with limited deep ocean areas.

Tundra would be Cold/Dry. I'm thinking of the interior of Antarctica where it is effectively a desert due to the lack of precipitation.

For comparison I'm think of Earth overall being Temperate with normal precipitation. I'm taking my ideas from Civ3 where a player could alter the parameters of the game at the start.


Alexei, I'm wary of going beyond 4 variants. I don't want to over-complicate things here. Even with 4 variants, it'll be somewhat more complicated, but I'm hoping that the extra flavor will be worth that small amount of detail.

What I might do is split the HZ's into 3 zones: hot, temperate, and cold. But there's no absolute guarantee that being in the cold part of the HZ will mean that the world is glacial. I'm going to assume that orbits are a little fuzzy in their distance values, just as HZ boundaries are a bit fuzzy due to the complexity of defining "habitable zone".

For example, take the Yellow Star HZ: 6-12 LM. The warm zone of the HZ might be from 5-6 LM (yes, 5 not 6) and the cool zone of the HZ might be from 12-13 LM. (Hmmm, this sounds complicated even as I'm thinking of it.) Planets in those regions would be "Hot" and "cold" T/ST variants. In the temperate middle, you'd probably just have to do a die roll. Say 1-2 on a d10 is a water world, 9-10 is an Arid World, and 3-8 is a standard T/ST.

This model is one where the 4 variants are strictly hot, cold, wet and dry. In a model with hot/wet, hot/dry, etc. it'd be more complex. You'd almost want to end up with 8 variants that wrap around the central standard T/ST at the center. Or maybe it's 6.

This is getting tricky.. :?
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby AlexeiTimoshenko on Sun 09 Dec 2012 21:37

I would limit the HZ zone split to yellow, green and white stars. Orange and red have too narrow a HZ to make a split easy. With split HZ's, my oddities shouldn't be hard to implement. Using your example 1-2 would be wet, 3-8 normal and 9-10 dry. An example of a Cold/Normal world might be Sphinx in the Honorverse or Beaufort in Starfire. Hot/Dry would be Kalizwah.

As I'm envisioning things there would be a 3x3 matrix of climate types possible. Under this system the climate you roll becomes your base habitability value. You can change one value by one step (say hot to temperate) and still be benign. Changing one value by 2 steps or two values by 1 step each makes a world harsh. Changing by a total of 3 steps makes a world hostile. Changing by 4 steps (opposing corners on the matrix) makes a world marginal. Mass change counts as a step, so a corner Type T planet would have a 5 step change if it found an opposing corner ST. I would consider a 5 step change to be uninhabitable.

With the above system, you get variability and can eliminate the HI die roll.
Charles Rosenberg.

Alexei Timoshenko is the name of my protagonist in the fanfics, although I wish it could have been me.
AlexeiTimoshenko
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010 21:16
Location: Baltimore MD

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby Crucis on Sun 09 Dec 2012 21:58

AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:I would limit the HZ zone split to yellow, green and white stars. Orange and red have too narrow a HZ to make a split easy. With split HZ's, my oddities shouldn't be hard to implement. Using your example 1-2 would be wet, 3-8 normal and 9-10 dry. An example of a Cold/Normal world might be Sphinx in the Honorverse or Beaufort in Starfire. Hot/Dry would be Kalizwah.

As I'm envisioning things there would be a 3x3 matrix of climate types possible. Under this system the climate you roll becomes your base habitability value. You can change one value by one step (say hot to temperate) and still be benign. Changing one value by 2 steps or two values by 1 step each makes a world harsh. Changing by a total of 3 steps makes a world hostile. Changing by 4 steps (opposing corners on the matrix) makes a world marginal. Mass change counts as a step, so a corner Type T planet would have a 5 step change if it found an opposing corner ST. I would consider a 5 step change to be uninhabitable.

With the above system, you get variability and can eliminate the HI die roll.


No, I don't see the HI/HD thing going away because there are a number of factors that aren't covered in this T/ST variant thing, like gravity, chiralty, atmospheric stuff, and so forth.

And honestly, I'd rather avoid a 3x3 matrix. it's just too much. 6 variants is already making me nervous. I'd be happier with only 4.

As for Orange stars, their HZ is now 3-6, not 3-5, according to my recalculations. And that doesn't factor in the fuzzyness factor for HZ edges for hot and cold boundary types. That said, as I pointed out before, the inner boundary of Orange stars is within the TLZ and thus will have Type M planets, and Type M planets do not variants. (Type M planets cover a number of scenarios. This one could be the tidelocked planet.)
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby AlexeiTimoshenko on Mon 10 Dec 2012 05:00

Orange stars would have temperate and cool zones as their hot zone is tidelocked. Red stars would only have cool zones.

Crucis wrote:No, I don't see the HI/HD thing going away because there are a number of factors that aren't covered in this T/ST variant thing, like gravity, chiralty, atmospheric stuff, and so forth.


I hadn't considered the other factors. Adding in HI/HD does make the matrix a bit complicated,
Charles Rosenberg.

Alexei Timoshenko is the name of my protagonist in the fanfics, although I wish it could have been me.
AlexeiTimoshenko
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010 21:16
Location: Baltimore MD

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby Crucis on Mon 10 Dec 2012 06:39

AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:Orange stars would have temperate and cool zones as their hot zone is tidelocked. Red stars would only have cool zones.


No, Red Stars with an HZ of 2-3 LM and a TLZ of 1-3 LM would only have tidelocked, Type M planets, which aren't subject to T/ST variation. Wait a sec, I could see where one might think that there was a cool zone at 4 LM, just outside the HZ and TLZ. However, it's also the final LM of the Outer Rocky Zone as well, since Red Stars' Rocky Zone is 1-4 LM.

Oh ... wait another sec.

I just did some research on the "frost line", and it appears that the rocky-gas zone boundaries used previously in the PFZ tables, not to mention my recalculated ones were too close to the stars. Sol's frost line is at about 4.2 AU, i.e. 34.9 LM. I think that the Rocky/Gas Zone boundaries are going to be sliding outward quite a bit, according to my newly recalculated numbers. It looks like the Red Star's Rocky Zone is going to be 1-8 LM rather than the 1-4 LM I had originally recalc'd it to be or the 1-5 used in the ISF tables.

By this, it is possible that even though the HZ of 2-3 would still be within the TLZ, the fuzzy part of the cool zone at 4 LM doesn't eat up all of the Outer Rocky Zone now for Red Stars. So I suppose that it's possible that there could indeed be a 1 LM wide zone (at 4 LM) for cool T/ST variant worlds. And from some analysis I did earlier, the fact that 4 LM's regularly occurs in the 1st orbit of the TB table means that it would provide Red Stars with plenty of cool zone Glacial planets. Interesting.

EDIT: Well, it seems like I got sucked in by some sort of Wikipedia error. The 4.2 AU number I stated above may be the correct distance where the Frost Line might reside today. But at the time that the planets were forming billions of years ago, the sun was much less luminous (about 40% less from what I can deduce) and thus, the Frost Line at THAT time was around 2.7 AU, which is what most other sources seem to go with, since the Frost Line really only matters at the time of planetary formation.

Anyways, I've recalc'd once again, using luminosities reduced by 40% and using the 150K Frost Line number, and the result was quite interesting! The Rocky/Gas Zone boundary returned almost exactly to where it was before I started this exercise.

And for the purposes of your original point, Alexei, about cool HZ zone and Red Stars, the difference between my original R/G boundary and the 2nd re-calc'd version was slight, but significant. The boundary went from 4.95 LM to 5.13 LM, which the way I do the PFZ's means that the Red Star's Rocky Zone changed from being 1-4 to 1-5 LM. When I have a fractional boundary value, which is nearly always, the outer edge of the Rocky Zone is is FRD and the inner edge of the Gas Zone is FRU. In this case, the ever so slight increase of 0.18 LM pushed the boundary just enough to make a change in the whole number values.

As for whether Red Stars should have a narrow "cool HZ" for cold T/ST variants at 4 LM, I'm undecided. 4 LM is just outside the TLZ, so that's not an issue. My concern is that if I do allow it, I'd be giving half of the 2 LM wide Outer Rocky Zone for Red Stars to the HZ, and about 38% of all TB rows have an orbit of 4 LM, meaning that the number of Glacial worlds would go up significantly. I'll have to think about it.



Crucis wrote:No, I don't see the HI/HD thing going away because there are a number of factors that aren't covered in this T/ST variant thing, like gravity, chiralty, atmospheric stuff, and so forth.


I hadn't considered the other factors. Adding in HI/HD does make the matrix a bit complicated,


maybe yes, maybe no.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby Crucis on Mon 10 Dec 2012 15:23

I'm starting a detailed Habitable Worlds Analysis of this T/ST variant planet types for just hot and cold, assuming the +1/-1 LM to the HZ. I'm not done yet, and it's looking bad ... really bad. It increased the average number of habitable planets per star system from 0.82 to 1.03, which is huge and NOT good.

So, this leaves only 2 primary means of fixing this problem.

1. Get rid of the fuzzy 1 LM extensions to the HZ on either side for most star types. This would obviously fix the problem completely since the increase in # of HW's is entirely due to wider effective HZ's. But would also nuke the numbers for the hot and cold worlds as well.

2. Reduce the numbers of White, Green, Yellow, Orange, and Red Stars and replace them with Red Dwarf stars. RD's have no habitable planets and the fuzzy HZ's don't help them any. (But the Red Stars made out like bandits due to the fuzzy extension of their HZ to 4 LM...)

And there's a third option that's a little more difficult to quantify without doing another Hab Worlds Analysis...

3. Change the TB tables. This new TB table idea is probably fine without these fuzzy extensions. But with them in place, the number of hab worlds created for Yellow (at 5 LM), orange (at 7 LM), and particularly Red Stars (at 4 LM) is crazy because those numbers show up a LOT in the new TB table due to the nature of its construction. Red Stars were getting another HW every time a 1st orbit was 4 LM, which was 25% of the time. And 5's and 7's regularly showed up quite often as well. Orbits greater than 9-10 showed far more rarely, which is why Green stars didn't get nearly as much benefit, and Yellow stars didn't get many hits for cold HW's. The big winners did well because their numbers were regularly in the first 2 orbits, which weren't calculated, but pre-assigned within the TB model.

More work needs to be done here, if this concept has any chance of being used.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby Crucis on Mon 10 Dec 2012 17:30

And as a further addendum to the discussion as it relates to Red Stars, it should be noted that the Red Star planetary formation zones and its HZ are somewhat inflated. The Star types White thru Orange are all averaged based on the spectral subclass "5" of each type, i.e. A5, F5, G5, and K5. However, the two Red classes were not. Red Stars are M0-M4 and Red Dwarfs are M5-M9, and their zones were created using the most generous sub types. In reality, I should really use M2 and M7, rather than M0 and M5., in which case the PFZ's for Red and Red Dwarf would look like this:

Red Star (based on M2)
Rocky Zone: 1-2
TLZ: 1-3
HZ: 1
Gas Zone: 3-12
Ice Zone: 13-174

Red Dwarf (based on M7)
Rocky Zone: none
TLZ: 1-2
HZ: none
Gas Zone: 1-2
Ice Zone: 3-108

NOTE: In reality, the rocky zone of an M7 would exist out to about 0.45 LM, and its HZ between 0.15-0.31 LM. But seeing as how Starfire needs to work in whole number values for the sake of simplicity in the sysgen process, orbital values of less than 1 LM must be ignored as a general rule.

NOTE 2: The above TLZ's extend into the Gas Zone. This really doesn't have any effect on the game, at least as long as unusual races aren't used. (If they are, I haven't a clue how they'd affect things.) It doesn't affect moon types.



And for what it's worth, I just reran the HW analysis with Red Stars only having an HZ of 1 (tidelocked, no fuzzy extension to 2, since it would be TL'd as well), and it did reduce numbers significantly ... by about 50%, but that's still about 50% too high. There's more work to be done.
User avatar
Crucis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27

Re: Type T/ST variant planet types

Postby AlexeiTimoshenko on Mon 10 Dec 2012 19:02

From the calculations it looks like Red stars can't have habitable T worlds. Glacial ST's may in theory be possible as a larger planet should have more internal heat from radioactive decay along with a dense enough atmosphere to have a substantial greenhouse effect.

For Yellow, Green and White stars I would use the inner 20% of the HZ as warm, and the outer 20% as cold. Use the actual HZ's, no fuzzy versions. Orange would have a cold zone at 6 LM and no warm zone at it would be in the tidelock zone.
Charles Rosenberg.

Alexei Timoshenko is the name of my protagonist in the fanfics, although I wish it could have been me.
AlexeiTimoshenko
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010 21:16
Location: Baltimore MD

Next

Return to Cosmic Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron