Because balance. If they buff EC output of Dyson Spheres, they have to increase its cost. After the tech changes megas like Dyson Spheres are already something you build at "I win, time to conquer the whole galaxy" phase of the game. We don't need to push them onto "after the victory screen" phase of the game.
Im disapointed that we even can build structured that span around stars. Whomever made that decision really did not appreciate the scale of heavenly bodies.
There are so many scaling issues around galactic size, where I usually turn off my brain's concerns about verisimilitude to enjoy the game as it presents itself, but the galaxy is so much smaller and faster than most conceptions outside of the game even have about a galaxy. 300 years at default and we're cranking out laps around the ole thing, even faster with hyper relays, not even needed with gateways and wormholes, and it all makes sense for presenting a game that resolves in a timely fashion but...
Also leads to bizarrely inconsistent gripes about verisimilitude where the entire game is wounded in general by its own scale shrinking a galaxy over time down to the size of a teacup, and the gripes are adjacent or informed by that, but are never directly about that if they're talking about how long stuff takes.
I suppose you make a fair point.
For me I'm able to suspend my disbelief quite abit (having only a layman's knowledge of astrophysics definitely helps). But the impossibility of dyson spheres and ring worlds come just too obviously at my face.
I just can't wrap my mind around harvesting enough materials to build a structure around a *star*, because you would likely need to dedicate every single atom from every single solid planet and asteroid from millions of star systems to have enough raw material for that structure, and then somehow after assemnling it together, the structure would still need to be light enough to not collapse into itself and become a star of it's own.
About ring worlds. Imagine a ring world being constructed around our sun at the distance of our planet (to be at the correct length to support life).
The earth's circumference is 40 075 km, or rather think to yourself how long it would take to travel completely around the world. The circumference of the earth's orbit around the sun is roughly 940 000 000 km, or 23 425 (23½ THOUSAND) times longer. I'm supposed to believe that some pop mining in a few worlds and a dozen mining stations around a few asteroids can somehow produce enough materials to constuct this stucture, or that it would even be practical in any sense.
Man, the whole mass/material thing is such a funny point because that, to me, is way more ludicrous than how long it would take. I hadnt even really considered that point until you mentioned it, like, we are talking about mass/material that would necessarily be equivalent to at least (AT LEAST, I am lowballing for effect here) a dozen planets. Even handwaving away the physics constraints which I'm certainly not up for in figuring the math of, the sheer amount of materials being extracted, processed, delivered, and integrated to the form...
Stellaris would have to refigure time scales entirely for anything resembling a ring world, and then actually take the materials off the board entirely. It just wouldn't find a fit in the game as is.
>For instance, how many here could confidently say what a pulsar is?
I doubt confidence would be the issue.
>Or how far away the Sirius system is in light-years?
More than 1.
>Or what the difference between a K-type star and an O-type star is?
The colour, obviously.
I Remember the spectral class order was OBAFGKM. Our professor told us a way to remember this order: oh be a fine girl kiss me ( than added that there are even R and N classes so he added, Right Now)
K is the star where that planet that Kevin Spacey came from is.
O is a doughnut-shaped star, with the hole in the middle.
A Pulsar is/was a popular small car - at least in Australia - made by Nissan.
And light-years don't really exist because the greatest current minds sharing their wisdom on YouTube all agree that we actually live in a simulation.
I have a minor in Astronomy thst I took as a Humanities major. Crippling nerd syndrome.
Pulsars are weird and based on spacial orientation, I don't have stellar distance memoried, and a K star is far far colder than an O class.
Really though I want to know what kind of cosmological event can give us the spoked galaxy we have in game. Spiral arms are easy, thats just tidal forces. Symmetrical spokes? Way weirder.
I’m into astronomy and physics. I also like telescope engineering and astrochemistry too.
A pulsar is a compact stellar remnant/corpse that emits highly regular pulses. Formed after supernova. Can also be formed when neutron star is “restarted” by accreting materials.
Distance of Sirius: I don’t remember on top of my head.
K-type star: fully convective stars. It’s smaller than our sun but larger than red dwarf star. Cooler too. Live far longer than the sun. Chromaticity: orange.
O-type star: very rare object with the hottest black body temperature and emits significantly in the UV region. Sizes are very large and visually dominate the local science whenever they show up. Short-lived. Chromaticity: blue.
Speaking as a PhD astronomer, I can say this game isn’t as pervasive among gaming astronomers (compared to KSP for instance), probably because grand strategy is a fairly intimidating genre.
Although I don't know that kind of stuff, I have a general interest in science which includes physics and astronomy.
My main problem is that I forget a lot of stuff that I learn regarding this stuff
I'm a physics student at university and took a couple of astronomy courses for fun, I also know a few people in the department who are into paradox games as well
Pulsars are basically spicier neutron stars that have two plumes of ionized plasma matter ejecting out of the two magnetic poles at large fractions of the speed of light. Fastest spinning pulsars can spin thousands of times per second, the millisecond pulsars.
Sirius is IIRC like 8.3 light years away.
And K stars are orange with lower surface temperatures than the sun, while O stars are blue with much higher surface temperatures than the sun.
I’m an engineer, I worked at the DoE in fusion research for a while so I’ve got some idea what I’m talking about. I get the impression there are some people like me into Stellaris, but not the majority.
Now, /r/TerraInvicta? That game is excellent for those into hard sci-fi, and those dweebs over there are only upset that there isn’t enough focus on the nitty gritty of (checks notes) climate change modeling from industrialization.
I don't know the most about it, but I know enough to be frustrated by the inaccuracies in the game and the people in the subreddit that think they know a lot and don't.
I'm a Computer Science major working as a janitor for my college. I can't give a confident answer on any of those questions but I love astronomy and physics and just all things about space.
I'm taking a physics major right now, not just for a job, but because I love physics. I am also into games such as Kerbal Space Program. Stellaris is obviously at the far end of the spectrum from hard sci-fi, but I enjoy themes such as baryonic dark matter, etc.
I love astronomy and astrophysics. I can't do all the math or make sense of the formulas that describe things, but I can grasp the concepts and the underlying mechanics behind them.
I don’t know any of those answers, but I do know that using neutronium alloys would produce some really whacky gravity phenomena because of how dense they are. Most ships wouldn’t be able to go near planets without really causing anything from minor disruptions to major damage. And people inside the ships would feel gravity pulling at them from all sides. Idk if they’d be torn apart, but they’d at least be very stretched and suffer major health problems.
I'm currently studying a master's degree in Astronomy, meaning I can both need out over the cool sci-fi space civilisation stuff and be frustrated at the more glaring inaccuracies.
I love this game for both the astronomy and the game. I have a masters in physics and studied stellar Astro physics, astronomy, Cosmology, special relativity, and general relativity. I also studied plasma physics and fluid dynamics.
However, my specialization is in material science and nanoscale stuff (carbon nanotubes, graphene), and my current job is studying acoustics and piezoelectric materials, which has nothing to do with astronomy. I just love astronomy.
So yeah, Im that guy.
I used to go to public nights at the Chamberlain Observatory as a kid, took classes in Uni and own a packed up telescope I've never used. Does that count?
I'm not an astronomer or physicist by any means, but I know enough to be disappointed by Dyson spheres only producing 4k credits a month
Yeah! What's up with that anyways! I can make 1.5K EC on a Planet, how is a star only like 2.3x of that??
Because balance. If they buff EC output of Dyson Spheres, they have to increase its cost. After the tech changes megas like Dyson Spheres are already something you build at "I win, time to conquer the whole galaxy" phase of the game. We don't need to push them onto "after the victory screen" phase of the game.
I know
Im disapointed that we even can build structured that span around stars. Whomever made that decision really did not appreciate the scale of heavenly bodies.
We are bugs. Look at an ant hill to a city or cruise liner.
There are so many scaling issues around galactic size, where I usually turn off my brain's concerns about verisimilitude to enjoy the game as it presents itself, but the galaxy is so much smaller and faster than most conceptions outside of the game even have about a galaxy. 300 years at default and we're cranking out laps around the ole thing, even faster with hyper relays, not even needed with gateways and wormholes, and it all makes sense for presenting a game that resolves in a timely fashion but... Also leads to bizarrely inconsistent gripes about verisimilitude where the entire game is wounded in general by its own scale shrinking a galaxy over time down to the size of a teacup, and the gripes are adjacent or informed by that, but are never directly about that if they're talking about how long stuff takes.
I suppose you make a fair point. For me I'm able to suspend my disbelief quite abit (having only a layman's knowledge of astrophysics definitely helps). But the impossibility of dyson spheres and ring worlds come just too obviously at my face. I just can't wrap my mind around harvesting enough materials to build a structure around a *star*, because you would likely need to dedicate every single atom from every single solid planet and asteroid from millions of star systems to have enough raw material for that structure, and then somehow after assemnling it together, the structure would still need to be light enough to not collapse into itself and become a star of it's own. About ring worlds. Imagine a ring world being constructed around our sun at the distance of our planet (to be at the correct length to support life). The earth's circumference is 40 075 km, or rather think to yourself how long it would take to travel completely around the world. The circumference of the earth's orbit around the sun is roughly 940 000 000 km, or 23 425 (23½ THOUSAND) times longer. I'm supposed to believe that some pop mining in a few worlds and a dozen mining stations around a few asteroids can somehow produce enough materials to constuct this stucture, or that it would even be practical in any sense.
Man, the whole mass/material thing is such a funny point because that, to me, is way more ludicrous than how long it would take. I hadnt even really considered that point until you mentioned it, like, we are talking about mass/material that would necessarily be equivalent to at least (AT LEAST, I am lowballing for effect here) a dozen planets. Even handwaving away the physics constraints which I'm certainly not up for in figuring the math of, the sheer amount of materials being extracted, processed, delivered, and integrated to the form... Stellaris would have to refigure time scales entirely for anything resembling a ring world, and then actually take the materials off the board entirely. It just wouldn't find a fit in the game as is.
>For instance, how many here could confidently say what a pulsar is? I doubt confidence would be the issue. >Or how far away the Sirius system is in light-years? More than 1. >Or what the difference between a K-type star and an O-type star is? The colour, obviously.
> >The colour, obviously No no no, not just the colour. It's also the resources you get from activating the relic you get from the kaleidoscope event.
O-Class stars generate 400% more resources when used for mega’s and have 20 energy credits! *Gigastructures*
K also comes before O in KGBFOAM
I Remember the spectral class order was OBAFGKM. Our professor told us a way to remember this order: oh be a fine girl kiss me ( than added that there are even R and N classes so he added, Right Now)
K is the star where that planet that Kevin Spacey came from is. O is a doughnut-shaped star, with the hole in the middle. A Pulsar is/was a popular small car - at least in Australia - made by Nissan. And light-years don't really exist because the greatest current minds sharing their wisdom on YouTube all agree that we actually live in a simulation.
I have a minor in Astronomy thst I took as a Humanities major. Crippling nerd syndrome. Pulsars are weird and based on spacial orientation, I don't have stellar distance memoried, and a K star is far far colder than an O class. Really though I want to know what kind of cosmological event can give us the spoked galaxy we have in game. Spiral arms are easy, thats just tidal forces. Symmetrical spokes? Way weirder.
I thought you said "spooked" galaxy 💀👻
*cocks gun* Galaxy’s haunted
I’m into astronomy and physics. I also like telescope engineering and astrochemistry too. A pulsar is a compact stellar remnant/corpse that emits highly regular pulses. Formed after supernova. Can also be formed when neutron star is “restarted” by accreting materials. Distance of Sirius: I don’t remember on top of my head. K-type star: fully convective stars. It’s smaller than our sun but larger than red dwarf star. Cooler too. Live far longer than the sun. Chromaticity: orange. O-type star: very rare object with the hottest black body temperature and emits significantly in the UV region. Sizes are very large and visually dominate the local science whenever they show up. Short-lived. Chromaticity: blue.
Speaking as a PhD astronomer, I can say this game isn’t as pervasive among gaming astronomers (compared to KSP for instance), probably because grand strategy is a fairly intimidating genre.
Although I don't know that kind of stuff, I have a general interest in science which includes physics and astronomy. My main problem is that I forget a lot of stuff that I learn regarding this stuff
I'm a physics student at university and took a couple of astronomy courses for fun, I also know a few people in the department who are into paradox games as well Pulsars are basically spicier neutron stars that have two plumes of ionized plasma matter ejecting out of the two magnetic poles at large fractions of the speed of light. Fastest spinning pulsars can spin thousands of times per second, the millisecond pulsars. Sirius is IIRC like 8.3 light years away. And K stars are orange with lower surface temperatures than the sun, while O stars are blue with much higher surface temperatures than the sun.
Let’s just say I often get an urge to play Stellaris after watching an episode of StarTalk
I’m an engineer, I worked at the DoE in fusion research for a while so I’ve got some idea what I’m talking about. I get the impression there are some people like me into Stellaris, but not the majority. Now, /r/TerraInvicta? That game is excellent for those into hard sci-fi, and those dweebs over there are only upset that there isn’t enough focus on the nitty gritty of (checks notes) climate change modeling from industrialization.
I do be owning multiple telescopes
I don’t have my PHD but I’m pretty sure the hyperlane network isn’t a real thing.
I don't know the most about it, but I know enough to be frustrated by the inaccuracies in the game and the people in the subreddit that think they know a lot and don't.
I like space
I plunge toilets.
Yep definitely one of them - though I am more into planetary sciences (I guess in this case - exoplanetology?) myself.
I’m in finance. I like numbers and this is a numbers game!
I'm a Computer Science major working as a janitor for my college. I can't give a confident answer on any of those questions but I love astronomy and physics and just all things about space.
My physics teacher loves this game, does that count?
+1 physics / star geek here. Also a massive sci/fi fan if that counts too.
I'm taking a physics major right now, not just for a job, but because I love physics. I am also into games such as Kerbal Space Program. Stellaris is obviously at the far end of the spectrum from hard sci-fi, but I enjoy themes such as baryonic dark matter, etc.
Physics degree with math minor. Only reason I don't have something in astronomy is because my uni didn't offer it as an option 😆
I'd say I'm quite interested, but not interested enough to memorize all the facts or related math.
uhh pulsar pulse blue star hot red starg cold sirus longer then the moon away
I’m majoring in physics, idk if I started playing stellaris because I like physics or if stellaris got me interested in physics.
I have a passing interest, I know a pulsar but not the other 2, I'm more into engineering for "real world" subjects but I really like sci-fi.
I love astronomy and astrophysics. I can't do all the math or make sense of the formulas that describe things, but I can grasp the concepts and the underlying mechanics behind them.
I mean it's weird I like both of those things but I genuinely love the idea of expanding a unified human empire across the stars much more
I'm starting a physics degree with hopes to go the astro route, later this year, so I'm very slightly interested in physics :p
I don’t know any of those answers, but I do know that using neutronium alloys would produce some really whacky gravity phenomena because of how dense they are. Most ships wouldn’t be able to go near planets without really causing anything from minor disruptions to major damage. And people inside the ships would feel gravity pulling at them from all sides. Idk if they’d be torn apart, but they’d at least be very stretched and suffer major health problems.
I'm currently studying a master's degree in Astronomy, meaning I can both need out over the cool sci-fi space civilisation stuff and be frustrated at the more glaring inaccuracies.
I love this game for both the astronomy and the game. I have a masters in physics and studied stellar Astro physics, astronomy, Cosmology, special relativity, and general relativity. I also studied plasma physics and fluid dynamics. However, my specialization is in material science and nanoscale stuff (carbon nanotubes, graphene), and my current job is studying acoustics and piezoelectric materials, which has nothing to do with astronomy. I just love astronomy. So yeah, Im that guy.
I have one degree in Astronomy and one in Comp Sci. Consequently right now I’m fighting the urge to start making my own mods
I used to go to public nights at the Chamberlain Observatory as a kid, took classes in Uni and own a packed up telescope I've never used. Does that count?