Planet Busters- do they bust planet?

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Planet Busters- do they bust planet?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Planet Busters- do they bust planet?

pHunny_pHarmer posted 08-18-99 11:04 AM ET
If you use a planet buster in this game, you get a lake, right. Well, isn�t the name wrong, then? It�s a PLANET buster. Shouldn�t there be a planet reprocussion (sorry I can�t spell) also? Like a massive mind worm swarm? In Civ2 there was at least pollution to deter you from launching the nukes. Here, once you repeal the charter... How about a massive earthquake or volcanic erruption, or an AC version of nuclear winter? What do you think?
Q Cubed posted 08-18-99 11:33 AM ET
um......
on the higher levels, there IS a massive mindworm swarm...
pHunny_pHarmer posted 08-18-99 12:06 PM ET
But on earth, an ecological disaster would affect everybody. What I mean is something like global cooling. (Where does all that land from the lake go, anyway?)
pHunny_pHarmer posted 08-18-99 12:08 PM ET
But on earth, an ecological disaster would affect everybody. What I mean is something like global cooling. (Where does all that land from the lake go, anyway?)
korn469 posted 08-18-99 12:36 PM ET
well that planet buster is described as a nuclear weapon...what would happen would be a nuclear winter maybe -1 energy and -1 nutrients in every square across the planet for 50 years
korn469
HMFIC posted 08-18-99 03:11 PM ET
if you are not playing on any sissy level,
planet busters cause a general global warming
causing the ocean to rise and destory cities
without pressure domes. You also get
locust/mindworm attacks as well as fungal
blooms.
Also, what makes you think that just cuz
something occurs one way on the Earth, that
it will have the same affect on this new
world? Why do you assume the explosive in
a planet buster is the exact same thing we
have today? Isnt this a game taking place
in the future. Like we have advanced to
where we can colonize distant planets, but
we have not evolved in any other tech?
Pah-leeze.
Have a nice day.
korn469 posted 08-19-99 04:39 AM ET
HMFIC
it says in the datalinks that it is a really powerful nuclear bomb. something like 4 gigatons
and in responce to
"Also, what makes you think that just cuz
something occurs one way on the Earth, that
it will have the same affect on this new
world?"
it's because of the laws of physics, but maybe i'm wrong.
korn469
HMFIC posted 08-19-99 08:51 AM ET
I never did understand that physics thingy...
perhaps you could explain to me the physics behind PSI GATES.
SMACTrek posted 08-19-99 09:35 PM ET
This is why I love MOO2. You can just fire away with your stellar converter. No worms. Just enemies.
Q Cubed posted 08-19-99 10:14 PM ET
Really?
As I understood it, the planet buster is a Quasi-nuclear device...
not exactly a big nuke, but similar.
but it doesn't make much of a difference, does it?
CrankyHotDog posted 08-20-99 12:59 AM ET
Listen, the Planet Buster is NOT 4 gigatons. Instead, it's 256!!!!
mindlace23 posted 08-20-99 06:33 AM ET
As the yield of a planet buster depends on the reactor, I imagine what 'type' of weapon it is depends on the same. A fission reactor- fission PB.
I imagine they call it 'quasi-nuclear' since a PB with an antimatter reactor really isn't nuclear at all.
If I wanted to speculate about it's sci-fi nature, I'd say that while it uses the energetic reaction implied by it's reactor type, it 'channels' or modifies the energy coming from the reaction, most likely to strip any alpha and beta particles, or convert them into energy, so that the 'lake' that remains is not radioactive.
This probably requires a lot of computational smarts, especially to do it in the time between detonation and the missile's disintigration, and so 'pre-sentient algorithms' are required.
~mindlace
Darkstar posted 08-20-99 12:36 PM ET
I think Brian Reynolds just wanted to be able to nuke people and not worry about polution, fall-out, nuclear winters...
-Darkstar
bene4 posted 08-20-99 12:54 PM ET
It would only be logical for the next generation of weapons to use the materials provided by the enemy against them - for example a small bomb that used the matter around it as a source of energy. This would explain the hole in the ground - some matter has been converted into energy and the rest has been fused/pulverized or made very small. The water is rain water.
Why the water in the crater goes away when the sea levels go down? It's easier code.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Planet Busters- do they bust planet?
pHunny_pHarmer	posted 08-18-99 11:04 AM ET If you use a planet buster in this game, you get a lake, right. Well, isn�t the name wrong, then? It�s a PLANET buster. Shouldn�t there be a planet reprocussion (sorry I can�t spell) also? Like a massive mind worm swarm? In Civ2 there was at least pollution to deter you from launching the nukes. Here, once you repeal the charter... How about a massive earthquake or volcanic erruption, or an AC version of nuclear winter? What do you think?
Q Cubed	posted 08-18-99 11:33 AM ET um...... on the higher levels, there IS a massive mindworm swarm...
pHunny_pHarmer	posted 08-18-99 12:06 PM ET But on earth, an ecological disaster would affect everybody. What I mean is something like global cooling. (Where does all that land from the lake go, anyway?)
pHunny_pHarmer	posted 08-18-99 12:08 PM ET But on earth, an ecological disaster would affect everybody. What I mean is something like global cooling. (Where does all that land from the lake go, anyway?)
korn469	posted 08-18-99 12:36 PM ET well that planet buster is described as a nuclear weapon...what would happen would be a nuclear winter maybe -1 energy and -1 nutrients in every square across the planet for 50 years korn469
HMFIC	posted 08-18-99 03:11 PM ET if you are not playing on any sissy level, planet busters cause a general global warming causing the ocean to rise and destory cities without pressure domes. You also get locust/mindworm attacks as well as fungal blooms. Also, what makes you think that just cuz something occurs one way on the Earth, that it will have the same affect on this new world? Why do you assume the explosive in a planet buster is the exact same thing we have today? Isnt this a game taking place in the future. Like we have advanced to where we can colonize distant planets, but we have not evolved in any other tech? Pah-leeze. Have a nice day.
korn469	posted 08-19-99 04:39 AM ET HMFIC it says in the datalinks that it is a really powerful nuclear bomb. something like 4 gigatons and in responce to "Also, what makes you think that just cuz something occurs one way on the Earth, that it will have the same affect on this new world?" it's because of the laws of physics, but maybe i'm wrong. korn469
HMFIC	posted 08-19-99 08:51 AM ET I never did understand that physics thingy... perhaps you could explain to me the physics behind PSI GATES.
SMACTrek	posted 08-19-99 09:35 PM ET This is why I love MOO2. You can just fire away with your stellar converter. No worms. Just enemies.
Q Cubed	posted 08-19-99 10:14 PM ET Really? As I understood it, the planet buster is a Quasi-nuclear device... not exactly a big nuke, but similar. but it doesn't make much of a difference, does it?
CrankyHotDog	posted 08-20-99 12:59 AM ET Listen, the Planet Buster is NOT 4 gigatons. Instead, it's 256!!!!
mindlace23	posted 08-20-99 06:33 AM ET As the yield of a planet buster depends on the reactor, I imagine what 'type' of weapon it is depends on the same. A fission reactor- fission PB. I imagine they call it 'quasi-nuclear' since a PB with an antimatter reactor really isn't nuclear at all. If I wanted to speculate about it's sci-fi nature, I'd say that while it uses the energetic reaction implied by it's reactor type, it 'channels' or modifies the energy coming from the reaction, most likely to strip any alpha and beta particles, or convert them into energy, so that the 'lake' that remains is not radioactive. This probably requires a lot of computational smarts, especially to do it in the time between detonation and the missile's disintigration, and so 'pre-sentient algorithms' are required. ~mindlace
Darkstar	posted 08-20-99 12:36 PM ET I think Brian Reynolds just wanted to be able to nuke people and not worry about polution, fall-out, nuclear winters... -Darkstar
bene4	posted 08-20-99 12:54 PM ET It would only be logical for the next generation of weapons to use the materials provided by the enemy against them - for example a small bomb that used the matter around it as a source of energy. This would explain the hole in the ground - some matter has been converted into energy and the rest has been fused/pulverized or made very small. The water is rain water. Why the water in the crater goes away when the sea levels go down? It's easier code.