The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[The Expanse] You know a lot about how people die.

1356767

Posts

  • BogartBogart Kneel before Mod Registered User, Moderator mod
    I am going to guess that Thomas Jane will be the best thing about the show.

    InkSplat
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Bogart wrote: »
    I am going to guess that Thomas Jane will be the best thing about the show.

    Without having read the source material I know he's one of the key things bringing me to it.

    Shameless Link whoring updated Fridays starting 1/26/17
    http://exterminatorsassistant.blogspot.com/
    Julius
  • Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Once an Asshole. Trying to be better. Registered User regular
    So I've been listening to these audiobooks and I enjoy them a lot. I'm currently 2/3 or so in Cibolas Burn and it's awesome. I love how shit is hitting the fan so hard on SPOILERS:
    the dumbass colonists who thought it's a splendid idea to land on a unknown planet, with an unknown biosphere, with an unknown geo-characteristics. Reminds me of the first American settlers who all flocked over to the new found land and was so focus on finding gold that they resorted to cannibalism when they didn't bother to gain enough resources to last through the winter.

  • InkSplatInkSplat 100%ed Bad Rats. Registered User regular
    How did I miss that the 4th book was already out? I swear when this thread started and I started reading them that there were only 3! Huh. Well, guess I know what I'm buying when I get home.

    Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
  • CabezoneCabezone Registered User regular
    edited April 2015
    I thought Cibola Burn was the weakest of the books so far, but I'm still super excited for this.

    My only immediate, knee jerk concern is that, with a SyFy budget (even one they consider big), you need great characters really well written and executed, which is probably the weakest tool in the Expanse books' repetoire.

    The other is I just don't get how they cast Jane as Miller. I just didn't read that character anywhere close to what that guy exudes. Miller (for me) feels more like William Forsythe in a trenchcoat smoking a cigarette than a skinny Zen Punisher.

    Eh....new medium...there's going to be some significant differences between the two....or at least there should be. I've always been of the opinion that something should always be heavily rewritten for each medium while keeping the core story. They can rewrite all of the dialogue and keep the same general story.

    Cabezone on
  • InkSplatInkSplat 100%ed Bad Rats. Registered User regular
    I'm going to miss all the single-book POV characters all over again. I just kept wanting Bobbie back in book 3.

    Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
    DracomicronshrykeCalicaWraith260DevoutlyApathetic
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    edited April 2015
    It'd be pretty difficult to do this show accurately on a TV budget, what with there being no actors raised in low-gee, and practically everybody is multi-racial.

    That said, I can overlook that sort of thing if they got good actors. Thomas Jane as Miller sounds like a valid interpretation of the character. May need to schlub him up a little, but Miller does have some themes in common with Punisher, so...

    I think I imagined Jewel Staite as Sam while reading the books.

    Dracomicron on
    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • ArtereisArtereis Registered User regular
    Book 5 just came out. Still working through it but I'm enjoying it immensely at the moment.

  • EchoEcho Where da waaagh at? Moderator mod
    Yeah, I have it and Paolo Bacigalupi's latest in the queue.

    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
  • iguanacusiguanacus Desert PlanetRegistered User regular
    Just finished. Shit has hit all the fans

    All of them.

    Completely covered in shit.

    I dunno, I take you seriously on some topics and dick rider is your profession
    webguy20
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    I am several chapters in. I knew that it was going to be intense as soon as I realized that
    all four of the main cast have their own viewpoint chapters. I worry that getting fleshed out supporting cast means somebody gonna die. I'm still not over (Book 3)
    Sam's death

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    I finished book 5. I didn't expect that. I wonder if the series is going to go at one season/book. If so, we're talking Game of Thrones-level of spoiler control on some of this stuff.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • EchoEcho Where da waaagh at? Moderator mod
    Still haven't worked my way down to it yet, but eh, I was just a couple of chapters into The Peripheral anyway. *switches*

    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
    Dracomicron
  • EchoEcho Where da waaagh at? Moderator mod
    I guess this means "airing in December".

    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
  • webguy20webguy20 Registered User regular
    I finished book 5. I didn't expect that. I wonder if the series is going to go at one season/book. If so, we're talking Game of Thrones-level of spoiler control on some of this stuff.

    Yea, the authors arent pulling any punches. Hot damn was the 5th book good.

    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
    Dracomicron
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    webguy20 wrote: »
    I finished book 5. I didn't expect that. I wonder if the series is going to go at one season/book. If so, we're talking Game of Thrones-level of spoiler control on some of this stuff.

    Yea, the authors arent pulling any punches. Hot damn was the 5th book good.

    5th book I really liked how they got
    Clarissa Mao
    back into the series. She was a cool character.

    Also Bobbie. Bobbie is the best.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • TeriferinTeriferin Registered User regular
    I always completely miss when one of these books comes out. Into the reading list it goes!

    teriferin#1625
  • StraygatsbyStraygatsby Registered User regular
    I know this isn't about the TV show, but since you guys mentioned it: Nemesis Games was excellent. I was really down on Cibola Burn, but this one feels like we're back on track.

    Saw the "full" (maybe?) trailer for The Expanse show during the Dominion premiere (wow that show still sucks), and while I'm still not sure about Jane, I'm warming up. I think, with only 3 minutes of footage to go on, that they nailed the fuck out of Amos, Avrasala, and Naomi.

    I couldn't tell who Alex was one first viewing.

  • EchoEcho Where da waaagh at? Moderator mod
    Oh hey I completely missed the new trailer they showed at Comiccon.

    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
    GethLind
  • EchoEcho Where da waaagh at? Moderator mod
    Halfway through Nemesis Games and woooow. The fourth book was kinda slow, but this more than makes up for it.

    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
    Dracomicron
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    Echo wrote: »
    Halfway through Nemesis Games and woooow. The fourth book was kinda slow, but this more than makes up for it.

    Nemesis Games is when Shit Gets Really Really Real.
    Like, the destruction in Leviathan Wakes was pretty serious. No doubt. Nemesis Games blows right past it.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
    Echo
  • EchoEcho Where da waaagh at? Moderator mod
    Finished it.

    Shit got Real. I can only hope the TV show lives long enough to get to this part.

    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
    Dracomicron
  • LindLind Registered User regular
    December 14 is the date to look for the tv series.

    Echo
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Ethlete Registered User regular
    edited August 2015
    I'm glad I checked in on this thread.
    I was starting to tire of the hubris of man theme in books 1 through 4.
    I cracked open the fifth book.

    Not that I wasn't going to anyways.
    Read 1-4 in the past two weeks. :P

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on



  • ChanusChanus Sugoi! ^_____^Registered User regular
    edited August 2015
    This is relevant to my interests!

    I was actually wondering if there was a thread, and I found this, and then I discovered I had even read the OP :P

    I am very excite. I don't share the apparent general consensus that cibola burn was slow or boring or whatever. I enjoyed it, and even liked the somewhat change of tone with
    the interludes from the perspective of whatever protomolecule-related mechanism drives ghost miller/the investigator

    though i did feel that
    what's his nuts was a bit on the edge of the cartoonish villain with stupid motivations caused by evil-induced myopia

    I watched the trailer with some friends who hadn't read the books and I realized that it's pretty much a mashup of scifi nonsense that is pretty inscrutable if you don't already know what's happening. I hope the show translates well from the books.

    Also, could there be a more perfect Avasarala than Shohreh Aghdashloo? She is exactly who I pictured when reading the books before I even knew there was a show coming.

    Chanus on
    D&D [chat] names list for games
    XCOM Name File with [chat] First Names - All Countries, M&F | Or Shivahn's with gendered names
    Blueberrywerewlf on the Sony Anime Games Box | BluberryWerewlf on the BroBone
    **PUUUUUUNCH**
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] Registered User regular
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    mvaYcgc.jpg
    HaphazardChanusAntinumeric
  • HaphazardHaphazard Registered User regular
    I'm still on the first novel, about two thirds in. Since I go through audio books pretty fast atm, I'm going to listen to the whole series anyway.

  • ChanusChanus Sugoi! ^_____^Registered User regular
    second book ramps up the scope a bit, is a bit more actiony, and less the sort of noir detective film feeling the first one has

    i thought it was good, but i liked all the books :P

    D&D [chat] names list for games
    XCOM Name File with [chat] First Names - All Countries, M&F | Or Shivahn's with gendered names
    Blueberrywerewlf on the Sony Anime Games Box | BluberryWerewlf on the BroBone
    **PUUUUUUNCH**
    JuliusDracomicronAntinumeric
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited August 2015
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    I just finished the 3rd book last week and it made me so angry but because I was invested in the characters.
    Fucking Ashford. Just fucking space the asshole. Also the juxtaposition of the obvious reaction to Ashford with Anna's chapters was really really strong. I could agree with what Anna was saying while still really really really wanting horrible things to happen to Ashford.

    I'm also curious if the 4th book and beyond continue the trend of mentally ill POVs.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    ChanusHaphazard
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] Registered User regular
    edited August 2015
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    The noir bit I didn't like because I'd read too many of them already, and even too many sci-fi detective mash-ups. But they switched gears near the middle of the book and made it better, I thought.

    I'll nerd out a bit on the telescope thing here:
    You can and would track every single ship, because lots of people would care, especially in war time. Cops don't have access to spy satellites, not that they'd be much good anyway. But you can bet China has a damn good idea where US ships are at a given time, even though its very expensive to maintain this sort of surveillance.

    When you have thousands of ships flying about the solar system, you need a way to keep track of them. For trade, for taxes, to stop smugglers and pirates, for military or diplomatic reasons, etc. It isn't difficult, because a fusion drive is hot enough to be seen clear across the solar system, and you can easily analyze the specturms to help with identification. This is current day technology. You just need a lot of telescopes- but if there are millions of people permanently living in the belt across however many habitats, you have plenty of easy places to build them. The volume of space is large, but you're mostly looking only along a single plane, and computer-automated systems can watch and record things across many scopes automatically. I mean, if you're living in space and want to know whats going on outside, telescopes are the main option; they'd be utterly ubiquitous.

    The best example was when the Canterbury was destroyed. It was a large Martian warship, very important. When it blew, if not before, the Martians and everyone else would want to see what happened, and so would turn their telescopes to that location. They'd especially want to see who done it, and so would look very carefully and track the mysterious ships that attacked it. They were stealth ships, but that doesn't matter when under thrust. And when they turn off their thrust, you can still make an accurate guess as to their course.

    I know this makes me sound like this guy, but its a curious omission for a book that clearly cared about how space travel might plausibly work.
    tumblr_l2lvyzeATz1qc073co1_400.gif

    [Tycho?] on
    mvaYcgc.jpg
    Geth
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    The noir bit I didn't like because I'd read too many of them already, and even too many sci-fi detective mash-ups. But they switched gears near the middle of the book and made it better, I thought.

    I'll nerd out a bit on the telescope thing here:
    You can and would track every single ship, because lots of people would care, especially in war time. Cops don't have access to spy satellites, not that they'd be much good anyway. But you can bet China has a damn good idea where US ships are at a given time, even though its very expensive to maintain this sort of surveillance.

    When you have thousands of ships flying about the solar system, you need a way to keep track of them. For trade, for taxes, to stop smugglers and pirates, for military or diplomatic reasons, etc. It isn't difficult, because a fusion drive is hot enough to be seen clear across the solar system, and you can easily analyze the specturms to help with identification. This is current day technology. You just need a lot of telescopes- but if there are millions of people permanently living in the belt across however many habitats, you have plenty of easy places to build them. The volume of space is large, but you're mostly looking only along a single plane, and computer-automated systems can watch and record things across many scopes automatically. I mean, if you're living in space and want to know whats going on outside, telescopes are the main option; they'd be utterly ubiquitous.

    The best example was when the Canterbury was destroyed. It was a large Martian warship, very important. When it blew, if not before, the Martians and everyone else would want to see what happened, and so would turn their telescopes to that location. They'd especially want to see who done it, and so would look very carefully and track the mysterious ships that attacked it. They were stealth ships, but that doesn't matter when under thrust. And when they turn off their thrust, you can still make an accurate guess as to their course.

    I know this makes me sound like this guy, but its a curious omission for a book that clearly cared about how space travel might plausibly work.
    tumblr_l2lvyzeATz1qc073co1_400.gif
    I don't think the answer you're looking for has a technical basis, it's a social thing.

    The belt? That great place to put all those government telescopes you're talking about? It doesn't have a government. It's a corporate libertarian style of thing. They don't even run their own cops. The two places that appear to have the economic muscle to do that are Earth and Mars and neither really runs the belt.

    Now I totally buy that Earth and Mars saw the Donnager, the Martian warship, blow up. It was post Holden's broadcast and shit was obviously going down. Hell, I'll even buy that Earth is always watching a Martian warship of that size. The Cantebury, the ice hauler, is like complaining that we don't have detailed satellite surveillance of MH370 disappearing. It is entirely within our technical capability but who gives a shit? It'd be useful like .001% of the time and run a fairly large capital investment to do. Shit, we don't even have detailed info of MH17 and that was flying over a war zone. Especially when all the stuff you talked about aside from the military thing can be handled by transponder tracking. Sorta like what I believe we do with Super Tankers and other ocean liners currently.

    I'm also kinda gonna back off because something I was gonna bring up is definitely from the 2nd book. I'll just wrap up by saying that Leviathan Wakes doesn't exactly paint a complete picture of the state of the setting.

    JuliusDracomicron
  • EchoEcho Where da waaagh at? Moderator mod
    Chanus wrote: »
    Also, could there be a more perfect Avasarala than Shohreh Aghdashloo? She is exactly who I pictured when reading the books before I even knew there was a show coming.

    She had better curse until the paint peels off the walls in the show!

    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
    ChanusDevoutlyApatheticRchanenQuid
  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    The noir bit I didn't like because I'd read too many of them already, and even too many sci-fi detective mash-ups. But they switched gears near the middle of the book and made it better, I thought.

    I'll nerd out a bit on the telescope thing here:
    You can and would track every single ship, because lots of people would care, especially in war time. Cops don't have access to spy satellites, not that they'd be much good anyway. But you can bet China has a damn good idea where US ships are at a given time, even though its very expensive to maintain this sort of surveillance.

    When you have thousands of ships flying about the solar system, you need a way to keep track of them. For trade, for taxes, to stop smugglers and pirates, for military or diplomatic reasons, etc. It isn't difficult, because a fusion drive is hot enough to be seen clear across the solar system, and you can easily analyze the specturms to help with identification. This is current day technology. You just need a lot of telescopes- but if there are millions of people permanently living in the belt across however many habitats, you have plenty of easy places to build them. The volume of space is large, but you're mostly looking only along a single plane, and computer-automated systems can watch and record things across many scopes automatically. I mean, if you're living in space and want to know whats going on outside, telescopes are the main option; they'd be utterly ubiquitous.

    The best example was when the Canterbury was destroyed. It was a large Martian warship, very important. When it blew, if not before, the Martians and everyone else would want to see what happened, and so would turn their telescopes to that location. They'd especially want to see who done it, and so would look very carefully and track the mysterious ships that attacked it. They were stealth ships, but that doesn't matter when under thrust. And when they turn off their thrust, you can still make an accurate guess as to their course.

    I know this makes me sound like this guy, but its a curious omission for a book that clearly cared about how space travel might plausibly work.
    tumblr_l2lvyzeATz1qc073co1_400.gif
    *rips out the ships transponder and suddenly no one knows where to look for me in the great big humongulous space that is our solar system*

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Trace wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    The noir bit I didn't like because I'd read too many of them already, and even too many sci-fi detective mash-ups. But they switched gears near the middle of the book and made it better, I thought.

    I'll nerd out a bit on the telescope thing here:
    You can and would track every single ship, because lots of people would care, especially in war time. Cops don't have access to spy satellites, not that they'd be much good anyway. But you can bet China has a damn good idea where US ships are at a given time, even though its very expensive to maintain this sort of surveillance.

    When you have thousands of ships flying about the solar system, you need a way to keep track of them. For trade, for taxes, to stop smugglers and pirates, for military or diplomatic reasons, etc. It isn't difficult, because a fusion drive is hot enough to be seen clear across the solar system, and you can easily analyze the specturms to help with identification. This is current day technology. You just need a lot of telescopes- but if there are millions of people permanently living in the belt across however many habitats, you have plenty of easy places to build them. The volume of space is large, but you're mostly looking only along a single plane, and computer-automated systems can watch and record things across many scopes automatically. I mean, if you're living in space and want to know whats going on outside, telescopes are the main option; they'd be utterly ubiquitous.

    The best example was when the Canterbury was destroyed. It was a large Martian warship, very important. When it blew, if not before, the Martians and everyone else would want to see what happened, and so would turn their telescopes to that location. They'd especially want to see who done it, and so would look very carefully and track the mysterious ships that attacked it. They were stealth ships, but that doesn't matter when under thrust. And when they turn off their thrust, you can still make an accurate guess as to their course.

    I know this makes me sound like this guy, but its a curious omission for a book that clearly cared about how space travel might plausibly work.
    tumblr_l2lvyzeATz1qc073co1_400.gif
    *rips out the ships transponder and suddenly no one knows where to look for me in the great big humongulous space that is our solar system*
    Well he's right to the degree that if they know where you are right now and are willing to continually point a telescope at you they should be able to track you. If you burn they see your drive and can use that information to know how your velocity changed. If you don't burn then you're a dumb rock and bound by Newton's Laws.

    I just don't think they have the resources or the inclination to keep a telescope pointed at every single ship in the whole solar system. Certainly not during Leviathan wakes where the system is going crazy.

    Chanus
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] Registered User regular
    Trace wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    The noir bit I didn't like because I'd read too many of them already, and even too many sci-fi detective mash-ups. But they switched gears near the middle of the book and made it better, I thought.

    I'll nerd out a bit on the telescope thing here:
    You can and would track every single ship, because lots of people would care, especially in war time. Cops don't have access to spy satellites, not that they'd be much good anyway. But you can bet China has a damn good idea where US ships are at a given time, even though its very expensive to maintain this sort of surveillance.

    When you have thousands of ships flying about the solar system, you need a way to keep track of them. For trade, for taxes, to stop smugglers and pirates, for military or diplomatic reasons, etc. It isn't difficult, because a fusion drive is hot enough to be seen clear across the solar system, and you can easily analyze the specturms to help with identification. This is current day technology. You just need a lot of telescopes- but if there are millions of people permanently living in the belt across however many habitats, you have plenty of easy places to build them. The volume of space is large, but you're mostly looking only along a single plane, and computer-automated systems can watch and record things across many scopes automatically. I mean, if you're living in space and want to know whats going on outside, telescopes are the main option; they'd be utterly ubiquitous.

    The best example was when the Canterbury was destroyed. It was a large Martian warship, very important. When it blew, if not before, the Martians and everyone else would want to see what happened, and so would turn their telescopes to that location. They'd especially want to see who done it, and so would look very carefully and track the mysterious ships that attacked it. They were stealth ships, but that doesn't matter when under thrust. And when they turn off their thrust, you can still make an accurate guess as to their course.

    I know this makes me sound like this guy, but its a curious omission for a book that clearly cared about how space travel might plausibly work.
    tumblr_l2lvyzeATz1qc073co1_400.gif
    *rips out the ships transponder and suddenly no one knows where to look for me in the great big humongulous space that is our solar system*
    Well he's right to the degree that if they know where you are right now and are willing to continually point a telescope at you they should be able to track you. If you burn they see your drive and can use that information to know how your velocity changed. If you don't burn then you're a dumb rock and bound by Newton's Laws.

    I just don't think they have the resources or the inclination to keep a telescope pointed at every single ship in the whole solar system. Certainly not during Leviathan wakes where the system is going crazy.
    But with the one ship that started it all, at least the interested militaries would be looking at it, you'd think.

    mvaYcgc.jpg
    Geth
  • EchoEcho Where da waaagh at? Moderator mod
    What I really like about the books is how the scope is constantly expanding.

    Serious spoilers up to book five here:
    Book 1: we're confined to the solar system, have our first contact with alien technology.
    Book 2: Eros is done cookin' on Venus, launches its structure and sets up shop near Jupiter.
    Book 3: Humanity goes through the portal, discover thousands of new portals to possibly habitable systems.
    Book 4: It's the wild west all over again.
    Book 5: contained to our solar system, but something is making ships vanish as they go through portals...

    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
    Chanus
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    Echo wrote: »
    What I really like about the books is how the scope is constantly expanding.

    It's almost an... expanse... by this point.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
    EchoChanus
  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    Trace wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    The noir bit I didn't like because I'd read too many of them already, and even too many sci-fi detective mash-ups. But they switched gears near the middle of the book and made it better, I thought.

    I'll nerd out a bit on the telescope thing here:
    You can and would track every single ship, because lots of people would care, especially in war time. Cops don't have access to spy satellites, not that they'd be much good anyway. But you can bet China has a damn good idea where US ships are at a given time, even though its very expensive to maintain this sort of surveillance.

    When you have thousands of ships flying about the solar system, you need a way to keep track of them. For trade, for taxes, to stop smugglers and pirates, for military or diplomatic reasons, etc. It isn't difficult, because a fusion drive is hot enough to be seen clear across the solar system, and you can easily analyze the specturms to help with identification. This is current day technology. You just need a lot of telescopes- but if there are millions of people permanently living in the belt across however many habitats, you have plenty of easy places to build them. The volume of space is large, but you're mostly looking only along a single plane, and computer-automated systems can watch and record things across many scopes automatically. I mean, if you're living in space and want to know whats going on outside, telescopes are the main option; they'd be utterly ubiquitous.

    The best example was when the Canterbury was destroyed. It was a large Martian warship, very important. When it blew, if not before, the Martians and everyone else would want to see what happened, and so would turn their telescopes to that location. They'd especially want to see who done it, and so would look very carefully and track the mysterious ships that attacked it. They were stealth ships, but that doesn't matter when under thrust. And when they turn off their thrust, you can still make an accurate guess as to their course.

    I know this makes me sound like this guy, but its a curious omission for a book that clearly cared about how space travel might plausibly work.
    tumblr_l2lvyzeATz1qc073co1_400.gif
    *rips out the ships transponder and suddenly no one knows where to look for me in the great big humongulous space that is our solar system*
    Well he's right to the degree that if they know where you are right now and are willing to continually point a telescope at you they should be able to track you. If you burn they see your drive and can use that information to know how your velocity changed. If you don't burn then you're a dumb rock and bound by Newton's Laws.

    I just don't think they have the resources or the inclination to keep a telescope pointed at every single ship in the whole solar system. Certainly not during Leviathan wakes where the system is going crazy.
    But with the one ship that started it all, at least the interested militaries would be looking at it, you'd think.
    Yeah, if they know where to look. For example, the average distance between objects in the asteroid belt, 600,000 miles. Space is huge and you'd need to be very lucky indeed to just luck upon the ship your looking for if you don't already know where it is.

    Gethshryke
  • MahnmutMahnmut Registered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    The noir bit I didn't like because I'd read too many of them already, and even too many sci-fi detective mash-ups. But they switched gears near the middle of the book and made it better, I thought.

    I'll nerd out a bit on the telescope thing here:
    You can and would track every single ship, because lots of people would care, especially in war time. Cops don't have access to spy satellites, not that they'd be much good anyway. But you can bet China has a damn good idea where US ships are at a given time, even though its very expensive to maintain this sort of surveillance.

    When you have thousands of ships flying about the solar system, you need a way to keep track of them. For trade, for taxes, to stop smugglers and pirates, for military or diplomatic reasons, etc. It isn't difficult, because a fusion drive is hot enough to be seen clear across the solar system, and you can easily analyze the specturms to help with identification. This is current day technology. You just need a lot of telescopes- but if there are millions of people permanently living in the belt across however many habitats, you have plenty of easy places to build them. The volume of space is large, but you're mostly looking only along a single plane, and computer-automated systems can watch and record things across many scopes automatically. I mean, if you're living in space and want to know whats going on outside, telescopes are the main option; they'd be utterly ubiquitous.

    The best example was when the Canterbury was destroyed. It was a large Martian warship, very important. When it blew, if not before, the Martians and everyone else would want to see what happened, and so would turn their telescopes to that location. They'd especially want to see who done it, and so would look very carefully and track the mysterious ships that attacked it. They were stealth ships, but that doesn't matter when under thrust. And when they turn off their thrust, you can still make an accurate guess as to their course.

    I know this makes me sound like this guy, but its a curious omission for a book that clearly cared about how space travel might plausibly work.
    tumblr_l2lvyzeATz1qc073co1_400.gif

    There's an interview with the author(s? I forget) where they say up front that they're not interested in writing hard sci-fi -- The Expanse has a lot of the trappings of that, but only where it adds interest or serves the plot. So it makes sense that you're feeling that discrepancy.

    Steam/LoL: Jericho89
    DracomicronKana
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] Registered User regular
    Trace wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    Trace wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    I finished the first book. It was ok. Filled to the brim with cliches but got more original as it went. I don't see the comparisons to Firefly or to Game of Thrones.

    I find it strange how selectively realistic the book is, regarding spaceflight. Its not many sci-fi books that eschew artificial gravity, needing thrust or spin to put feet on the floor instead and creating interesting side effects. But it seemed like nobody had telescopes, as ships were often doing crazy things, and then just flying off to safety. But since there's no cover in space, anyone who cared to look would be able to track the ships very effectively to their destinations. They even mentioned briefly that you could identify a ship from its drive signature, but seemed to drop it there. Maybe it was too restrictive to the story to do it that way.

    And the solution to the trouble on Eros was hilarious:
    Throw it into the sun! I play Kerbal Space Program which pretty much makes me an expert. Throwing something into the sun is one of the most energy intensive things you can do, and ramming a ship into an asteroid is not going to do it guys. Slowly altering its course to impact Jupiter would make a lot more sense. I was very happy when Eros dodged. That was one thing the book started to do well, throw curveballs after strings of predictable events.

    How does the 2nd compare to the first? If its better I'll get it, on par or worse I might leave the series here.

    Well we have spy satellites that could track our every movement, why do we have unsolved murders? I don't recall anybody really hiding a ship from Mars and/or Earth who are the factions who could plausibly deploy that kind of infrastructure and I also think the volume of the space travel is supposedly to be enormous. You don't track every single ship because there are too many and you don't really care.

    I understand your cliche comment but I definitely viewed that as an homage to the style's it was referencing. This felt like a classic 70's sci-fi novel mashed with a noir and to that end I loved it. I was also quite happy when the second book didn't really maintain that style for the noir bit.

    The 2nd book feels different from the first and starts introducing more of the politics that I think drive the comparisons to GoT. I don't know if I liked it better than the first but I really enjoyed it.

    The noir bit I didn't like because I'd read too many of them already, and even too many sci-fi detective mash-ups. But they switched gears near the middle of the book and made it better, I thought.

    I'll nerd out a bit on the telescope thing here:
    You can and would track every single ship, because lots of people would care, especially in war time. Cops don't have access to spy satellites, not that they'd be much good anyway. But you can bet China has a damn good idea where US ships are at a given time, even though its very expensive to maintain this sort of surveillance.

    When you have thousands of ships flying about the solar system, you need a way to keep track of them. For trade, for taxes, to stop smugglers and pirates, for military or diplomatic reasons, etc. It isn't difficult, because a fusion drive is hot enough to be seen clear across the solar system, and you can easily analyze the specturms to help with identification. This is current day technology. You just need a lot of telescopes- but if there are millions of people permanently living in the belt across however many habitats, you have plenty of easy places to build them. The volume of space is large, but you're mostly looking only along a single plane, and computer-automated systems can watch and record things across many scopes automatically. I mean, if you're living in space and want to know whats going on outside, telescopes are the main option; they'd be utterly ubiquitous.

    The best example was when the Canterbury was destroyed. It was a large Martian warship, very important. When it blew, if not before, the Martians and everyone else would want to see what happened, and so would turn their telescopes to that location. They'd especially want to see who done it, and so would look very carefully and track the mysterious ships that attacked it. They were stealth ships, but that doesn't matter when under thrust. And when they turn off their thrust, you can still make an accurate guess as to their course.

    I know this makes me sound like this guy, but its a curious omission for a book that clearly cared about how space travel might plausibly work.
    tumblr_l2lvyzeATz1qc073co1_400.gif
    *rips out the ships transponder and suddenly no one knows where to look for me in the great big humongulous space that is our solar system*
    Well he's right to the degree that if they know where you are right now and are willing to continually point a telescope at you they should be able to track you. If you burn they see your drive and can use that information to know how your velocity changed. If you don't burn then you're a dumb rock and bound by Newton's Laws.

    I just don't think they have the resources or the inclination to keep a telescope pointed at every single ship in the whole solar system. Certainly not during Leviathan wakes where the system is going crazy.
    But with the one ship that started it all, at least the interested militaries would be looking at it, you'd think.
    Yeah, if they know where to look. For example, the average distance between objects in the asteroid belt, 600,000 miles. Space is huge and you'd need to be very lucky indeed to just luck upon the ship your looking for if you don't already know where it is.
    Since the transponders were on and working for those vessels, yeah they would know where to look.

    Anyway, I know I'm being anal about this, and I don't expect books to conform to my preferences of realism. I just find it an oddity that this pretty common aspect would be left out. It hardly ruined the books for me.

    mvaYcgc.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.