Steve Jackson Games Forums

Steve Jackson Games Forums (http://forums.sjgames.com/index.php)
-   GURPS (http://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less? (http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=148289)

vicky_molokh 02-06-2017 05:19 AM

From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Greetings, all!

Both single-solar-system space settings and many-star-system space operas seem reasonably common, but I'm wondering: how does one develop a setting from one to the other? Babylon 5 is occurring around 2250s; Star Control around the 2150s; Mass Effect around 2180s (with multiple colonies with populations in the millions, while the interstellar phase began in the 2150s); Star Trek TOS seems to be place around the 2200s.

So let's say that I have a TL9^ setting, with reactionless drives to solve the SSTO issue, a homeworld population of about 4 billion, and about 10-50 million spending a significant part of their lives or even outright living offworld or on other worlds of the system (unobtainium mining, orbital power plants, zero-G alchemy research, logistics for all of the above etc.). On Staryear Zero, the first successful FTL trip to a nearby system occurs. Let the staroperatification begin!

Things that worry me:
  • The rate of building up colonies. Making multiple self-sustaining colonies (not outposts) with a population ranging from at least a few millions to a billion seems like something that's hard to pull off in 200ish years. It means either focusing more on non-operatic technologies such as creation of rapid-breeding transhumans, or moving lots of people around.
  • Moving lots of people offworld implies having a large colonizing fleet. Yet somehow I doubt that a planetary population will spend more than about 0.5% of its Monthly Average Wealth Income on such a fleet and the colonization itself. Maybe 5% if there's some big long-term existential threat (because societies like being in denial). I suspect that this would be extremely little.
  • Assuming the colonies will be founded by rather modest populations compared to that of the homeworld, just how fast can they grow, assuming that a new planet both has a biochemically compatible ecosystem (this isn't hard-sci!) and reasonable resource value?

Has anyone had the worldbuilding experience of going through this process? Or just ideas how to make it 'work'?
Thanks in advance!

Gadget 02-06-2017 07:15 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
GURPS Space gives a good way determining homeworld colony and outpost
populations over a specified time period step 10 in the world building process p91-93

ericthered 02-06-2017 07:31 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
If you want rapid colonization you need both a reason for people to want to get off of the homeworld and fairly cheap means to do so. This probably means dropping the cost of your ships. Or greatly increasing the wealth available. Or both.

If I read your post right, you start with "earth" at half its current population, and twice to ten times that number in orbit. At this point, why are they still using planets when they colonize the system? You don't have the population pressure you need for rapid colonization, and it looks like you have enough space infrastructure that planets aren't a big deal.

In most science fiction, you have a number of planets being colonized, and a steady stream of immigrants. you don't suddenly go from being a single system civilization to a 50 system civilization: it happens slowly, with worlds building up populations. At first, its unlikely more than six worlds can gain substantial populations compared to earth.

Think in terms of total population: what is the final number you need?

vicky_molokh 02-06-2017 07:40 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ericthered (Post 2075002)
If I read your post right, you start with "earth" at half its current population, and twice to ten times that number in orbit. At this point, why are they still using planets when they colonize the system? You don't have the population pressure you need for rapid colonization, and it looks like you have enough space infrastructure that planets aren't a big deal.

Woops, my mistake. Edited: 10-50 millions of people in orbit/on other planets part- or full-time. But half of Terra's population is just a number in a setting I'm currently running, which I imagined as one of the possible starting points for such a development.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericthered (Post 2075002)
In most science fiction, you have a number of planets being colonized, and a steady stream of immigrants. you don't suddenly go from being a single system civilization to a 50 system civilization: it happens slowly, with worlds building up populations. At first, its unlikely more than six worlds can gain substantial populations compared to earth.

Suddenly is relative. Mass Effect lists 30 human colonies (with no less than 5 of them having a almost a million or even several millions of people).

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericthered (Post 2075002)
Think in terms of total population: what is the final number you need?

I'm hoping to achieve 6-12 garden worlds with -1 billion (10^9) people each by the end of the expansion phase (i.e. by about mid-TL10^, about 200 human years from the start of the expansion).

ericthered 02-06-2017 08:35 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Suddenly is relative. Mass Effect lists 30 human colonies (with no less than 5 of them having a almost a million or even several millions of people).
One million isn't what I meant by "Substantial populations compared to earth". The United states alone sports 46 metropolitan areas with double that population. That's a collection of outposts. Million person outposts, but outposts none the less: the collection of them has roughly the same population as Canada (chosen because its similarly large, wealthy, and not known for friendly weather). All together they are significant, not alone.

I was referring to populations capable of significantly interacting with earth in terms of population. You can populate thousands of worlds with earth's current population, but you can only populate a few with meaningfully large populations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh (Post 2075004)
Woops, my mistake. Edited: 10-50 millions of people in orbit/on other planets part- or full-time. But half of Terra's population is just a number in a setting I'm currently running, which I imagined as one of the possible starting points for such a development.

I'm hoping to achieve 6-12 garden worlds with -1 billion (10^9) people each by the end of the expansion phase (i.e. by about mid-TL10^, about 200 human years from the start of the expansion).

Ok, so you want to somewhere between double and quadruple your population over the course of 200 years, meanwhile moving all this excess population to new worlds?

To hit a total of 10 billion you can use a growth rate of .5%. This is half of the current global growth rate. If you use the full current growth rate of 1% you end up with 30 billion total. In that case, you don't just have the people you need to population those worlds, you probably also want those worlds so you can put these people somewhere. And if use peak global growth from the 1960's (2% per annum), you have 200 billion people to put somewhere. Those six colonies aren't going to cut it.

If you use the populating of the united states as an example, you probably get to move more of your population at the end of the period, not at the beginning. The UK had more people than the US until about 1860. That said, the growth rate stays steady at about 30% per decade from 1800 to 1880.

So your goal is quite doable.

Fred Brackin 02-06-2017 08:54 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh (Post 2074982)
So let's say that I have a TL9^ setting, with reactionless drives to solve the SSTO issue,

Unless your reactionless drive is limited in some fashion it will make STL interstellar flight possible as well. If not all the way up to .99 c then still at a useful percentage of say 20-40%. Alpha Centauri is quite reachable at such speeds.

thrash 02-06-2017 11:00 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
If you sidestep environment and resource constraints, the biggest limiting factor on colony growth is infrastructure development. This, in turn, is driven by the tech level you want the colonies to maintain on their own: TL5 is easy (with the right starter package and skill set); TL9^ will take work.

Infrastructure can be created locally, by existing colonists, or imported. The main difference is that local infrastructure can benefit from exponential growth, while imported infrastructure requires resources (ships, mostly) that are likely to have a cap. The balance between the two shifts from all imports in the establishment phase to all local by the time the colony is fully mature and sending out daughter colonies of its own.

Eric's figures on growth rates are pretty good. I suggest you look at how much shipping you want to have available (which may grow over time), how much imported infrastructure each new colonist needs (in tons, on average) to be productive, and therefore how many colonists you can add per year over the organic growth rate.

Your initial population will look like an investment curve with interest plus regular payments -- much faster than just based on interest alone. Once the local population and infrastructure increases exceed the imports, you can quit worrying about imports.

Remember that each world has a saturation population level, based on habitability, resources, and tech level. As you reach that point, the growth curve should level out and then stabilize around that value. This is a reasonable point for some worlds to start sending out daughter colonies.

In my worldbuilding, I usually anticipate that this saturation point is reached in about 400 years of uninterrupted (by war, collapse, etc.) colonization.

Daigoro 02-06-2017 11:12 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by thrash (Post 2075040)
Infrastructure can be created locally, by existing colonists, or imported. The main difference is that local infrastructure can benefit from exponential growth, while imported infrastructure requires resources (ships, mostly) that are likely to have a cap. The balance between the two shifts from all imports in the establishment phase to all local by the time the colony is fully mature and sending out daughter colonies of its own.

There'll also be a trade phase of development, when daughter colonies begin to rely less on the mother system and develop a trade interdependence. This should allow them to exploit their comparative advantage to accelerate infrastructure development and get around the support export limits of the mother system.

Buzzardo 02-06-2017 11:15 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
The Expanse series of books deals with just such a scenario. It starts with humans confined to their own system but having reached out quite a ways within the system. Then it finds a way for humans to get to other systems. Those books might give you a model from which to work.

Curmudgeon 02-06-2017 11:15 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by vicky molokh
Greetings, all!

Both single-solar-system space settings and many-star-system space operas seem reasonably common, but I'm wondering: how does one develop a setting from one to the other? Babylon 5 is occurring around 2250s; Star Control around the 2150s; Mass Effect around 2180s (with multiple colonies with populations in the millions, while the interstellar phase began in the 2150s); Star Trek TOS seems to be place around the 2200s.

So let's say that I have a TL9^ setting, with reactionless drives to solve the SSTO issue, a homeworld population of about 4 billion, and about 10-50 million spending a significant part of their lives or even outright living offworld or on other worlds of the system (unobtainium mining, orbital power plants, zero-G alchemy research, logistics for all of the above etc.). On Staryear Zero, the first successful FTL trip to a nearby system occurs. Let the staroperatification begin!

Things that worry me:
• The rate of building up colonies. Making multiple self-sustaining colonies (not outposts) with a population ranging from at least a few millions to a billion seems like something that's hard to pull off in 200ish years. It means either focusing more on non-operatic technologies such as creation of rapid-breeding transhumans, or moving lots of people around.
• Moving lots of people offworld implies having a large colonizing fleet. Yet somehow I doubt that a planetary population will spend more than about 0.5% of its Monthly Average Wealth Income on such a fleet and the colonization itself. Maybe 5% if there's some big long-term existential threat (because societies like being in denial). I suspect that this would be extremely little.
• Assuming the colonies will be founded by rather modest populations compared to that of the homeworld, just how fast can they grow, assuming that a new planet both has a biochemically compatible ecosystem (this isn't hard-sci!) and reasonable resource value?

Has anyone had the worldbuilding experience of going through this process? Or just ideas how to make it 'work'?
Thanks in advance!

Let’s assume that for whatever reason, people are willing to do this and that there is no shortfall of personnel willing to go. Let’s also assume the modest figure of 0.5% monthly income is assigned to the project and that it takes twice the average annual income to send one person out as a colonist. Let’s also assume that the colonists are selected to maximize fertility and that the expectation is that a family will have a child once every four years, on average (This allows for harsh nomadic conditions where the fertile female cannot be expected to look after more than a toddler and a babe in arms while travelling. On the other hand, the figures also assume that all children will survive to adulthood.) Let’s also assume that a new planet suitable for colonization can be found by a planet once every ten years.

We can launch 0.25% of the 4,000,000 population; that’s ten million colonists, annually, based on our projected budget. We’re assuming a twenty-year long period of fertility and are going to try to recruit at least whole nuclear families for the project. If we assume an initial breakdown of 20% post-fertile, 40% fertile and 40% pre-fertile, we have four million colonists that are fertile and assuming an equal age distribution among both the fertile and pre-fertile groups, 200,000 fertile colonists will become post-fertile and 200,000 pre-fertile will become fertile each year, giving us a constant breeding population of 2,000,000 for the first fertility cycle. The project stops sending all 10 million immigrants when a new planet is discovered or at the end of ten years of immigration, whichever comes last, i.e. the colony is guaranteed a total population of 100 million due to immigration before accounting for natural increase but after that all immigration from the motherworld is directed to a new colony. On average the population will double every twenty years. A colony world will reach a population of four billion, one hundred years after the first colonists arrive. When a colony reaches a population of four billion, it is fully mature and will start its own colonization projects.

Based on those figures, and assuming that Year 0 is the date of arrival of the first ten million colonists at Colony 1, Year 200 should see 75 colony worlds. The breakdowns are as follows: Motherworld & Colonies 1-10 fully mature and colonizing; Colonies 11 & 12, 90 years towards maturity; Colonies 13-15, 80 years towards maturity and a population of two billion; Colonies 16-19, 70 years towards maturity; Colonies 20-24, 60 years towards maturity and a population of one billion; Colonies 25-30, 50 years towards maturity; Colonies 31-37, 40 years towards maturity and 500 million population; Colonies 38-45, 30 years towards maturity; Colonies 46-54, 20 years towards maturity, population 212 million; Colonies 55-64, 10 years towards maturity and population 130 million; and Colonies 65-75, just settled with a population of 10,000,000. In Year 210, Colony 87 will be the first colony to be settled by a colony (Colony 11) of a colony (Colony 1).

whswhs 02-06-2017 11:24 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ericthered (Post 2075011)
Ok, so you want to somewhere between double and quadruple your population over the course of 200 years, meanwhile moving all this excess population to new worlds?

We have an idea of the human doubling time. It was incredibly long up until the beginning of urbanization. At that point it went to around a thousand years, and stayed there, roughly, up until 1750, when it went to 50 years. With a fifty-year doubling time you could multiply initial population by 16 in 200 years, and that's without continuing immigration.

weby 02-06-2017 11:25 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
The speed of development comes down to few main factors:
-cost of transportation
-how habitation friendly the target worlds are
-how desperate humanity/major parts of humanity are to get out there.

A mature TL 9^ society with the capability to resource mine in the space and to use robots should be able to build astonishingly large space structures while still using extremely small parts of a planetary wealth.

So if the actual FTL drives are just normal technology and do not require some special rare material like the mass effect element zero. Then building the ships would not really cost that much.

So if there is a need/wish and plenty of directly habitable worlds then moving millions of people should be possible over a timescale of only decades.

David Johnston2 02-06-2017 11:43 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
[QUOTE=vicky_molokh;2074982]
Things that worry me:[list]
Quote:

[*]The rate of building up colonies. Making multiple self-sustaining colonies (not outposts) with a population ranging from at least a few millions to a billion seems like something that's hard to pull off in 200ish years. It means either focusing more on non-operatic technologies such as creation of rapid-breeding transhumans, or moving lots of people around.
Well you can't reasonably grow a colony to billions in 200 years ago. And even in space opera, you don't. Star Trek started founding human interstellar colonies abooout...now, and none of them have a population of billions except by virtue of having already been inhabited when humans arrived. Even the really nice planets clock in at no more than under ten million. Which is actually enough. You have a single decent sized city surrounded by some small towns. Science fiction frequently treats planets as single biomes which is of course wrong, but it can look like that when the planet is mostly still uninhabited and you're only visiting the occupied part of it.



Quote:

[*]Assuming the colonies will be founded by rather modest populations compared to that of the homeworld, just how fast can they grow, assuming that a new planet both has a biochemically compatible ecosystem (this isn't hard-sci!) and reasonable resource value?
Assume a perfectly habitable planet (Habitability 6) that does not have any notable resources (RVM 0), that was colonized 200 years. The minimum population (barring catastrophe) using standard assumptions of growth would be 400,000. But the typical population value would 3 million. That fits into the default model of a single modern port city surrounded by a few small somewhat frontiery towns. Give it RVM +1 and roll a 14 and you get as high as 15 million. Having a culture that emphasizes population growth could increase that somewhat maybe as much as three times.

Going further than that, and you can always use the Darkover cheat...which is to say that malfunctions of the early buggy hyperdrives could send colony ships back in time, creating lost colonies that likely regressed in technology at least for a time but have populations that hit the carrying capacity limits of whatever their tech level was by the time they were discovered by the Imperium.

kreios 02-06-2017 11:59 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
That's actually something close to my own setting.

First of all, looking at the numbers: You don't really need reactionless drives for cheap orbital transport. An SM+8 water-based Fusion Torch craft can put 750t into orbit for about 70t of water, for a cost of less than $2 per ton into orbit. Using SS2:40's $50/t should pay for handling, shipping, etc.
FTL cost will obviously depend on your FTL method. Let's assume the average distance between "interesting" systems is 10 days. We can use SS2:40's $100/t per day as a proxy. Total cost to travel between two interesting worlds is therefore $1050/t, call it $1000. With colonies being further away, $2000.

As another approach, we can look at the Genesis Colonial Transporter (SS5:19). A TL10^ design, it transports 4,000 colonists plus everything they need to a new home. At $1.8B, it's fairly expensive, and would probably be used in a "shuttle" service between a colony and a parent colony. Doing so, we can call it thirty days per round trip (total of 20 days travel due to FTL-2, plus five to unload and load). Call it ten trips per year.
Replacing the hydrogen-torch with a water-torch reduces fuel cost to $30,000 per trip. Let's assume that reduces passengers to 3000. Additional cost is for the crew (60 people, at $600,000 per trip for comfortable jobs), and to pay off the spacecraft itself ($3.6M per trip over fifty years). Call it a comfortable $5M per trip, including moving stuff into and out of orbit. That's only $16,000 per person, and includes space for industrial equipment and livestock.


Now, who can afford that? At TL10, monthly pay for an average job is $5,600. At status 1, you gain a profit of over $4,000 per month; $3000 if you have to support one dependant. It appears clear that, by saving for two or three years, most people would be able to buy a trip to a colony world.

And how many would there be? Well, look into genetic engineering. A human being with Longevity engineered will live to more than 200 years. You might well assume that UT medical technology and longer lives will lead to more children per parent - I find ericthered's 2% growth rate to look more and more plausible.

And why would they leave Earth? Well, aside from the usual - population pressure, resources, wars, devastation, climate change - those would be 200 billion people. You have to put them somewhere. But can you transport 200 billion people to other planets?
Let's say your 4 billion people, gross-world product of $22.4T, invest 0.5% into colony spacecraft. That's $112B in the first year, buying 60 Genesis transports. Those are able to transport 1.8 million people per year, and that only increases with each further year. Assuming 2% of the transports have to be replaced every year, the peak population is reached 64 years in, when about 5000 Genesis transport 150 million people per year. If the colonies continue to pay to transport Earth's population, it's actually going to be empty by the year 110.

Dalillama 02-06-2017 12:01 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh (Post 2075004)
Woops, my mistake. Edited: 10-50 millions of people in orbit/on other planets part- or full-time. But half of Terra's population is just a number in a setting I'm currently running, which I imagined as one of the possible starting points for such a development.

Quote:

Originally Posted by weby (Post 2075053)
-how desperate humanity/major parts of humanity are to get out there.

A mature TL 9^ society with the capability to resource mine in the space and to use robots should be able to build astonishingly large space structures while still using extremely small parts of a planetary wealth.
.

And there's the rub: A mature TL 9^ civilization with a planetary population of 4 billion appears to have no pressing need to go colonising the galaxy. What's their motivation, is basically the first question that needs to be addressed, that will affect all the others.

Phantasm 02-06-2017 12:10 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
What I did in mine followed the following steps:

1) First extrasolar colony took 20 years to reach at fast STL speeds.
2) First contact with another species that already had lightspeed drives.
3) War breaks out between the species, fought mainly at STL and lightspeed for 150 years.
4) FTL drives developed not long after the war ends.
5) Sleeper ships sent out to many stars at fast STL, lightspeed, and slow FTL speeds. Some ships still unaccounted for.
6) Extrasolar colonies founded on nearby systems not long after.
7) Cloning used in a lot of areas to quickly populate some planets, generally used as a workforce on farms, in mines, and in construction.
8) Colonization of a 20 ly radius assisted by well-mapped routes. The frontier extends out to 50 ly beyond that, not so well mapped and often in very small populations.

Mind, my setting takes about 500 years to go from TL8 to TL11^; the setting itself is just entering TL11^ ca. 2500 CE.

No world other than Earth and some alien homeworlds has over a billion people; even the leaders of my "self-determination league" measure their populations in the millions.

doctorevilbrain 02-06-2017 03:13 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Humans won't have left Earth in Star Trek until 2063 at the earliest, because that's when Warp Drive was invented. Those ships would only do Warp 1 at best.

Ulzgoroth 02-06-2017 03:29 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh (Post 2074982)
[*]The rate of building up colonies. Making multiple self-sustaining colonies (not outposts) with a population ranging from at least a few millions to a billion seems like something that's hard to pull off in 200ish years. It means either focusing more on non-operatic technologies such as creation of rapid-breeding transhumans, or moving lots of people around.

Well, the thing is 200 years is a lot of time and a lot of people can move in that time. Look at the population of North America, for instance.

If going to a colony world in your space opera is as easy as crossing the Atlantic or Pacific in the 19th century, you don't really have that much of a problem.
Quote:

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh (Post 2074982)
[*]Moving lots of people offworld implies having a large colonizing fleet. Yet somehow I doubt that a planetary population will spend more than about 0.5% of its Monthly Average Wealth Income on such a fleet and the colonization itself. Maybe 5% if there's some big long-term existential threat (because societies like being in denial). I suspect that this would be extremely little.

If movement of people to the colonies has to be done at public expense, you likely have a problem.

If it's done by people buying their own passage from a plentiful general transportation fleet, not as much.

PTTG 02-06-2017 03:44 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
In a sense, this is a justification for "single-biome planets" in a lot of space operas; There's only a few thousand or million people on a planet, and they live in the best place they can find. It doesn't work for Star Wars where people have lived on every planet you can breath on for millennia, but for a lot of other settings...

David Johnston2 02-06-2017 04:46 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by doctorevilbrain (Post 2075088)
Humans won't have left Earth in Star Trek until 2063 at the earliest, because that's when Warp Drive was invented. Those ships would only do Warp 1 at best.

That's a retcon to move the date safely into the future. At the time, Star Trek's future history had us launching interstellar colonization ventures in the 1990s.

warellis 02-06-2017 04:58 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by David Johnston2 (Post 2075104)
That's a retcon to move the date safely into the future. At the time, Star Trek's future history had us launching interstellar colonization ventures in the 1990s.

I thought the "interstellar colonization" was "send crazy madman and his followers off-planet on sublight ship?" As in Khan was able to escape?

Also has there been a retcon on that actually?

Refplace 02-06-2017 06:55 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
One thing I havent read here that I think is important is how good the FTL is.
If its really fast you dont need as many ships and can build up faster.
if its slower or requires more expensive resources than it will take more time to build up a colony.

I would go with a few STl reactionless ships doing exploration and colonization with larger ships or embryonic seeding.
Later than you get the FTl so you can have a few different types out there.

vicky_molokh 02-07-2017 01:45 AM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Refplace (Post 2075123)
One thing I havent read here that I think is important is how good the FTL is.
If its really fast you dont need as many ships and can build up faster.
if its slower or requires more expensive resources than it will take more time to build up a colony.

I would go with a few STl reactionless ships doing exploration and colonization with larger ships or embryonic seeding.
Later than you get the FTl so you can have a few different types out there.

I was thinking that FTL trips to most candidate-worlds take from a couple of weeks to a few months, depending on distance and drive quality/number.

I also think that it's easiest to make STL irrelevant in this scenario (due to hyperspace mapping mismatching realspace mapping, due to reactionless drives not being able to get past a certain potential energy limit, due to distances involved etc.).

sir_pudding 02-07-2017 04:28 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by warellis (Post 2075105)
Also has there been a retcon on that actually?

Sort of, but it was apparently an error. In Doctor Bashir, I Presume dialog places the Eugenics Wars in the 22nd century, but Moore has said this wasn't deliberate but just rather bad math.

Notably though the Future's End Voyager two-parter takes place in a 1990s without significant obvious differences from our own. Apparently there is a novel series that tries to reconcile this with contemporary but covert Eugenics Wars.

Several Enterprise episodes reference the Eugenics Wars as late 20th century, as well.

Johnny1A.2 02-07-2017 08:59 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sir_pudding (Post 2075288)
Sort of, but it was apparently an error. In Doctor Bashir, I Presume dialog places the Eugenics Wars in the 22nd century, but Moore has said this wasn't deliberate but just rather bad math.

Notably though the Future's End Voyager two-parter takes place in a 1990s without significant obvious differences from our own. Apparently there is a novel series that tries to reconcile this with contemporary but covert Eugenics Wars.

Several Enterprise episodes reference the Eugenics Wars as late 20th century, as well.

They were. There was never much question in the original TOS that the Eugenics Wars were waged in the 1990s, it was specifically stated. It was never made entirely clear (in TOS) if the Eugenics Wars and World War III (both of which are referenced specifically in TOS) are parts of the same thing, or just how they were related, if they were, or just what.

I remember that novel about 'covert' EW, IIRC it had Gary Seven in it. But I only skimmed it, I didn't consider it worth the trouble.

Some continuity conflicts cannot be reconciled, the background of TOS and the background of the rest of the Trek franchise just aren't compatible. The Eugenics Wars weren't covert conflicts or conspiratorial proxy struggles, they were open wars against and between the kingdoms ruled by Khan and his ilk, and they happened in the 1990s, as a basic part of the pre-series history.

Flyndaran 02-07-2017 09:15 PM

Re: From TL9^ interplanetary to TL10^ interstellar space opera in 200 years or less?
 
Wouldn't the same reason for changes among Terminator, Doctor Who, and other shows work for ST? Time travelers, time wars, timey-wimey, etc.?

An episode of Voyager suggests that the computer explosion of integrated circuits were the direct result of someone finding a time lost ship in the 1960s, making "our history" an altered one.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.