• 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.
upload_2020-3-30_20-55-46.png


I just conquered Sanctuary and, then it hit me, how big has to be these slums or wasteland to cover a entire ringworld district?


upload_2020-3-30_20-59-21.png


Technically, they never said I could not remove the entire flora and fauna from the planet.
 
What the hell? What version are you playing on? I only started playing Stellaris after Megacorp, and am very confused by what I'm seeing.
It looks like the Super Crystal Monster imposed itself onto a pre-2.0 galaxy map.

its some of my pic that i took when the game came out there was some funny graphic bugs back then when you left system view and returned to galexy view the game some time didnt unload all the stuff in the system so you could see fleets and stuff
 
Playing as rogue servitor, one of my subjects had an AI uprising with another rogue servitor.
I realised that surrendering would transfer all of my federation's planets to them - effectively putting most of organic life in galaxy under protection and care of machines. Which was my empire's objective in the first place.
Screenshot from 2020-03-31 03-53-41.png
 
Playing as rogue servitor, one of my subjects had an AI uprising with another rogue servitor.
I realised that surrendering would transfer all of my federation's planets to them - effectively putting most of organic life in galaxy under protection and care of machines. Which was my empire's objective in the first place.
View attachment 561243
Calculating...
Your conclusion is recognized as logical.
Proceed?
 
My War in Heaven experience:
  • Started as Rogue Servitors
  • Formed a Hegemony
  • Forced an empire with "Scion" origin to join via war. FE master of said empire didn't even bother interacting with said war at all.
Few year later, War in Heaven triggers. One of the FE that wakes up was the patron of my "loyal voluntary scion origin federation member"

I got automatically called into WiH as an ally of said AE. No decession, no choice, no nothing, I was now part of the War in Heaven. Not as a subject of said AE either, no, as an ally.

So here I am now.
A robot empire.
Allied (not subordinate!) to the spiritualist AE.
In the War in Heaven.
Oh and they have closed their borders to me, because why wouldn't they.

CD8FCD2CC219231415C254502F9D47DD93B012B2
 
Last edited:
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
My War in Heaven experience:
  • Started as Rogue Servitors
  • Formed a Hegemony
  • Forced an empire with "Scion" origin to join via war. FE master of said empire didn't even bother interacting with said war at all.
Few year later, War in Heaven triggers. One of the FE that wakes up was the patron of my "loyal voluntary scion origin federation member"

I got automatically called into WiH as an ally of said AE. No decession, no choice, no nothing, I was now part of the War in Heaven. Not as a subject of said AE either, no, as an ally.

So here I am now.
A robot empire.
Allied (not subordinate!) to the spiritualist AE.
In the War in Heaven.
Oh and they have closed their borders to me, because why wouldn't they.

CD8FCD2CC219231415C254502F9D47DD93B012B2

The War in Heaven is the single buggiest event in the game. I keep seeing new ways for it to break the game.
 
Doing an On the Shoulders of Giants start and just discovered this.

View attachment 561139

Underground.

Under. Ground.

That is a gas giant.

There is no "ground"!

How in the Great Blue Sky's name did these guys build an underground structure under the non-existent ground of a gas giant?

I would not agree to that. Wikipedia states: "...gas planets can have a solid core. After the "Kern-Aggregations-Hypothese" this is even necessary for them to form..."
So, your gas planet can have a solid core, which can have a underground base.
 
I would not agree to that. Wikipedia states: "...gas planets can have a solid core. After the "Kern-Aggregations-Hypothese" this is even necessary for them to form..."
So, your gas planet can have a solid core, which can have a underground base.

I'm well aware that gas giants can have a core. However, even when they have a solid core that core is not commonly referred to as "the ground" (or a synonym of it, e.g. "the surface"), which at the very least makes the wording odd and suggests that this isn't supposed to target a gas giant. The younger races in Stellaris also don't seem like they possess the technology to launch an excavation on the core of a gas giant based on some anomalies regarding gas giants and difficulties regarding stuff in the atmosphere of one, which also makes it seem like something other than just the text is wrong if we assume that there's supposed to be general consistency.
 
I'm well aware that gas giants can have a core. However, even when they have a solid core that core is not commonly referred to as "the ground" (or a synonym of it, e.g. "the surface"), which at the very least makes the wording odd and suggests that this isn't supposed to target a gas giant. The younger races in Stellaris also don't seem like they possess the technology to launch an excavation on the core of a gas giant based on some anomalies regarding gas giants and difficulties regarding stuff in the atmosphere of one, which also makes it seem like something other than just the text is wrong if we assume that there's supposed to be general consistency.
Well, there's your problem, assuming there's supposed to be general consistency!

It's 2200, we have FTL travel and consider many anomalies we find primitive, but we're using red lasers and nuclear fission :p

So, why not be so well acquainted with accessing and digging under the solid core of gas giants that we call it the surface, while also having difficulty accessing things in its atmosphere?

Seriously though, yah, clearly an oversight/bug.
 
I'm well aware that gas giants can have a core. However, even when they have a solid core that core is not commonly referred to as "the ground" (or a synonym of it, e.g. "the surface"), which at the very least makes the wording odd and suggests that this isn't supposed to target a gas giant. The younger races in Stellaris also don't seem like they possess the technology to launch an excavation on the core of a gas giant based on some anomalies regarding gas giants and difficulties regarding stuff in the atmosphere of one, which also makes it seem like something other than just the text is wrong if we assume that there's supposed to be general consistency.
The thing is, the term "gas giant" is just a legacy. It's not "gas" and "giant" simultaneously, it's "gas giant" with its own meaning.

A "core" of a "gas giant" is a planet itself, and gas around it - is just atmosphere. High, thick, dense, pressed by gravity of a planet. Forming relatively (to Earth's) high pressure on the surface.

In order to exploit it, you need over9000-very strong materials, or anti-gravity fields. And, well, the latter is presented in the game, but only used to add housing to housing districts lol
 
A "core" of a "gas giant" is a planet itself, and gas around it - is just atmosphere. High, thick, dense, pressed by gravity of a planet. Forming relatively (to Earth's) high pressure on the surface.
While you are technically correct(the best kind of correct), the "gas" of a gas giant doesnt stay gas for very long as you go deeper. It transitions to liquid, and, if the atmosphere is primarily hydrogen, metallic.
You wouldnt call the bottom of the ocean earths surface, would you? You wouldnt be underground, but also clearly not on the surface.

We also have a definiton of the surface of a gas giant. The "surface" is at the level where the atmospheric pressure is 1 bar.
 
While you are technically correct(the best kind of correct), the "gas" of a gas giant doesnt stay gas for very long as you go deeper. It transitions to liquid, and, if the atmosphere is primarily hydrogen, metallic.
You wouldnt call the bottom of the ocean earths surface, would you? You wouldnt be underground, but also clearly not on the surface.
Depends on pressure and temperature, yes, I remember)
Surface, well.. I need to check the context and its terminology, to be sure. To be correct in common, I will prefer wording "the bottom of the ocean" (you used this as well), or coordinates including z-axis, at least because it describes the actual position.

We also have a definiton of the surface of a gas giant. The "surface" is at the level where the atmospheric pressure is 1 bar.
Tried to google it, to no result. Where does it come from?
 
Tried to google it, to no result. Where does it come from?
After some searching, Ive found 2 Sources for it:
1.: An Introduction to the solar System, published by David A. Rothery, Neil McBride and Iain Gilmour, page 389
The table on this page includes the mean radius and defines it for gas Giants at 1 bar pressure.

2.: The german wikipedia page for Jupiter mentions it:
Die Temperatur beträgt bei einem Druck der Gasschicht von 100 kPa (1 bar, dies wird bei Gasplaneten allgemein als Nullniveau, d. h. „Oberfläche“, definiert) 165 K (−108 °C) und bei 10 kPa (0,1 bar) Druck 112 K (−161 °C). Das Nullniveau liegt am Jupiteräquator durchschnittlich bei 71.492 km.[5]

"1 bar, commonly defined as zero level ("surface") for gas giants"
The citation leads to this book:
Keneth R. Lang: The Cambridge Guide to the Solar System - Second Edition Cambridge University Press, 2011, ISBN 978-0-521-19857-8, Page 34.
 
Depends on pressure and temperature, yes, I remember)
Surface, well.. I need to check the context and its terminology, to be sure. To be correct in common, I will prefer wording "the bottom of the ocean" (you used this as well), or coordinates including z-axis, at least because it describes the actual position.


Tried to google it, to no result. Where does it come from?

..... i think, this is getting out of hand. This is the wrong forum for this topic. Its the "strange screenshot-threat", not the "discuss gas giants"-threat.
Nevertheless, i was just thinking about the deep ocean conditions. The pressure there is rapiditely increasing. At 4000 m depth you have a pressure of 400 bar. Still, there are fishes around. The kind of fishes, whose eyes explodes, when you take them up to the surface. We humans have the same problem, when we are in space without protection: our eyes explodes and all the other nice things, like our bodies expanding a lot.
I have read a few thousends of science fiction books during my past lifetime and in one there was an expedition discovering flying animals living in some gas planet. Or in another book there were some heat-resisting big monster eating up suns.
Its science fiction. We can imagine everything. It doesn´t have to be true. Its imagination. But, if there is a solid core in a gas planet, some species, which can withstand pressures a lot more then we can withstand, can have some base in some gas planet.

Edit: i had some hard time trying to find out, how many bar a human can withstand, but could not find anything. Jet fighter pilots have to withstand 9 g = 9 times the pressure = should be 9 bar?
And only 1 out of 100 applicants are able to withstand this....
The record in deep see diving without extra protection is 332 m = 33 bar. But then you have to breathe special air, as normal air would explode your lungs....
 
Last edited: