Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Speculative biology is simultaneously a science and form of art in which one speculates on the possibilities of life and evolution. What could the world look like if dinosaurs had never gone extinct? What could alien lifeforms look like? What kinds of plants and animals might exist in the far future? These questions and more are tackled by speculative biologists, and the Speculative Evolution welcomes all relevant ideas, inquiries, and world-building projects alike. With a member base comprising users from across the world, our community is the largest and longest-running place of gathering for speculative biologists on the web.

While unregistered users are able to browse the forum on a basic level, registering an account provides additional forum access not visible to guests as well as the ability to join in discussions and contribute yourself! Registration is free and instantaneous.

Join our community today!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
What type of evolution ought we to have
The original method 0 (0%)
Mnidjm's method 1 (50%)
Flisch's method 1 (50%)
Total Votes: 2
Cytelbearn 3 - General Discussion; This is where you can discuss the Cytelbearn 3 project
Topic Started: Aug 20 2016, 06:31 AM (1,723 Views)
Vailnoff
Member Avatar
Adolescent
 *  *  *  *  *
This is where you can discuss the Cytelbearn 3 project.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vailnoff
Member Avatar
Adolescent
 *  *  *  *  *
I am currently naming the tectonic plates (And thus the continents) of Cytelbearn 3. If you wish to have a plate named after you, please reply to this comment.
Posted Image
Tectonic Plates
1 - Mnidjm
2 -
3 -
4 - Hydromancerx
5 -
6 -
7 -
8 -
9 -
10 -
11 -
Edited by Vailnoff, Aug 24 2016, 03:25 AM.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Flisch
Member Avatar
Superhuman
 *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
Your northpole is somewhat impossible in euclidian space.
We have a discord. If you want to join, simply message me, Icthyander or Sphenodon.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vailnoff
Member Avatar
Adolescent
 *  *  *  *  *
I see, do know how I could fix it?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Flisch
Member Avatar
Superhuman
 *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
Well, redrawing that part would be an option?
We have a discord. If you want to join, simply message me, Icthyander or Sphenodon.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vailnoff
Member Avatar
Adolescent
 *  *  *  *  *
What I meant was what particular part of it was was impossible and what could be changed to make it less so. I apologise if I annoyed you.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Flisch
Member Avatar
Superhuman
 *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
Well, you have to imagine that the entire top row of pixels on your map is a single point, the north pole. Since the northpole is only a single point, it would be occupied by one continental plate. On your map however, there are two that simultaneously converge on the northpole.
We have a discord. If you want to join, simply message me, Icthyander or Sphenodon.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vailnoff
Member Avatar
Adolescent
 *  *  *  *  *
Fixed.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
FallingWhale
Member Avatar
Prime Specimen
 *  *  *  *  *  *  *
To avoid making a rolling disaster I'd suggest a few things:

Say how large microscopic actually is. Less than one centimeter covers nearly all species and mass on earth. Otherwise people just make giant singlecells.
Don't specify species; genus covers the scale much better.
If there are going to be bacteria or implied other life decide now before someone points out the total lack of mitochondria or chloroplast in a year.
Posted Image
Spoiler: click to toggle
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mnidjm
Member Avatar
King of Mars
 *  *  *  *  *
FallingWhale
Aug 21 2016, 08:44 PM
To avoid making a rolling disaster I'd suggest a few things:

Say how large microscopic actually is. Less than one centimeter covers nearly all species and mass on earth. Otherwise people just make giant singlecells.
Don't specify species; genus covers the scale much better.
If there are going to be bacteria or implied other life decide now before someone points out the total lack of mitochondria or chloroplast in a year.
I agree with all of these, especially the bacteria part.

I would recommend ballparking the size to around 10 micrometers.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vailnoff
Member Avatar
Adolescent
 *  *  *  *  *
About the genus systems, ought it to be like Sagan 4's in which it can only be for species up to 20 centimetres or ought it to apply to everything on the planet. As well as this, would such a system that you are suggesting entirely eliminate the species system? Just wondering.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
FallingWhale
Member Avatar
Prime Specimen
 *  *  *  *  *  *  *
It would be simpler to make it universal, the only exemptions are a very small number of very long lived slow reproducing trees like ginkgos and monkeypuzzles.
Posted Image
Spoiler: click to toggle
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Flisch
Member Avatar
Superhuman
 *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
Here are two points that always itched me the wrong way on Sagan 4:

1) Microscopic life - These kinds of games are already massive in scope and using microscopic life is simply too much for my taste. Either you end up having a ridiculously unrealistically small amount of microbes, just so you don't have them dominating the game by 99%, or you, well, you have them dominate the game by 99%, both cases are not very satisfying in my opinion. It would be better to just assume that all bacteria and single-celled organisms exist and move on. I think adding them is never worth it. It's better to just start with the first primitive multicellular life.

2) People adopting their own "pet lineages" - I've seen it multiple times in Sagan 4, where people just pick a species and evolve that... and its ancestor, and that species ancestor, and THAT species ancestor until you have a complete lineage that was designed by one person. This often leads to unnecessarily convoluted and bizarre evolutionary histories that feel rather forced rather than natural, because the creator had a certain idea and needed to bruteforce that thing into the game, because nothing extant fit the criteria. An easy fix to this would be add a rule that you can never evolve a species that you created yourself. This way the evolutions feel much more natural, because they don't go one particular predestined path but instead zig-zag back and forth, like they would in reality.

Please note that these are just personal pet peeves. but maybe you agree.
We have a discord. If you want to join, simply message me, Icthyander or Sphenodon.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vailnoff
Member Avatar
Adolescent
 *  *  *  *  *
I can see where you're coming from Flisch. However, what life-form do you suggest starting with instead of a microbe? Or, shall we start off like some of the evogames you see on 4chan where you start with 4 primitive life-forms(perhaps 2 photosynthetic organisms, a carnivore and a herbivore?). Sorry if that didn't make much sense.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mnidjm
Member Avatar
King of Mars
 *  *  *  *  *
I would recommend saying that your starting organism is the first eukaryotic life, while saying that bacteria and viruses exist. Make each microbe submission be a global genus, and then put a block on anymore submissions of cellular life, so every submission after must be multicellular.

You as the admin can then use the viruses and bacteria to facilitate disasters.
Edited by mnidjm, Aug 22 2016, 08:02 AM.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Café Cosmique · Next Topic »
Add Reply