Flying cities, or dome cities?

[Drakeburn]

I've been brainstorming for some time now. What I've come up with so far is a distant future where the Earth has become devastated by the pollution that was made from mega corporations. Not only does this create wastelands across the planet that are too toxic to sustain human life, but the pollutants also mutate anything that doesn't die from them: plants, insects, animals, and humans. So as a result, not only are there human gangs and looters, but also giant insects (and insectoids), zombies, monsters, and mutants (which are humans who have superpowers).

Anyways, I'm thinking about how there might be some futuristic cities that are still populated and functioning, acting as safe havens for the mundane human survivors of the toxic planet.

Though for the main city that'll act as the home base for the PCs, I'm not sure if I should go with a city that is floating in the sky, or a city that is protected by some kind of dome.

What do you guys think?

Other notes:

- While the majority of Earth has been turned into a toxic wasteland, there are some places that are more toxic than others.

[RazorChain]

I suggest self sustained Arcologies.

If they have anti gravity then they could probably just send a nanoswarm to clean up that pollution.

[InvisibleBison]

Why not both? The domed cities are ramshackle constructions inhabited by groups of survivors with limited resources who are just barely managing to get by. The flying cities are self-sustaining enclaves of pre-apocalypse society, who shun and literally look down on the degenerates on the surface.

Also, I'd like to think that the phrase "pollution that was made from mega corporations" means the pollution is literally made out of mega-corporations - like they all burned down and released really nasty fumes or something.

[Steve Edwards]

My character wants to build a flying city in one of the campaigns I'm in

[Steel Mirror]

I really like the idea of cities in the sky, so I'd definitely cast a vote for that option. Though in that case, I'd also throw in the possibility of something a little more novel: cities hanging from space!


Practical? Maybe. Okay, probably not. But cool, suggestive of even crazier technology up above the clouds, and an even higher ideal for the poor muties in the poisoned world below to look up to.

[VoxRationis]

In a far-future dystopia marked by environmental exhaustion and destruction, I would assume that the point when flying cities would be considered cost-effective has been passed. A city would have to be certain, unreasonably so, given the circumstances you've described, of continued energy production to fly all the time.

[Mutazoia]

You may want to check out the anime "Chrome Shelled Regios"... it runs on that basic concept.

Personally, I've had a similar story concept...with floating cities that were high-tech but with limited space for population and food production. As a result, the citizens of the floating cities were shorter and thinner than the average human today (think North Korea with out the starvation and with advanced tech). On the surface, you had your mutated animals and insects, and a few pockets of humans that still clung to life in well concealed cities (usually underground, dug into solid bedrock to prevent mutated things from burrowing in), who lacked the advanced tech of the floating cities, but made due by repairing and recycling the old tech from before the world went to ****.

Much like in "Chrome Shelled Regios", the floating cities would fight each other over resources, that were usually represented by mining sites on the surface (for raw materials that couldn't simply be recycled), or the few places left that could actually grow edible crops. I keep going back and forth on the method of combat, but so far, giant Mecha seems to keep cropping back up...that way you wouldn't damage the cities themselves (a big Taboo for the floaty types).

For the most part, the cities were unaware that the people on the surface existed, or didn't think that they were as numerous as they were...they thought there were a few nomad bands, but didn't now about the cities. Food and space are more abundant on the surface (you can actually eat some of those mutated beasts, and plants, as well as room for larger hydroponic set ups), so the surface people were still your average "modern" height and weight.

The city regarded the surface people as little better than savages, while the people on the surface were definitely aware of the flying cities (kind of hard not to see them floating around up there), especially when two cities took to fighting near/over one of the surface cities. This usually didn't do much damage to the underground cities (because they were buried deep enough) but it did allow them to scavenge any downed Mech parts and such. They consider the city people to be crazy snobs fighting over scraps, instead of using their advanced tech to help out....

[RFLS]

I would check out the Mortal Engines series for some thoughts along these lines.

[Cespenar]

Feasibility-wise it would probably go:

Walled City > Underground City >>> Domed City >>>>> Floating City

[hymer]

You could also consider cities under the sea or the ground. Not all communities need have come up with the same solutions, so you can put in variety. Some have rigorous innoculation regimes, which allows their cities to be without domes, but outsiders need to wear protective gear, e.g.

[NRSASD]

Realistically, if a substantial portion of the Earth's surface is polluted so badly that it's now hazardous to human health, odds are really good at least some of those pollutants will be airborne. In that case, a flying city alone won't protect you.

On the other hand, flying cities are waaaay cooler than domed cities, so I vote flying cities. Though like others have said, why not both? Or all of the above?

[Nifft]

Cities that are both flying and domed and also IN SPAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!!!

[Lord Torath]

Cities flying high enough to be above the pollution would probably need to be domed anyway, just to maintain a livable air pressure. So probably both.

[Pleh]

the Earth has become devastated by the pollution that was made from mega corporations. Not only does this create wastelands across the planet that are too toxic to sustain human life, but the pollutants also mutate anything that doesn't die from them: plants, insects, animals, and humans. So as a result, not only are there human gangs and looters, but also giant insects (and insectoids), zombies, monsters, and mutants (which are humans who have superpowers).

Anyways, I'm thinking about how there might be some futuristic cities that are still populated and functioning, acting as safe havens for the mundane human survivors of the toxic planet.

When the fate of mankind is on the line, you don't invest in just one solution and hope it works. There will be several cities with multiple solutions. I'll compose a few key considerations, but keep in mind they are far from exhaustive lists of what could be considered.

Skyborn Cities (flying, floating, hanging, mountain perched, etc)
Pros

• Out of reach of most of the surface dwelling monstrosities
• Theoretically, easy access to several regions of the globe based on aerial mobility (some flying mechanisms are more able to go where they please, while others may be stuck on a tight flight schedule that demands very precise pit stops, and still others may be locked in place by some other means)

Cons

• Maintaining Altitude (Planes/jets require fuel, dirigibles must manage a large quantity of gas that often must be produced)
• Depending on Altitude, dealing with Storm Fronts or increased levels of Radiation Exposure (I mean, I can't imagine what Pollution on Steroids has done to our ozone)
• Unless they have Star Trek Replicators (even that will rely on power), gatherers must be sent to the surface for supplies. They might have greenhouse farming capability, but some resources are simply not renewable
• Increased Difficulty and Danger of Routine Maintenance. Either you have to Fix things On the Fly or identify a few relatively safe locations to land occasionally for repairs.

Dome Cities
Pros

• If you can build them, you can build them just about anywhere, allowing you to carefully select location based on risk vs reward
• Depending on the architecture, these structures can be highly defensible
• Most protected from environmental concerns

Cons

• Wall Maintenance. If the Dome is physical, someone has to ascend to its location for repairs. If it is an energy field (magical, technological, or anywhere inbetween), its power and projector must be kept from growing too weak to keep threats out or overloading and blowing the dome into a crater
• Visibility. Some walls make better doors than windows and this is a double edged sword either way. It's hard to hide a structure this large so you either want to park under something bigger than yourself or make yourself as strong and dangerous looking as you can to dissuade thoughts of attack. It also can limit your ability to perceive threats ahead of time.
• You end up having to walk to go out and gather resources. It's easier to manage a large supply of renewable resources here than in the air, but you'll generally be less mobile and have less options about which resources are within reach. You'll probably end up making do with whatever is closest

Cave Cities
Pros

• Much of their structure is already created, fortified, and isolated from the outside world
• Best location for ease of access to mineral deposits, which may be the most difficult and necessary raw materials to obtain in a renewable state.

Cons

• Potentially susceptible to earthquakes, cave-ins, and other tectonic activity
• Security hazard: it can be difficult to be certain that ALL of the nooks, crannies, and small crevices in the walls have been sealed and accounted for, which means toxic pollution, toxic NATURAL gasses, creatures, and polluted abominations might always find that one crack you missed
• Bonus Points Combo: A relatively harmless earthquake might create new fissures that could constitute an unknown breach in security
• Industrial or constructive activity in some caves can destabilize the structure that prevents cave ins (as is a common concern in modern mining)
• Limited access to biological resources commonly required for sustenance
• No natural daylight (making farming of photosynthetic produce more challenging)

Aquatic Cities
Pros

• Choose between Surface Dwelling, Mobile (will look similar to the Skyborn City), and Ocean Floor (will look like a Dome City)
• Depending on the type of pollution, possibly more resistant to the toxicity (water tends to be pretty good at shielding from radiation, but biological toxins might actually become stronger)
• Gain the general isolation advantages of Skyborn cities (most ocean life lives near the shoreline and ocean surface, where they get sunlight and occasional food, while the deeper and further from shore you go, the bigger the fish/fish groups tend to be and the more spread out they become) with somewhat reduced cost in maintenance and risk of instantaneous death (except in Ocean Floor cities)
• Access to Fish as a food source

Cons

• Risk of largest aggressive animals imaginable
• Still have to land occasionally for gathering resources that don't exist at sea
• Surface Dwelling cities will have to contend with dangerous storms
• Ocean Floor Cities have to contend with lethal water pressure differentials and no natural daylight

The real answer to your question is that there should probably be a few of each of these kinds of cities littered about the landscape. You want to start your heroes in whichever sounds like the most boring one so they hear about these other cool places and want to trudge through toxic waste to see them.

[halfeye]

Cities that are both flying and domed and also IN SPAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_in_Flight

These?

[Mastikator]

What would keep the city floating?

[Tvtyrant]

I like flying and underground cities the most, with underwater being very cool but harder to integrate into a game.

Underground has the Underdark, or having it be beneath a surface city, or be the ruins of a city that sank.

Flying you can see it, take a big bird or rocket to it, etc.

Underwater you can't see it, it is far away, hard to access and presumably purposefully hidden.

[Random Sanity]

Also, I'd like to think that the phrase "pollution that was made from mega corporations" means the pollution is literally made out of mega-corporations - like they all burned down and released really nasty fumes or something.

Completely plausible in the case of corps with industrial capacity. That sort of thing happens IRL from time to time.


If the pollution clings to low-lying areas well enough to make airborne cities worth the trouble, the Blazblue solution might still be a better call: tiered cities built on mountains. The altitude is innate to the building site, and the folks with the financial resources to set them up in the first place are safe, while the poor have to live closer to the gunk. (And frankly, that is perfectly in-character for any society that would produce mega-corps in the first place.)

[Jay R]

Flying cities are massive consumers of energy and producers of pollution. They created the current environment, and people are now living in domes or sealed-off caves, cursing the horrible flying cities of the past that did this to them.

[TheCount]

a good list

Very good list with good advices.

here is my two cents:

Thier size is also an important factor, even more so for the relation of the living zone(s) to the areas to upkeeping said living zones (power plants, sewer system, recyclers (especially in airbone cities!!!) ect., and thats not even talking about the factories for manufacturing goods, just the basics for life (drinkable water, breatable air, comfortable temperature. energy source optional)

I would also recommend taking in account how this(/these)...pollution(s) have altered the lay of the land, so to speak....
In the bygone times, cities of every civilization appered near waters first, then people figured out how to dig wells.

-How many natural water sources are compromised?How heavily are they affected?

-Did, and if yes, how did thier pollution(s) changed the area? (e.g.: The Grand Canyon and its surrunding is a lush (rain)forest now, the jungles become even scarrier, the region famed for its fertile land is now the land of the foulest poisons and diseas)

-Did the plants and animals mutated? does it has a general tell that everything shows? (e.g:they are glowing/ become amphibious/ smell pleasant or just look really ugly/beautifull)

Maintainance is also quite tricky. Flying cities, although very mobile, but reliant on landbased outpost for materials/parts or prone to just fall after some time to the joy of the scavengers that survive it, and on that note:

Did the wildlife run over settlements of any type? did survivors managed to flee to other cities to tell the tale? did "treasure hunters" searched these cities for themselvesh/thier city?

Also, how are cities regarding the world around them? up for plunder? work creatures that are too different from them like slaves? happy coexistence? worship the chaos and its creations?

There are a lot of options to spice up the game!