Well of Souls Forums

Arioch wrote:If you're asking what it's made out of, I don't know for sure. I imagine that it's probably a composite of a carbon fiber structural framework interwoven with an insulating material, alternating with layers of a strong, conductive alloy that helps spread and dissipate heat. Different combatants at the same tech level probably use the same materials, with variations in structure and manufacturing technique (Race A's alloy of X material might be more refined than Race B's).

There's a physical limit to how much energy any material armor can absorb, so I think we have to accept that defensive screens probably represent the majority of protection and armor is a minor component.

Well, composition as well as if they had any special qualities/construction techniques to reduce damage (vacuum baffles for blocking shockwaves, reflective/ablative coating for lasers, etc), though that does pretty much answer my question, thank you!

Arioch wrote:If you're asking what it's made out of, I don't know for sure. I imagine that it's probably a composite of a carbon fiber structural framework interwoven with an insulating material, alternating with layers of a strong, conductive alloy that helps spread and dissipate heat. Different combatants at the same tech level probably use the same materials, with variations in structure and manufacturing technique (Race A's alloy of X material might be more refined than Race B's).

There's a physical limit to how much energy any material armor can absorb, so I think we have to accept that defensive screens probably represent the majority of protection and armor is a minor component.

One of the problems with Star Trek is when they technobabble forth something that later become ridicules when real science catch up. Suffice to say, it is cool, advanced and it works. We do not need to know how thou.

Mr Bojangles wrote:

Arioch wrote:sori is a class of "hypersquid" organisms on Perrein of various sizes that cause a lot of trouble.

The sori - I get the squid part, but what makes them "hyper?" High intelligence?

It's just a term I used. Sori are not necessarily intelligent, but they are highly developed in evolutionary terms, having a lot more genetic material than a mollusc. This means they can have some very sophisticated (and nasty) special features, adaptations, and behaviors. Perrein's ecosystem is much older than Earth's, and so the organisms have had longer to develop and specialize.

Hello everyone!
How many new weapons created Loroi during the war?

Something I'm wondering about Loroi physiology; how exactly does it compare to human? I know they were genetically engineered, but I was wondering what sort of trade-offs were made, compared to humans, in making them the way they are now.

Jack wrote:How many new weapons created Loroi during the war?

Most of the new weapons created by the Loroi during the war were based on the Historian technology exchange -- the Pulse Cannon and the Wave-loom device. There have been other refinements and incremental improvements, but nothing major that I can think of.

malletmann wrote:Something I'm wondering about Loroi physiology; how exactly does it compare to human? I know they were genetically engineered, but I was wondering what sort of trade-offs were made, compared to humans, in making them the way they are now.

Loroi and humans are very similar in physical capabilities. Loroi are slightly healthier on average (in terms of stamina, disease resistance, and damage resistance) and have better acceleration tolerance, but the difference is minor; you'll find a greater variation between individual humans than between the Loroi and human averages. Loroi also mature faster, require less food and oxygen, and have a lower body temperature. And of course they're telepathic.

They're based on a different and more efficient biochemistry than humans (and other Earth organisms), so they can get slightly better performance out of a similar design without necessarily having to trade off something else. However, other Soia-Liron organisms using the same biochemistry may have to make some trade-offs for improved performance (for example the Barsam gain greater size and strength and improved regeneration at the cost of greater food and oxygen requirements, longer maturation time and reduced lifespan.

Arioch wrote:

Jack wrote:How many new weapons created Loroi during the war?

Most of the new weapons created by the Loroi during the war were based on the Historian technology exchange -- the Pulse Cannon and the Wave-loom device. There have been other refinements and incremental improvements, but nothing major that I can think of.

malletmann wrote:Something I'm wondering about Loroi physiology; how exactly does it compare to human? I know they were genetically engineered, but I was wondering what sort of trade-offs were made, compared to humans, in making them the way they are now.

Loroi and humans are very similar in physical capabilities. Loroi are slightly healthier on average (in terms of stamina, disease resistance, and damage resistance) and have better acceleration tolerance, but the difference is minor; you'll find a greater variation between individual humans than between the Loroi and human averages. Loroi also mature faster, require less food and oxygen, and have a lower body temperature. And of course they're telepathic.

They're based on a different and more efficient biochemistry than humans (and other Earth organisms), so they can get slightly better performance out of a similar design without necessarily having to trade off something else. However, other Soia-Liron organisms using the same biochemistry may have to make some trade-offs for improved performance (for example the Barsam gain greater size and strength and improved regeneration at the cost of greater food and oxygen requirements, longer maturation time and reduced lifespan.

Loroi seem to have their sexual dimorphism the opposite way round to humans.

RedDwarfIV wrote:Loroi seem to have their sexual dimorphism the opposite way round to humans.

Yes, but so do most non-mammalian Earth species; the females tend to be larger.

Arioch wrote:

RedDwarfIV wrote:Loroi seem to have their sexual dimorphism the opposite way round to humans.

Yes, but so do most non-mammalian Earth species; the females tend to be larger.

I only note that it's strange because Loroi seem to have been based on humans in-universe. I know there are out-of-universe reasons, but it does make me wonder what the in-universe reason the Soia might have had for deliberately swapping it back around.

Maybe they intended that human males and Loroi females get together and RULE THE UNIVERSE

RedDwarfIV wrote:

Arioch wrote:

RedDwarfIV wrote:Loroi seem to have their sexual dimorphism the opposite way round to humans.

Yes, but so do most non-mammalian Earth species; the females tend to be larger.

I only note that it's strange because Loroi seem to have been based on humans in-universe. I know there are out-of-universe reasons, but it does make me wonder what the in-universe reason the Soia might have had for deliberately swapping it back around.

Maybe they intended that human males and Loroi females get together and RULE THE UNIVERSE

I think that is best left to the imagination

RedDwarfIV wrote:I only note that it's strange because Loroi seem to have been based on humans in-universe. I know there are out-of-universe reasons, but it does make me wonder what the in-universe reason the Soia might have had for deliberately swapping it back around.

Speaking hypothetically, of course, Beryl notes that she considers the larger percentage of females (and therefore greater reproductive capacity) to be a basic adaptation for a warrior species. All of the other known "warrior" species (Loroi, Delrias, Barsam, Nissek) are either female-dominated or hermaphroditic.

Arioch wrote:

RedDwarfIV wrote:I only note that it's strange because Loroi seem to have been based on humans in-universe. I know there are out-of-universe reasons, but it does make me wonder what the in-universe reason the Soia might have had for deliberately swapping it back around.

Speaking hypothetically, of course, Beryl notes that she considers the larger percentage of females (and therefore greater reproductive capacity) to be a basic adaptation for a warrior species. All of the other known "warrior" species (Loroi, Delrias, Barsam, Nissek) are either female-dominated or hermaphroditic.

That wasn't really my point. I agree with you that, with a high percentage of females, you could create a larger population. But then you have the issue of who is going to go into combat. You can't send the pregnant women or the women raising the children, or you'll lose that reproductive edge. I just think that, if you were engineering a species as a warrior, it would be more pragmatic to have the females' primary purpose be reproduction while the males' primary purpose is fighting - especially if you're using a species that already has a watered down version of those traits as a template. The males only have to donate their gametes, after all, while the females have to spend months carrying a baby then years teaching it.

I don't see how making the sex most responsible for reproduction also be the sex that does the fighting makes sense for a race engineered that way. But then, Beryl is biased in that regard. She's been taught her whole life that the Loroi are Proud Warriors, and since they are Proud Warriors, they must always have been Proud Warriors. She wouldn't realise the contradiction existed.

hi hi

It really isn't much of a contradiction when you look at the percentage of any population that actually participates directly in fighting during a war. Some of the most deadly wars we have seen on Earth haven't had more than 1/3rd of any given population in the military, let alone killed in the military.

RedDwarfIV wrote:I agree with you that, with a high percentage of females, you could create a larger population. But then you have the issue of who is going to go into combat. You can't send the pregnant women or the women raising the children, or you'll lose that reproductive edge. I just think that, if you were engineering a species as a warrior, it would be more pragmatic to have the females' primary purpose be reproduction while the males' primary purpose is fighting - especially if you're using a species that already has a watered down version of those traits as a template. The males only have to donate their gametes, after all, while the females have to spend months carrying a baby then years teaching it.

That's an unnecessary overspecialization, reproductively speaking. A female warrior can't bear children and fight at the same time, but she can do one or the other and switch between the two roles as needed. A male warrior can never bear children, and so he's reproductive dead weight when he isn't fighting. Sure, males can be used for insemination, but this takes a very small number of males and can be done entirely artificially in a high-tech environment. You can also go farther to the complete extreme: a hermaphroditic species like the Barsam in which 100% of the population can both fight and bear children (though even the Barsam can't out-reproduce the Loroi, because their greater size and physical complexity increases both gestation times and wear-and-tear on the "mother"). If you want to keep a percentage of your females safe behind lines and always bearing children, you can choose to do that -- but you're not forced to by biology.

This kind of explosive industrial-level reproductive capacity is usually unnecessary and undesirable in a naturally-evolved species (as it will result in catastrophic overpopulation) or even in the modern but comparatively "normal" society that the Loroi live in now -- in which a significant percentage of the population has to work in other jobs full time and you can never have 90% of them fighting. But imagine a hypothetical past (such as that hinted at in the Loroi sagas) in which the proto-Loroi were pure warriors -- having to make war or reproduce and literally nothing else.

RedDwarfIV wrote:

Arioch wrote:

RedDwarfIV wrote:I only note that it's strange because Loroi seem to have been based on humans in-universe. I know there are out-of-universe reasons, but it does make me wonder what the in-universe reason the Soia might have had for deliberately swapping it back around.

Speaking hypothetically, of course, Beryl notes that she considers the larger percentage of females (and therefore greater reproductive capacity) to be a basic adaptation for a warrior species. All of the other known "warrior" species (Loroi, Delrias, Barsam, Nissek) are either female-dominated or hermaphroditic.

That wasn't really my point. I agree with you that, with a high percentage of females, you could create a larger population. But then you have the issue of who is going to go into combat. You can't send the pregnant women or the women raising the children, or you'll lose that reproductive edge. I just think that, if you were engineering a species as a warrior, it would be more pragmatic to have the females' primary purpose be reproduction while the males' primary purpose is fighting - especially if you're using a species that already has a watered down version of those traits as a template. The males only have to donate their gametes, after all, while the females have to spend months carrying a baby then years teaching it.

I don't see how making the sex most responsible for reproduction also be the sex that does the fighting makes sense for a race engineered that way. But then, Beryl is biased in that regard. She's been taught her whole life that the Loroi are Proud Warriors, and since they are Proud Warriors, they must always have been Proud Warriors. She wouldn't realise the contradiction existed.

If you really want a Warrior Race then the Loroi are sorta there. Termites & similar provide the missing piece: a handful of females perform the majority of reproductive duties, being grotesquely adapted via their own biology, with the Warriors as backups that rarely get invoked. You really want the bulk of the population to be capable of reproduction, but not because that makes them a "warrior race": you want it because if they mostly get wiped out, then they can recover faster, and that is what makes them a warrior race.

With regards to any discussion on whether warrior societies should be based around the female gender and what precedents they should follow, I would like to submit that ants and bee colonies on Earth are protected by drones and all drones are inherently female. (and sterile females at that) The males of the species' only purpose is to reproduce and die. They serve no other purpose.

Nature and biology seems to have found a precedent for having females be the de facto aggressive members of their species.

The "queen" model may superior if you lay eggs, but for live birth you need more bodies to get more babies. Some ant queens can lay tens of thousands of eggs per day, but it would take a seriously freaky body to birth that many live babies.

Also, they have recently found that many "worker" bees, ants, etc. aren't actually sterile. Some of them occasionally sneak their own eggs in with the queen's batch and hope that nobody notices.

Do it like the seahorses:
Hand over the egg to have it bred by the father.
As adapted and genetically engineered species you could use sterile worker drones to carry out the babies, so that the queen can reproduce like hell.

But we're getting too far from the template, and far into hypothetical discussions how such a society would look like.

Arioch wrote:

RedDwarfIV wrote:I agree with you that, with a high percentage of females, you could create a larger population. But then you have the issue of who is going to go into combat. You can't send the pregnant women or the women raising the children, or you'll lose that reproductive edge. I just think that, if you were engineering a species as a warrior, it would be more pragmatic to have the females' primary purpose be reproduction while the males' primary purpose is fighting - especially if you're using a species that already has a watered down version of those traits as a template. The males only have to donate their gametes, after all, while the females have to spend months carrying a baby then years teaching it.

That's an unnecessary overspecialization, reproductively speaking. A female warrior can't bear children and fight at the same time, but she can do one or the other and switch between the two roles as needed. A male warrior can never bear children, and so he's reproductive dead weight when he isn't fighting. Sure, males can be used for insemination, but this takes a very small number of males and can be done entirely artificially in a high-tech environment. You can also go farther to the complete extreme: a hermaphroditic species like the Barsam in which 100% of the population can both fight and bear children (though even the Barsam can't out-reproduce the Loroi, because their greater size and physical complexity increases both gestation times and wear-and-tear on the "mother"). If you want to keep a percentage of your females safe behind lines and always bearing children, you can choose to do that -- but you're not forced to by biology.

This kind of explosive industrial-level reproductive capacity is usually unnecessary and undesirable in a naturally-evolved species (as it will result in catastrophic overpopulation) or even in the modern but comparatively "normal" society that the Loroi live in now -- in which a significant percentage of the population has to work in other jobs full time and you can never have 90% of them fighting. But imagine a hypothetical past (such as that hinted at in the Loroi sagas) in which the proto-Loroi were pure warriors -- having to make war or reproduce and literally nothing else.

But my whole point is that the Loroi are not a naturally evolved species. They are an engineered species that appears to be based on a naturally evolved species. The Soia, if designing the Loroi for war, probably wouldn't care if the result was something that couldn't sustain itself. If the Soia were no longer around to provide logistics to their genetically engineered army, why should they care what happens to it?

Having a 90% female population (and the ability to artificially inseminate) means you can have a pretty much exponentially expanding species, if you can provide supplies for it. That means even a 10% expendable male fighter population will grow exponentially too.

Or have I somehow managed to dramatically misread the entire situation, and the Loroi did evolve as a warrior race independently of humans, despite remarkable similarities?

RedDwarfIV wrote:But my whole point is that the Loroi are not a naturally evolved species. They are an engineered species that appears to be based on a naturally evolved species. The Soia, if designing the Loroi for war, probably wouldn't care if the result was something that couldn't sustain itself. If the Soia were no longer around to provide logistics to their genetically engineered army, why should they care what happens to it?

Again, hypothetically speaking, the issue is flexibility and efficiency. Non-reproducing warriors can't help increase the population when they're idle, and can't even sustain their own numbers if their home base gets bombed and the "mothers" get taken out. Even the Umiak, who reproduce artificially, aren't sterile; they could reproduce "naturally" if the situation called for it (Hardtroops probably not so much.) Though you might have to draw a diagram for them.

Specialization in work force (warrior vs. worker) is less dangerous, as you can teach a soldier to work in a factory and vice-versa. But you can't reach a man to grow a womb.

RedDwarfIV wrote:Having a 90% female population (and the ability to artificially inseminate) means you can have a pretty much exponentially expanding species, if you can provide supplies for it. That means even a 10% expendable male fighter population will grow exponentially too.

Again, this is an unnecessary specialization -- there's nothing about being able to bear children that precludes you from being an effective warrior. If you want to maintain a 90% reproductive reserve, fine. But you don't gain anything by locking yourself biologically into being unable to change that ratio by making the 10% non-reproductive. What happens if you reach your desired population cap? You've got 90% of your population twiddling their thumbs.