61

@MaraJade

First: I was mainly talking about utterly destroying the asteroid, not trying to deflect it; deflecting it would be a whole 'nother ball game and definitely something that needs to be done welll outside of Earth’s gravity well.

Secondly: I think I already mentioned a lot of this and how hard they are to pick apart by any means, especially if you’re just “shooting” at it from the outside. Hence the blatant and tortured reference to Barry Lyndon and the analogy about the redcoats. That doesn’t mean the asteroid would not get affected; if you shoot something at it and it actually makes it to the target (without failing, getting burnt up, or something else) and it hits, it’ll do damage. It’s just that one blow would probably not be enough.

Which was also why I only talked about hitting it with multiple things if you are trying to “shoot” it, and also mentioned talking about the “Armageddon” style of drilling into it and sticking something inside so that when it blows it would radiate the pressure outwards, ripping the solid guts of the asteroid apart from the inside and at least weakening it.

Finally; I explicitly mentioned that while I did say “nuke” and “nukes”, I wasn’t limiting myself to actual nukes. In fact, sufficiently powerful conventional explosives work fine and would in a lot of ways be even preferable to avoid ye olde “big nuclear asteroid” risk.

Bury a Tsar Bomba (to use an extreme case) inside an asteroid and you’re probably going to kill or at least devastate just about every asteroid we know to exist out there.

62

@Turtler scientifics disagree with you pal, Nasa included all their theories go to move trayectory with some sort of ships similar to aid docking ships in earth, anyway thats not propose of this game its like you where blaming cataprack about why he doesnt let you go anyway instead army at start of Sables .

63

@Marajade

I honestly don’t get what you are trying to say at this point.

“@Turtler scientifics disagree with you pal,”

Can you clarify *what you are referring to* or *how so?* Because frankly, saying that doesn’t help at all. “Scientists” and “Scientifics” can be said to disagree with just about anything, especially each other!

Specific sources would be very useful in this case, because I’m not really understanding what you’re trying to argue about.

“Nasa included all their theories go to move trayectory with some sort of ships similar to aid docking ships in earth”

I wasn’t talking about moving the trajectory of the asteroid at all, or at least not as the main thrust of it. I was talking about destroying the flipping thing, which would go by a considerably different system!

“thats not propose of this game”

I’m aware, as I have discussed above with andymwhy. I am not trying to make this the main thrust of the game by *any* stretch of the imagination; I was merely pointing it out as something that raised my eyebrows *personally.*

“its like you where blaming cataprack about why he doesnt let you go anyway instead army at start of Sables .”

A: I never did that at all, so I don’t know why

B: You *do* go into the Army at the start of Sabres (because Dragoons are part of the Royal Tierran Army. It’s mentioned several times), so I really don’t get what you are trying to say.

64

The number of choices a game like Cog are limited , we couldn’t adress all options possible so some has to be dead end, this is a early demo so many part of final text is not there yet. Probably at end would adressed.

I never said you yell about sables, it was a metaphor about you couldn’t choice ALL and say but i want dance in terran royal ballet instead. But the way you help a lot with your suggestion so thanks

65

@MaraJade

I understand, and that was never my main issue. I always knew this game was about space colonization, and I never wanted to take that away from anyone. I just felt from the ways the demo played (which I can now confirm since I’ve played through it) that it felt like concerns like that would likely factor in to how the gameplay works, with other people at your neck.

I’m also rather baffled by the idea that blowing up the asteroid flatout cannot work, and the claim that scientists have outright ruled it out (which would be about the first time they’ve agreed on anything to such a degree). Deflection has almost always been the preferred way to do it in science circles, but that has never meant that nobody has been looking into blowing it up, especially if it’s past a point where deflecting it is practical with our current tech.

Yes, large amounts of it are probably from the old nuclear and ballistics scientists trying to drum up funding since the Cold War ended. However, that doesn’t mean it is only that, and it’s still held as a viable option for very good reasons, especially as the step of last resort to prevent an impact that’s probably worse than having tons of explosions happen in our atmosphere.

Here you can even see it be taken seriously in an article that’s largely skeptical/opposed to it, and that’s before I get into things like the Russians thinking about repurposing ICBMs to hit asteroids.

http://news.discovery.com/space/astronomy/dont-be-subtle-nuke-that-asteroid.htm

Which is why your claims that I’m “missing science stuff” and that “scientifics disagree with (me)” confounds me.

@fantom

That’s actually pretty close to what the main thought on deflecting asteroids has been: finding a way to deflect it, either by strapping ships/drones off and powering them to send it off in another direction or even by exploding something near it to divert its’ course away from Earth.

That’s something I could definitely see them trying in-game, especially that far out. Like I mentioned before, we have drones, and the idea we have so far is if we know about it ahead of time we should be trying to divert its’ course away from Earth in ways like that.

So Kudos. I can also imagine it having more immediate applications for this game, as pertaining to the research for the ship.

66

i just noticed on every discution or what ever u want call it, fairygodfeathers on it and every 3or4 posts it hers/his

67

@GrimReaper0144 Well, he is a mod.

68

@GrimReaper0144 @fanom

Indeed, but also a very good crafter and helper when it comes to Choicescript and game making.

That said, we should probably not keep this derailed tooo long…

69

@Turtler We haven’t really derailed the discussion yet, mearly debating different ways to handle the beginning of the game in a more believable manner. If, however, @andymwhy disagrees we can always stop.

70

Sheesh, it’s like puttin’ ya hand up in a crowded classroom with all these good comments…
I’d like an option to be referred to as “they”.

71

The fact remains that even if scientists felt they had a shot at destroying/diverting the asteroid, they would still arrange contingency plans just in case. If absolutely necessary, we can change the asteroid for a neutron star (I just watched a documentary) although I’d prefer to keep it as an asteroid as it makes the story easier to follow and doesn’t need explaining.

@Bagelthief - that can be arranged.

72

@andymwhy
Thankyou so much!

73

@Bagelthief The demo will be updated weekly. I have made the changes now so in the next update, you will see them.

@MaraJade - I love it! We keep the asteroid idea and add extra drama!

74

I find it odd that all of the Chinese don’t have Chinese names… Is that a bug, or is it intentional?

75

All of the characters have the same name, regardless of your nationality (at present - with time this could change).

For now, imagine that they are all using their English names as given to them during English class in school :stuck_out_tongue:

76

@Turtler
I know I’m late, but the reason that we have the setup is so that the reader can customize his/her character a little before starting Earth. Story mode and Earth are directly connected, but since I’m a long way away from finishing Story mode, Earth wouldn’t have all the stats specified yet. When we finish, setup mode will be erased, the story will begin with Story mode, and continue with Earth.

77

@andymwhy

Understandable, and I’ve never doubted that. Both in real life and especially for this game, it’s only appropriate that we have this sort of plan in motion. Especially since it’s a direct tie in to the main meat of the game.

@Samuel_H-Young

I understand, and it makes sense. Thanks for clarifying for me.

@MaraJade

For somebody who accused me of having science disagree with me, are so many things wrong with this I don’t even know where to start. First and foremost, the North Koreans do not have a “experimental gamma radiation bomb.” If they do, they’d have it on loan from the Chinese or Russians (or made from materials and technology that is).

Secondly, the value in the nukes for anti-asteroid use is not in their radiation, its’ in their blast. The main value nukes would have at all is that there is something that you can expect to get a sizable boom out of because of the way they’re designed to detonate, but there’s nothing inherently better about them than conventional explosives that can make a boom of the same size (again, like non-nuke ICBMs, Tsar Bomba, the F/MOABs, etc), and like you mentioned it might have an additional complication.

Thirdly, claiming that “the radiation would wipe (out a) great part of the Earth in seconds” is downright wrong. This isn’t a B-Movie where tossing radiation at something makes it several times more powerful. In reality, irradiating the asteroid would mostly be all kinds of moot, not the least of which because *it’s already somewhat irradiated along with everything else in Space* since it’d be having all kinds of radiation (including solar radiation from the various suns- including our own- and several others which are several orders of magnitude nastier than anything we’ve been able to come up with on Earth).

We’ve known this because we’ve had asteroids jam into us repeatedly over our history and we are fairly sure about how they’d react with various degrees and forms of radiation.

On the grand scale of things, the radiation isn’t going to last that long or spread very far, the areas that would be affected by the radiation would only be the asteroid or asteroid chunk’s impact (Relatively speaking, even factoring in things like wind dispersion).

If the asteroid’s already big and devastating enough to cause problems for the Earth of this magnitude, having it be irradiated isn’t going to slap *that much more* of a damage multiplier than the re-entry would already cause. The real damage would be from the sheer, simple impact and what it’d do to the atmosphere, doing to us what happened to the dinosaurs (amongst other things).

78

@Turtle Game is placed Beyond 2090 , if we have near light ships
internal chips Al and VI . A Gamma radiation bomb like a small supernova wipe all live in earth .

And politically maybe China was conquered by NK or Japan lol. We are talking about future. Also I dont say NK send a bomb i said clearly a dictadorship similar NK .

And this is scifi , but gamma radiation waves in universe goes through planets burning all. Thats why a near supernova will destroy solar system in seconds thats the problem gamma radiation has.

Also sorry if seems i´m attacking you or something, its im not good disscussing in English an seem far more harsh i wanted too. We could talk in pm about this themes if you want.

79

Debate Question: How will Earth change between now and 2090?

80

Not?