I think nebulae and black holes should be visible from the start of the game, and should not have to be 'discovered.' I say this because even TODAY we can detect nebulae and black holes from Earth, without the fancy future technology in the game. We find black holes either by the gravitational effect they have on other celestial bodies, or when they distort light passing near them, creating cool effects like doubling images of stars behind the black hole. Nebulae are even easier, as many are visible with the naked eye or simple instruments.
I do not think making these visible is unbalancing... everyone will know where these features are, and their primary strategic value (i.e., presence of resources) will still be unknown until they are explored.
Note: I'm not sure if 'storms' should be visible... I am not sure they even exist as they are portrayed in the game.
so we should be able to see stars and balck holes and nebulas because our current technology allows that already.
we can detect most planets given enough time with our current technology
Number of extrasolar planet discoveries per year through September 2014, with colors indicating method of detection: radial velocity transit timing direct imaging microlensing
we can also detect theoretically if life exists on other planets bacause we can detect the gasses present by the way light filters through the atmosphere.
so we can detect number of planets size mass if they are habbitable why not simply remove the exploration part of the game completely?
since we dont need to go to a black hole because we can detect it why go to another planet if we can detect it? we know its there we can tell what kind of life is on it why visit it? its dangerous lets eliminate the expansion part of a 4x as well
I am well aware of this. However, the subject of my post was not let's make all planets visible through fog of war, it was let's make black holes visible. Black holes are part of the life-cycle of stars, and we can already see the other stages in their life cycle. Being able to see black holes makes the game more consistent.
Yes we can, but your hyperbole makes it clear that even you don't think this is enough. Obviously it isn't... knowing there is a planet with a POSSIBLY amenable atmosphere is not the same as being able to colonize. Maybe in the future sensors will be good enough to do that from Earth. For now, we can detect that there ARE planets (trivial, it seems that most stars have them), and that they MIGHT be colonizable. Not a big difference from the game now, and thus a reasonable conceit.
That is simply absurd: I am not talking about eliminating the expansion part of the game. In the game, you HAVE to go to planets if you want to win (minor races can't win). Likewise, you HAVE to go to Black Holes, to find antimatter and mine it. I never suggested not going. I suggested we should know in the game what we can know today. That's all.
Why is this suggestion so contentious? It seemed like a no-brainer to me?
...It seemed like a no-brainer to me?
Interrogatory?
Please leave Daddy's computer alone and let the adults have their conversation.
If you feel left out of the debate, perhaps you got in over your head. That happens when you play in the deep end of the pool before you are ready. And yes, I am taking parts of what you say and telling you why they are wrong.; that is how arguments usually proceed. If you didn't want your opinions questioned, why do you participate in discussions?
Regardless, you are obviously only interested in creating chaos, not in really addressing the topic, and you are certainly not interested in responding to points made to you. All you do is fill this thread with nonsensical word salad and insults. I am tired of being called names and having you dragging this thread far afield of the intended topic. That is not proper netiquette. If you persist, I shall ask the moderators to block you from this thread as a troll.
Please leave Daddy's computer alone and let the adults have their conversation. If you feel left out of the debate, perhaps you got in over your head. That happens when you play in the deep end of the pool before you are ready. And yes, I am taking parts of what you say and telling you why they are wrong.; that is how arguments usually proceed. If you didn't want your opinions questioned, why do you participate in discussions?Regardless, you are obviously only interested in creating chaos, not in really addressing the topic, and you are certainly not interested in responding to points made to you. All you do is fill this thread with nonsensical word salad and insults. I am tired of being called names and having you dragging this thread far afield of the intended topic. That is not proper netiquette. If you persist, I shall ask the moderators to block you from this thread as a troll.
Its because your putting words in my mouth, i mean honestly, i am just thinking where is this guy getting all this stuff out of what i said? How can i explain it so you will understand? I don't know, well one example, i used the term grammar nazi and you mention the holocaust.... i mean its extreme distortion of meaning going on - that is why i cannot hope to reasonably respond.
Insults, well that is an interesting topic, because everyone can see your previous posts, you do realize that? your the one initiating being insulting stating with Sophistry,.... hmmm perhaps i should have said 'boarders on double talk' and that magically makes it acceptable? Anyway, your level of insult directed at me gets quite extreme, totally uncalled for, so by all means call the moderator here to take a look!
Just curious, you do know the term 'grammar nazi' has nothing to do with the holocaust rite? Other than implying strictness? And if you know that, how do you explain your post 17?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Grammar%20Nazi
.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3515520/Are-grammar-Nazi-Language-pedants-likely-introverted-disagreeable.html
Typographical error.
From Merriam Webster:
: the use of reasoning or arguments that sound correct but are actually false
: a reason or argument that sounds correct but is actually false
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sophistry
I stated that your arguments were misleadingly simplistic and misleading. That is not an insult, it is an opinion.
Nazis perpetuated the holocaust. Comparing someone to a Nazi is comparing them to the perpetrators of one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th Century. And the Urban Dictionary is not exactly a reliable source.
Will do!
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sophistryI stated that your arguments were misleadingly simplistic and misleading. That is not an insult, it is an opinion.
I will agree that Sophistry is an opinion, as is the phrase 'double talk'.... about equally insulting as each other.
Now even Urban Dictionary should move aside for you? See, that's exactly the problem, you chose to take whatever meaning suits you and ignore what i am telling you is my intended meaning.
Enough.
This is not the way a thread a should end up when discussing something in the ideas thread for the game.
I don't want to see this nonsense on the forums again.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
