-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
why? like i previously stated, pluto has strategic value by being the outlier of the Sol system. it does have value if your willing to attach some to it.
- 2
Edge of the solar system? I thought there were some more pluto-sized objects after pluto. So where would the outlier of the solar system start and end? The Kuiper Belt? Neptune? The Oort Cloud? Uranus?
- 1
There is nine planets in Solar System. Seriously, the need for degree for all costs in those people is appaling. Next thing they would revise heliocetrism just for the sake of some shady money grant.
- 7
- 1
This topic is a great example that you can read statistics in many ways... most likely the way you want to read it.
- 3
there are objects past pluto (chiefly the dwarf planets Eris and Makemake,) but we know so little about them and they are WAYYYYYYY much father away (makemake is 3x plutos' orbit) that even from a strategic standpoint they're kinda pointless. now maybe pluto could be in but just be called "kuiper belt territory". this would make sense as it would theoretically include any and all objects from the increasingly better understood kuiper belt and would not purposefully omit anything outside of the oort cloud.
Holding pluto wouldn't be holding the entire outer solar system, it would be holding one tiny fraction of the most distant and (in economic and military terms) unimportant part of the solar system. My main argument against including pluto would be that it would extend the edge of the solar system considerably and require warp drives to travel and wormhole stations to be built that much further out.
- 2
So as far as I do understand subsystems the outer line would be the last objects with are effected by sun's gravity so the oort belt would be the limes as far as we know so Pluto is not the end of our solar system. And the fact that Pluto isn't a planet doesn't say anything Wether it should be included or not cause the moon isn't a planet either and I belive I saw it in a screenshot. And to all Pluto fanatics who hate astronomers the only reason Pluto isn't a planet is because it doesn't fit what is expected for a planet so it got his own category of which Pluto was so fist so I guess it went quite good for tiny pluto
Pluto is smaller then Eris. I'd be up for just forgetting about it and all the other Kuiper Belt objects because well, they're useless.
actually pluto is a bit larger
this picture also explains why i'd want pluto in but have it be called "kuiper belt territory"
but is that really a bad thing? with warp we know there is a minimum safe distance for FTL as is the cliche, but we don't know just how far that safe distance is. even sins of a solar empire, whose gameplay depth is comparable to banging rocks together and calling it an orchestral symphony has technologies that reduce the distance to system edge needed to charge up warp drives.
as for wormhole stations, well the one sci-fi franchise to use this same kind of thinking (mass effect) has charon being its mass relay.
and for system size... isn't bigger better? the larger the system, the more time to transit yeah, but for defensability- even when its just tactical relays or other passive things, it does work in favor of the defender if an attack fleet has to take a bit to get to earth. and thanks to speed settings, that won't take very long.
- 1
It's true. Pluto's orbit is 248 years. It is more than twice as far away from Earth as Neptune - the next closest body - and that means that as a 'jumping off point' to intercept invaders, for example, it would only be able to protect a tiny fraction of the rest of the system at any given time. The ships would have to travel an enormous distance to reach any given point along its orbit.
The dev diary says that warp and wormholes need to use the 'edge of the system', which seems to be a defined line on the system map just past the orbit of the furthest body. Adding Pluto would either require this distance be increased, or Pluto be added within the orbit of Neptune, which would be a bit accurate but... odd? That said, it would be very cool if the required distance changed with technology rather than just being 'move to province border to embark onto an ocean tile'.
Pluto's orbit be whack. It ranges from 29.6AU to 39AU, with an AU being the average distance from Earth to the Sun. Neptune is actually at a comparatively boring orbit with a distance of 29.9-30.3AU, so there is a point in Pluto's orbit where it's slightly closer to the sun than Neptune is. It could be added here, but then it's utility would be redundant, if not already pointless.
Honestly though, I think I may be changing my stance a little bit. Without orbital mechanics and with the FTL presented as is, if Pluto is at the very edge of a system, it could have huge utility in being a defensive base to cover a wormhole station, assuming inhabited bodies can project orbital defenses. Then again, the same could be said of Neptune's moons if they're near the edge of the system.
Is Pluto really becoming the balkans of Stellaris?
I gues that arguing about pointless things is a must do in any PDS games.
By the way, I WANT NATO PLUTO COUNTERS
I gues that arguing about pointless things is a must do in any PDS games.
By the way, I WANT NATO PLUTO COUNTERS
I'm afraid explaining in less circumspect terms would likely violate the forum rules regarding foul language. Needless to say, this is a hive of scum and deviancy.
- 2
KISSHUGKISSHUGKISSHUGKISSHUG Heart Pluto Heart KISSHUGKISSHUGKISSHUGKISSHUG
- 1
