Terraforming as a Trade Classification

[DaltonCalford]

The number of comments about small worlds not being able to maintain an atmosphere or that a particular combination would never NATURALLY occur, has led me to think that such a thing, although not natural, could occur in a sci-fi setting due to terraforming or high tech chicanery that was applied at some time in the past or is currently being applied.

Now, that being said, such a world would have special requirements for maintaining it's situation and means that their would be a profitable business supplying such a world -should those world not have their own trade code and a means of dealing with it in the trade and commerce rules?

Although the game mechanics do have a means of generating such worlds, they should have an effect upon the type of life found there (in the creature generation rules) as well as upon the trade rules.

A few people also state that the tech level on some of the generated worlds is too low to be terraformed, but, I always remember Traveller tech levels as not being the maximum tech found on the planet, but the average tech able to be manufactured on the planet, unless the world was interdicted by the scouts in which case it was the maximum tech.

The comment "Average Tech" means that higher tech items can be built upon the world, but they where very expensive - check out book 8 Robots for building with a higher tech item. Lower tech on a planet is a given as only the industrial worlds would have factories of the same tech covering the entire surface.

So a terraformed world, may only have the capability of manufacturing lower tech items, but look around your house - you may have a plasma tv, computers and all the rest of the items from a high tech society, but, do you have the equipment to build any of that stuff even if you knew how to?

Just because the tech level says 1 does not mean everyone is running around in leathers and furs - it just means that they do not make things locally.

just my 2c worth

best regards

Dalton

 

[Zowy]

It seems to me terraforming a small world by droping chunks of water/gas asteroids on it might work short term, i.e. 1,000 - 10,000 years dependiong on how fast the atmosphere would bleed away of due to low G. Would work even better on worlds that have lots of permafrost gas/water that you could melt once you got a basic greenhouse effetct going, with industral / biological methods. If you can get the worlds tempature high enough, you might even make it a nice place for 50,000+ years.

But how long would it take and how much would it cost? Who is going to pay for it?

 

[EDG]

Terraforming's generally been a TL 15+ thing in the OTU, so it's not really an option for that setting since most planets are less than TL 15. Plus, there'd have to be a vast amount of planets that have active terraforming still going on in order to be viable.

I think the solution really is to just not generate planets that are too small to hold onto breathable atmospheres like that, and the modifications I proposed to the system do just that. I'll post the final stats tonight hopefully and you can see how it changes things.

 

[AKAramis]

Terraforming's generally been a TL 15+ thing in the OTU, so it's not really an option for that setting since most planets are less than TL 15. Plus, there'd have to be a vast amount of planets that have active terraforming still going on in order to be viable.

I think the solution really is to just not generate planets that are too small to hold onto breathable atmospheres like that, and the modifications I proposed to the system do just that. I'll post the final stats tonight hopefully and you can see how it changes things.

Not exactly, EDG. There is a presumption of 300,000 years prior a massive wave of terraforming by the ancients. Many worlds may have been terraformed then, and are now falling back towards a sustainable state.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

True, but in 300,000 years all of those Size 1 and 2 worlds would have lost their oxygen atmospheres. SOME size 3 and 4 worlds might still have ATM 2 or 3, but not most.

Using the Ancients only partially solves the problems and raises the bigger question of WHY would anyone spend all that energy to terraform the Moon when Earth is right next door?

 

[pasuuli]

It seems to me terraforming a small world by droping chunks of water/gas asteroids on it might work short term, i.e. 1,000 - 10,000 years dependiong on how fast the atmosphere would bleed away of due to low G. Would work even better on worlds that have lots of permafrost gas/water that you could melt once you got a basic greenhouse effetct going, with industral / biological methods. If you can get the worlds tempature high enough, you might even make it a nice place for 50,000+ years.

But how long would it take and how much would it cost? Who is going to pay for it?

If the Ziru Sirka wants something done, then money's no object. Perhaps some Emperor was talked into the idea that terraforming smaller worlds would take less time and money, and thus was born Terraforming Squads who would set up robotic gleaners to bombard small worlds in the H-zone with ice from the belts.

A few thousand years later, do you have an atmosphere? Nah, it's not all that simple. Well, for a game, maybe it is, but in reality? Please.


How long does it take to lose an atmosphere? Mars lost its, so a billion years for a size 5? 10,000 years for a Size 1? Earth and Venus still have theirs. Something logarithmic? Anyone?

 

[DaltonCalford]

Terraforming's generally been a TL 15+ thing in the OTU, so it's not really an option for that setting since most planets are less than TL 15. Plus, there'd have to be a vast amount of planets that have active terraforming still going on in order to be viable.

I think the solution really is to just not generate planets that are too small to hold onto breathable atmospheres like that, and the modifications I proposed to the system do just that. I'll post the final stats tonight hopefully and you can see how it changes things.

Hey EDG, I don't remember terraforming being talked about in Traveller let alone relegated to TL15 and above.

I have all the Traveller materials produced by GDW and terraforming is in the realm of not discussed vs non-existant.
Sorta like most players who had the original three books thinking that aliens where not part of the game until the adventures and library data started to be produced.
Even robots where not discussed a lot until book 8.

A size 2 world, with an atmosphere may just have it due to either an extremely high density (not impossibly but it should be MUCH rarer than what the generation system produces) or it is due to ancients putting gravity generators onto the planet, deep in the planets core.

With cheap energy and gravity control (fusion power and anti-grav) which are both abundant in the OTU, terra-forming is possible, the question is, what are the reasons?

That is why I was suggesting a trade code to indicate something different is happening there.

just some food for thought

best regards

Dalton

 

[captainjack23]

Terraforming's generally been a TL 15+ thing in the OTU, so it's not really an option for that setting since most planets are less than TL 15. Plus, there'd have to be a vast amount of planets that have active terraforming still going on in order to be viable.

I think the solution really is to just not generate planets that are too small to hold onto breathable atmospheres like that, and the modifications I proposed to the system do just that. I'll post the final stats tonight hopefully and you can see how it changes things.

Hey EDG, I don't remember terraforming being talked about in Traveller let alone relegated to TL15 and above.

I have all the Traveller materials produced by GDW and terraforming is in the realm of not discussed vs non-existant.
Sorta like most players who had the original three books thinking that aliens where not part of the game until the adventures and library data started to be produced.
Even robots where not discussed a lot until book 8.

A size 2 world, with an atmosphere may just have it due to either an extremely high density (not impossibly but it should be MUCH rarer than what the generation system produces) or it is due to ancients putting gravity generators onto the planet, deep in the planets core.

With cheap energy and gravity control (fusion power and anti-grav) which are both abundant in the OTU, terra-forming is possible, the question is, what are the reasons?

That is why I was suggesting a trade code to indicate something different is happening there.

just some food for thought

best regards

Dalton

Well, depending on what you consider canon, its discussed briefly in both Rim of Fire and IW...I forget the name, theres a successfully terraformed planet near the Solomani border (near Remulak, actually) which is noted as rare.

It may also be in the solomani rim LBB, not sure.

BTW - where does the idea that the oddity worlds were terraformed by the ancients come in ?

 

[EDG]

Not exactly, EDG. There is a presumption of 300,000 years prior a massive wave of terraforming by the ancients. Many worlds may have been terraformed then, and are now falling back towards a sustainable state.

Most would have lost their atmospheres long ago, even if you did assume that somehow the Ancients did terraform pretty much every small world (even those outside the areas they did most damage in). From about size 3 downwards you lose the atmosphere on the order of weeks or months. Certainly by a few centuries or millenia the atmospheres would be long gone, never mind 300,000 years.

The terraforming excuse just doesn't work.

 

[captainjack23]

Not exactly, EDG. There is a presumption of 300,000 years prior a massive wave of terraforming by the ancients. Many worlds may have been terraformed then, and are now falling back towards a sustainable state.

Most would have lost their atmospheres long ago, even if you did assume that somehow the Ancients did terraform pretty much every small world (even those outside the areas they did most damage in). From about size 3 downwards you lose the atmosphere on the order of weeks or months. Certainly by a few centuries or millenia the atmospheres would be long gone, never mind 300,000 years.

The terraforming excuse just doesn't work.

I should note-the explicitly terraformed world I mention is earth-sized, nearly (7, I think)

 

[EDG]

Well to be clearer - the terraforming excuse doesn't work on the small planets.

I just don't want Traveller to be riddled with these worlds that can't exist. We shouldn't have to keep coming up with weird and wacky exceptions for every other planet here.

 

[pasuuli]

Well to be clearer - the terraforming excuse doesn't work on the small planets.

Well... since we've never done it before, that's not strictly true, I think. It does seem ridiculous to think that tiny worlds like the Moon could be terraformed, but then I'm thinking about an Earth atmosphere. Perhaps there are alternatives we haven't considered. Certainly there are things we've not thought of, like Arthur C. Clarke implied with his famous statement about technology and magic.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Well to be clearer - the terraforming excuse doesn't work on the small planets.

Well... since we've never done it before, that's not strictly true, I think. It does seem ridiculous to think that tiny worlds like the Moon could be terraformed, but then I'm thinking about an Earth atmosphere. Perhaps there are alternatives we haven't considered. Certainly there are things we've not thought of, like Arthur C. Clarke implied with his famous statement about technology and magic.

But still basic physics tells us this is not a viable course of action, and apart from a few noble exceptions, this kind of handwavium isn't really part of the Traveller ethic.

And then there's logic to consider. Even with magic technology, it would still be easier (therefore cheaper) to terraform the bigger rockballs (5+) rather than expend resources on the tiny worlds.

Probably better to eliminate such nonsensical results from the system. If a setting author really wanted a size 1 garden world, then he could add it by fiat. The generic system should not be producing them.

 

[EDG]

Well... since we've never done it before, that's not strictly true, I think. It does seem ridiculous to think that tiny worlds like the Moon could be terraformed, but then I'm thinking about an Earth atmosphere. Perhaps there are alternatives we haven't considered. Certainly there are things we've not thought of, like Arthur C. Clarke implied with his famous statement about technology and magic.

The only other way to do it is to build a "Worldhouse". Basically, you build a planet-sized roof over the entire planet to keep the atmosphere in. But that obviously has its own problems (the sheer engineering scale of it, plus how you're going to get sunlight in...). And you're really not going to tell me that thousands of undersized worlds in Known Space have roofs over them...

I guess if you're feeling really insane you could pave the entire planet with 1G grav plates. But then we're going beyond insane and into la-la land.

Either way, it's not practical. The physics is well known and means that small worlds can't hold onto breathable atmospheres, and will lose them on short timescales. There is no way around that, and I for one am really sick of the "Ancients armwave" to explain what is basically a defective worldgen system.

 

[EDG]

Hey EDG, I don't remember terraforming being talked about in Traveller let alone relegated to TL15 and above.

It's not really talked about, but it shows up on the high levels of the Tech Level charts in MT at least. (I think. Or was it WBH? Or FF&S?). Either way, that's pretty much it.

A size 2 world, with an atmosphere may just have it due to either an extremely high density (not impossibly but it should be MUCH rarer than what the generation system produces) or it is due to ancients putting gravity generators onto the planet, deep in the planets core.

...and here's where I start getting violent . Ahem. "NAY, NAY, and THRICE NAY!!!"

I had to come up with your first excuse to explain Enos in the GT: Sword Worlds (I helped out with the world design there). It required a ridiculous density to work out - something like 50,000 kg/m3, which is far denser than anything reasonable. I explained it as the remnant of the dense rare earth element inner core of a planet that got shattered in the system's early history, which is just shy of utter bullcrap. But it's basically a giant metal cannonball made of stupidly rare metals.

I felt soiled after coming up with that - largely because that explanation is only barely on the right side of utter codswallop... but it's a good example of how blazingly stupid these tiny worlds with breathable atmospheres have to be. And this sort of thing should be so ridiculously exceptional that it's completely unfeasible for there to be more than one of them per galaxy (if they can even exist at all), and yet the OTU is riddled with loads of them in every sector.

They're impossible in nature, and even with artificial help (terraforming, screwing around with gravity, or whatever) that sort of technology is just not a big enough part of the OTU to explain how so many small worlds across the entirety of Charted Space (especially in the bits that the Ancients never even visited) can hold onto their atmospheres.

So... no. They don't work. And I don't mean this personally, but I really wish that people would just accept that and stop trying to contrive excuses to make them work.

 

[captainjack23]

So, I was just wondering, EDG, do have any opinions about small worlds with thick atmospheres that you want to share with us ? :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

 

[AKAramis]

The physics is well known and means that small worlds can't hold onto breathable atmospheres, and will lose them on short timescales. There is no way around that, and I for one am really sick of the "Ancients armwave" to explain what is basically a defective worldgen system.

I wouldn't call it well known; the only people who I've seen mention it are you (EDG), GDW, and those few people I know who have tried world building in 2300... and those responding to you.

Peer-review accepted, probably (I'll take it as a given, in fact).

It's little known.

 

[EDG]

It's little known.

Come off it Aramis, you're smarter than that. What I meant was very obvious from the context - "the physics is well known" obviously means "by the scientists who study it". Obviously their range of knowledge is the benchmark here, not yours. :roll:

 

[EDG]

So, I was just wondering, EDG, do have any opinions about small worlds with thick atmospheres that you want to share with us ? :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Put it this way - if that aspect isn't fixed in MGT then I'm going to be really peeved about the wasted opportunity to fix something that's needed fixing from the CT days.

Gar can do what he likes obviously, but I'd hope that I haven't been wasting all my time for the past week or so trying to persuade the people that matter that this is worth fixing (though the actual persuasion will come when I get these thrice-damned stats posted!).

 

[AKAramis]

It's little known.

Come off it Aramis, you're smarter than that. What I meant was very obvious from the context - "the physics is well known" obviously means "by the scientists who study it". Obviously their range of knowledge is the benchmark here, not yours. :roll:

In a general population forum, claiming something is well known should be a reference to the population expected to be reading, not to some indirectly referenced population. (That's in 3 different style manuals, plus was taught in my sophomore Technical Writing class, as well as Speech 101...)

The implication, however, was that the average reader who was prior unaware is an idiot.

It's little known outside a small population of atmospheric and planetological scientists, and a tiny subset of geeks outside that.

Further, most people won't give a sh*t.