Alpha Centauri 2 - New Faction Concepts Inspired by Beyond Earth

[BlaneckW]

You would save time by just putting nukes on everything.

[Trenacker]

At first, yes.

The big question is whether fission, like industrial base, doctrine: airpower, and orbital spaceflight, should be one of those "lost" technologies or complex processes/activities that require a bit of investment or research before use on Planet.

Presumably, the factions will have access to solar-powered rovers at first. I'm not yet entirely convinced that the earliest settlers are going to want to explore uncharted territory using vehicles mounting fission reactors...

[Trenacker]

Also. Ten players so far. Working on an eleventh. Would love to include one or more from this site. Any interest amongst the new arrivals?

[Buster's Uncle]

Hmmm.  It strikes me that instead of Unity units being weak, a logical design would be to have them much stronger/more advanced than anything the colonists would be able to build for themselves for a long time.  It might be too game-breaking, but then astronauts eat caviar because the real expense by about an order of magnitude is in getting it into space - more expensive supplies are a trivial addition to the budget, and an actual economy when considered as getting more bang for your buck.  Caviar packs an enormous amount of calories into a very small package.

Naturally, we can't safely assume that the Unity project was well-run, so easy enough to have it however is more convenient for game design purposes.

[Vishniac]

Presumably, the factions will have access to solar-powered rovers at first. I'm not yet entirely convinced that the earliest settlers are going to want to explore uncharted territory using vehicles mounting fission reactors...

Fission reactor doesn't mean that every rover or scout patrol has a miniaturized nuclear reactor but probably that they are running electric and getting power from a big reactor at the base or on ships.

As for solar-powered rovers...
I don't want to get ideological but I'll be: people should realize that solar power is no solution to anything, it's green-washing at its best, inefficient and costly. The day you'll see on Earth a 4x4 SUV doing cross-country with only solar power, you'll come back and talk about combat rovers running with lasers and life-support systems in a noxious atmosphere.

[BlaneckW]

Solar power works just fine for low-level power requirements.  That is not ideological.

[Trenacker]

I plan to keep nutrients, minerals, and energy. Energy will remain the currency.

I have considered water, but I want to avoid introducing a resource that doesn't drive gameplay outcomes. My first thought was that perhaps Planet could have substantially more heavy metals than Earth, meaning that most water would be poisonous to the early settlers.

I agree that the expedition would have initial access to certain technologies brought along from Earth. I assume that those would be powered by electric batteries rather than microfission. Probably Small Modular Reactors (SMR) power the bases.

Vishniac - I take your point that solar power is "no solution to anything," even as prices-per-kilowatt hour drop for renewables.

[BlaneckW]

I want coolies to be made a resource.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuL8k7Ki4jg

[Trenacker]

I do plan to track population. Just try to think of all the other factions as your potential labor force.

[Vishniac]

I take your point that solar power is "no solution to anything," even as prices-per-kilowatt hour drop for renewables.

It's probably easy to make believe prices drop when pouring public money on it.
Switzerland (8 million people) pay 900 milion$ a year in subsidies for renewables.
Germany alone pay 24 BILLION EUROS a year in subsidies to solar and wind energy!!

A quick search bring:
http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/average-electricity-prices-kwh



Green washing paid by our pockets...

[Geo]

Green washing paid by our pockets...

I can't speak for the Swiss nuclear industry, but here in Belgium it is a public secret that our nuclear industry received tremendous government benefits throughout the upstart phase and first generation of exploitation, keeping the consumer bill down. Even now, with the energy sector supposedly being a private corporation, the nuclear sector is still handled with feather gloves, and customers of companies offering "classic"-generated electricity need to pay a stipend for an ever-delayed "phase out" of the oldest nuclear plants here.
So bashing newer ways to produce electricity through government spending sounds like bullcrap in my book. It's a prime example of things that barely if ever would go off the ground without a push in the back. Just as oil, -gas, -coal energy production back in the days.

[Vishniac]

Nuclear plants received investments to be built.
Hydro-electricity plants also received investments to be built.
And then they started producing power and now they have become cash cows.

Renewables receive investments to be built...and then they are costing a fortune every year just because they can't be beneficial.  THEY CAN'T!
Most recent news about it:
http://www.thelocal.es/20140511/sun-sets-on-spanish-solar-power-dreams

Tens of thousands of indebted Spaniards have found themselves lumbered with fields full of expensive solar panels whose subsidies have been unexpectedly cut in the financial crisis.
 
"How do I feel? Completely fooled," said David Utiel, a 37-year-old teacher who invested in a solar plant, recalling the government's sunshine slogan.
"Fooled, swindled, disappointed, disgusted."
 
He was one of the 62,000 ordinary citizens in Spain who campaign groups say have been caught in a financial sun trap.

Our minister who want to phase out nuclear says it herself: "Going out of nuclear would make electricity 2 or 3 times more expensive!"
YOOHOO! Fortunately, the executive can't decide anything without the vote of the Assembly or even the population, or else I could prepare to look for another job. Our industry would be badly crippled.
And using massively renewables would force a reconstruction of the energy grid devised to 100 BILLION$ !! (remember: for only 8 millions people!)
And when you see that Germany is opening new coal mines and plants and becoming increasingly dependant on Russian gas because wind and solar can't work alone... They need their capacity duplicated with 'conventional' power plants for when they don't produce (and it's often).
 
Those renewables energy are perhaps the biggest scam of this beginning XXIst Century.

[Trenacker]

The "problem" of renewables -- their inconstancy of production -- will be solved by batteries at some point in the future.

That said, right now, the cost-per-kilowatt hour of different types of generation is telling: renewables are nearly three times as expensive as nuclear power, which is about half as expensive as fossil generation.

Some considerations. First, many of the poorest customers cannot afford the cost of innovation. Second, as Vishniac pointed out, renewable energy and micro-grids still require a "reliability provider of last resort" to serve load when the sun isn't shining or something malfunctions. Those providers of last resort will not build infrastructure without the guarantee that it will be paid for. Third, nuclear power is affected by a unique set of factors inapplicable to other forms of generation. There is a "pucker factor" there, for both the operators and the public. Nobody wants to live in the shadow of a cooling tower, much less inside the 10-mile Emergency Planning Zone. Plant operators are liable for hundreds of millions of dollars in the event of a disaster elsewhere in the United States, and regulations increase (at great expense) every time there is a nuclear disaster anywhere in the world. The nuclear industry took a decades-long nosedive after Chernobyl for precisely that reason, although it was substantially helped along by inadequate load growth.

Anyway, what if we made the rain on Planet poisonous? What if there were more heavy metals under the ground? I could totally see Miriam's folks pushing their reactors critical at bases overrun by enemy factions.

[Buster's Uncle]

Believers self-destructing in defeat, like Masada or so many Romulans?  I think that's a profoundly good idea, creatively.

[Geo]

Nuclear plants received investments to be built.
Hydro-electricity plants also received investments to be built.
And then they started producing power and now they have become cash cows.

Renewables receive investments to be built...and then they are costing a fortune every year just because they can't be beneficial.  THEY CAN'T!

Yeah yeah yeah. And I bet your minister forget to add the cost of minor things like nuclear disaster plans, transport, protection, and storage of nuclear waste, safety checks of nuclear plants, and perhaps the necessary overcapacity in case there's not enough waterflow for some reason (too cold mountain summer season, too little snowfall during winter, whatever...)

It's a fact the energy grid was created with central power plants in mind, back by about a 3 generations ago. Don't you think these 'upstart' costs from way back (by means of upkeep maintenance) should be included in your bill? Part of my bill is for the maintenance of said national grid, and expansions thereof.

I bet 'phasing out' costs were never thought of back when Swiss nuclear plants were constructed. That was something for the future. Well, that future is today where those first generation reactors should be closed&dismantled because of old age and replaced by something else/newer. Perhaps even better productive nuclear plants, but that's something we're in the proces of deciding.