Am I the only one who doesn't want ringworlds to be buildable?

[LizardCommander]

To produce one Gaia world takes about 40 years, requires max-level Terraforming, Terraforming Liquids and Gasses, max power infrastructure (to hit 10k energy cost), and even with a leader that reduces terraforming costs, you're looking at a lot of energy. The fact is, you have to spend a very long time generating up to power cap (or nearly there) to produce ONE Gaia world, and then it takes 40 years for that world to finish terraforming into a Gaia world. It uses up all of your power stores (which means you can't go negative like you normally would during a war, focusing on mineral production over energy). This is fine with me, it keeps Gaia worlds exceptionally rare, even for a late game and powerful Empire. Assuming you have both liquids and gas, and have +100 energy production a month, you can only begin terraforming one Gaia world every 8 years.

As for Ring construction, I am not 100% sure that it will be added, it should be, we are quite capable of surpassing Fallen Empires. In fact, in the general process of events the Fallen Empries are conquered by the newer civilizations. I believe that we also need a new ship type, ideally it would be the super class of ship that Fallen Empires have. Of course as with Gaia worlds such powerful technologies should be exceptionally rare and expensive to produce. Why does it make sense that I should be able to produce such vessels, ringworlds, and Gaia Worlds? I have surpassed the Fallen Empires, almost defeating the Unbidden alone in a hundred year war, keeping them perpetually at bay, and then afterwards conquering a Fallen Empire with ease. It makes sense for that Empire of mine to have the reasonable ability to produce ringworlds, and preferably better.

 

[klingonadmiral]

"Orbitals are not ringworlds. RIngworld, as per definition, span around a star, prefferably in the habitable zone to also allow it to house a massive population. The Culture's orbitals fail to do so for an G-class star (although they possibly could do so on faint Red Dwarves, but I don't know if you wanna live around those, the plants would be blue) with a diamater of a mere 3 million kilometers, exactly 1% of the diamater of a proper ringworld around a G2V-class star like the Sun. Orbitals are tiny."

Although you wouldn't need to go up very far from an orbital to get a ringworld around a small M-class star. Proxima b orbits at about 7 megameters from its host star.

 

[Kayden_II]

The way I see if it's a ring designed for people to live on then it's a world and a ring and therefor a ringworld.

I wouldn't consider the Word - "World", because It can be Anything, Which has a certain (rather big) Size ...

In the Context of this Thread, It means One of these Structures, Which We've seen in Stellaris and such a One seems to be within the habitable Zone of its Star (caused by visible Continents and Oceans), but It's a Ring around its Star, too ...

So Yeah - It's a little Bit confusing, because the Stellaris-Structure seems to be a Hybrid, because ...

To achieve the Ability to habit People or at Least to minimize the Costs of It (Habitability-Concept), It's reasonable to position Anything within the habitable Zone of a Star ...
To maximize the Energy-Absorbtion from a Star (Dyson-Concept), It's reasonable to position 1. Satellites or 2. a Ring, better Ring(s) or 3. a full Sphere around a Star as near as possible to this Star ...

That's my Point ...
Build a Ring, Which has a certain (rather big) Size and You can call It a "Ring-World" ...
Build a Ring, Which has a certain (rather big) Size + is within the habitable Zone of its Star and You can call It a "(habitable) Ring-World" ...
Build a Ring, Which has a certain (rather the biggest) Size + is within the habitable Zone of its Star + is build around its Star and You can call It a "(habitable) Dyson-Ring-World"

Conclusion: The Stellaris-Structure is a "(habitable) Dyson-Ring" or a "(habitable) Dyson-Ring-World".

 

[Peko?]

That's the opposite of what you told me isn't it?

No it isn't, me and klingonadmiral seem to be in agreement. Orbitals are (smaller) rings that orbit stars, ringworlds are (much larger) rings that span around stars.

 

[Phoenix32]

No it isn't, me and klingonadmiral seem to be in agreement. Orbitals are (smaller) rings that orbit stars, ringworlds are (much larger) rings that span around stars.

He specifically said that orbitals fail to orbit a proper star, while ring worlds do. You told me orbitals are not ringworld because they DO orbit stars.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

He specifically said that orbitals fail to orbit a proper star, while ring worlds do. You told me orbitals are not ringworld because they DO orbit stars.

Orbit implies, you know, orbiting- going around as a discrete body.

A ringworld doesn't "orbit" its star- it encircles it.

 

[jazzglands]

Alright I'm convinced about the megastructures. I just wanted it to feel like an achievement.

 

[TempusxX]

well we are getting a dyson sphere and to also be able to build ringworlds in the expansion

 

[Peko?]

He specifically said that orbitals fail to orbit a proper star, while ring worlds do. You told me orbitals are not ringworld because they DO orbit stars.

Sigh. For the last time. No he didn't. Show me where he said that orbitals can't ORBIT a star. In no way, shape, or form was that stated.
What was said was that orbitals don't SPAN a star, as in forms a ring around it. Be careful to note that span and orbit are two different words that don't mean the same thing.

 

[Dëzaël]

@TheDungen I wasn't agreeing with you on a gameplay perspective, but I have to admit @Otto of england and you are crazy b******* when it comes to number crunching. That was a nice reading.

On topic : I'm happy the diary stated there would be diplomatic consequences to megastructures. At least it should not be an easy win for those who fear that.