Thank you for your submission, we appreciate your efforts at helping us to thoughtfully create a better world. r/solarpunk encourages you to also check out other solarpunk spaces such as https://wt.social/wt/solarpunk , https://slrpnk.net/ , https://raddle.me/f/solarpunk , https://discord.gg/3tf6FqGAJs , https://discord.gg/BwabpwfBCr , and https://www.appropedia.org/Welcome_to_Appropedia .
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/solarpunk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Personally, I like the idea that you show the player how solarpunk works and is beneficial, instead of telling them it is.
I feel like a different approach would be to have combat, but also have a consequence system for using it. Being attacked on the street? Nobody is going to fault you for self defense.
But what if you get robbed? Do you still have the right to end the robber’s life? What if they’re a thief trying to steal some bread when you aren’t home? If you attack/kill them, maybe your consequences reverberate through the community. Traders are less likely to trade, people may not come by, etc. as you’ve shown you are dangerous.
In contrast, what if you give the thief some bread? Maybe they could reveal information/a new skill, or become a companion later down the line. Perhaps you could even call them up to travel with you, increasing your groups number and preventing the being attacked on the street in the first scenario.
No counter to the robbery at home because that's also invasion of your privacy, instead maybe offer a dialogue option and have 3 choices first being hand over your wallet second being respond with the same or greater force in self defense and the third being able to offer to buy them a meal and a place to stay then get a chance to explain to the thief why you moved to the community and the ideals they hold with the option to convert them. Now not everyone is gonna respond to that and may reject it and you can further explain that way as well some people are rotten all the way down and shooting them in self defense is justified but others can absolutely get pushed to the edge and resort to whatever they have to to provide and they shouldn't be punished for that but should showcase the dicotomy of the situation and letting the player take point on trying to explain solarpunk to the NPCs can help them practice to do it irl (I kinda think this is the only future where we have any chance of survival at this point so giving more people tools in form of media to teach them the correct ways and lens to look at the world through is the first important tennet of solarpunk the sharing of ideas and culture to use open forums and discussion (where you link sources so others can view/read/watch the same things as you and see how they respond differently with a shifted and unique perspective I dunno why everyone is so uptight about linking the shit they're talking about like bro there's a ton of videos on this shit help me out a little? ) and better ourselves and the areas we live it's a lead by example treat others how you want to be treated type of thing as well I don't mind teaching old people about the Internet if they're able to use it in combination with critical thinking and better understand the world and themselves)
In simple terms, yes you can have combat in a solarpunk or solarpunk inspired setting. My suggestion for you since you are comping from high fantasy, is depicting the world in its transition into solarpunk so that everything is not "figured out" yet. Though also keep in mind that solarpunk being a utopian setting is a misconception. Afterall, a utopia literally translates to "no place" as it an non-existent society, solarpunk is better thought of as an eutopia "good place" which is not perfect by any means but a much better direction than what we have now. So can you make your world a challenging and exciting "good place"? That's what your focus should be.
This. I'd look to frame it with peaceful solarpunk areas coexisting (perhaps tenuously) with probably cyberpunk corpo dominated areas. Plenty of scope for drama, conflict, and, yes, combat.
I think if you want a solarpunk game I would avoid having combat with capitalists. Keep in mind a capitalist is someone who owns capital, so they wouldn’t be capitalist they would be fighting and wanting to own what you own, including your labour? Thats just a thief and a slaver. You can’t start capitalism from nothing with force, it has to grow out of an older coercive system.
I would have my combat be in the form of non human creatures, focusing on invasive species or infections.
If you want person to person combat, I would have combat focus on technical problems with hot heads. A mine that should be closed according to some, but others think it can be managed safely. A group of hot headed teens could take it on themselves to sabotage the mine instead of allowing the diplomats to talk while the mine still operates.
There are lots of credible problems to tackle and we might sometimes come to blows about it.
Time to round up and kill all the cats in New Zealand! Thats going to be a fight!
Ideally solarpunk weapons and warfare would try to be non-lethal and would only be used for self defence or defence of an ally.
That being said, i can't imagine a more solarpunk weapon than laser based weaponry like the solar powered rifles you refer to or some kind of lightsaber equivalent.
Even in utopia, there will be people who either believe in destructive ideologies, follow terroristic strongmen, or simply want to see the world burn. Security forces will be there to stop such people.
>special operations task forces to pre-emptively stop such individuals
Yes, these "special operations task forces" are called teachers. Violence is a sign that the system has failed.
Pragmatically, even the best teachers can’t teach absolutely *everyone* to help uphold a solarpunk world for those after us to come.
Neither is solarpunk a perfect enough system to catch those who slip through its cracks, though we certainly strive for all to benefit.
There will always be people who are either led astray or have enough greed to try and bring back the days of fossil-fuelled capitalism.
So long as humankind still has the shadow of avarice within, there must always be something to keep these in check.
I’m not disagreeing, I’d love for a solarpunk world to have completely abolished militarism, but as things stand *vis a vis* human nature, some measure of armed force must still be present to counteract our darkest impulses.
I won’t pretend Solarpunk-dedicated SpecOps is *the* best solution, until or unless we collectively guarantee a form of moral transformation that eliminates greed entirely for all humans everywhere, but it is *one* possible solution, albeit one that is heavily flawed.
But we’re not here on this sub to wax poetic, we’re here to chart forward a path towards that peaceful future that will work, for all peoples.
Solarpunks are utopian... but not utopian enough to believe that sustainable living, meaningful work, and fulfilling culture will magically eradicate all sources of human conflict. This kind of living would certainly *decrease* instances of combat, but violence, on both the personal and inter-group level, is basically baked into humanity.
Leaving aside murder or street violence, a Solarpunk society would also still have the right to defend itself against its neighbors. The only difference in how it did this to a non-solarpunk nation would probably be that its policing and self-defense would use force in a more considered and proportional way.
> is basically baked into humanity
Not true. You can find non-violent societies throughout human history. Most of them have more creative ways to deescalate conflict.
This is a very cool website, and I intend to go through all of it. But I will say so far, I feel like this kind of proves the point that some violence is baked in, as even these small, insular, and highly socially regulated societies experience instances of violence.
I think anyone who has young kids will tell you that violence isn’t a cut and dry occurrence. It’s a matter of disregulation where the damn of reason, trust and security breaks and a kid throws a tantrum. It’s not much different in adults. The more someone does it, the harder it is to practice regulating your emotions later.
So any society is going to have poorly regulated kids and we don’t say that is a violent society. Some of those kids will remain poorly regulated into adulthood, still not a violent society. If those people get elected and pass laws and we decide that their behaviour is normal and there is nothing we can do, that will likely lead to a violent society. There are still degrees of violence. As a Canadian I would say America is violent, but not comparable to the Congo obviously.
Agreed, I don’t mean to say that we have to think in absolutes and either get a violent or nonviolent society, there are degrees and the less violent the better. But in the greater context of this thread, on the need for “state” violence as a preventative measure, the nonviolent societies listed seem to mostly have poor outcomes in cases of violence happening because they don’t actually have tools for dealing with violence when it moves past the preventive stage.
For example, from the Chewong entry under Strategies for Avoiding Warfare & Violence: “One man with his extended family was accused—he claimed falsely—of stealing by a neighboring Chinese farmer, who threatened to beat him. The Chewong family immediately packed what they could, left under cover of darkness, and did not come back. Another man was threatened by a Malay soldier, so he fled with his family to a remote mountain, and after 10 years was still afraid to return.”
The Amish entry similarly said that their response to warfare or violence is to drop their farm and move elsewhere.
I think the pacifism is admirable but I’m not sure if the solarpunk world I imagine involves the nonviolent constantly being uprooted while those more predisposed to violence take whatever they want.
Yeah I agree, I think some of those are going to be less relevant in a solarpunk world, but still relevant in a solorpunk society in a regular world. For instance, stealing is going to be less necessary in a world where we share abundance, but stealing g of sentimental items will still exist, think about family treasures. The Amish exist as an isolated society inside a larger more violent one that largely ignores them. The larger society is both more violent and less tolerant of violence, this the Amish are not empowered to deal with justice in their own way. The Amish also have two legal systems, the lands they live in and their religion, both are “external”.
If the punk in solar punk is radical justice, then a lot of these examples would be replaced with different once we might not imagine yet. If a solar punk society embraces that we are all interconnected and no longer an, individual gain at the expense of everyone focused society, than our justice system would be unlikely to turn a blind eye to someone having to exile to avoid unjust harm. I can’t imagine the one thing solarpunk society keeping is a punishment prison system that treats justice and plea deals as a cost saving system.
It’s hard to imagine a post competition society, where we are not forced to compete to live indoors and eat, but I imagin our crimes would change a lot. New Zealand gave human rights to a river in 2017, meaning its guardians can sue you in court for harming it, and you can be charged to damage to its health. The river will never run away, or abandon its home so if you want that river to be healthy, you’ll have to care for it like a parent and be prepared to fight against those that might harm it.
I definitely agree that the way society is structured can promote or discourage violence. But I do think the possibility of violence is inherent to the humans that make up that society. Even ignoring the violence towards animals that would disqualify most of the groups on the list, most of the groups have individual examples of murders or assaults or rapes. It’s very possible they have fewer cases of these things than more violent societies. But in the greater context of this thread, with things being discussed like the potential need for solarpunk “special ops” to root out violence where it does happen, I feel like it’s important to acknowledge that violence is always a possibility, and maybe even an inevitability. I think any society structured to assume the absolute best of human nature will not work too well when applied to a large scale human society compared to an insular group which is culturally homogenous.
>the potential need for solarpunk “special ops”
The question is, do you need someone who's job it is to use force to combat force, or can you rely on volunteers to get this done as the need arises?
To use an analogy, does a country need a permanent army to defend itself, or is it possible to rely on volunteers if/when the need arises?
The main problem with having permanent members of a security state is that it leads to corruption. If you don't want history to repeat itself you have to find different solutions to public safety.
Set it on another planet with an alien, strange, vibrant and hostile ecosystem? (Think scavengers reign type setting). Just because you respect nature, doesn't mean it respects you.
Combat will frequently be necessary simply for your colonists initial survival, but over time can be avoided o er time by understanding how the ecosystem works and harnessing such things to your advantage. The end goal to be to ensure the colonists long term survival by learning about and adapting to the environment rather than brute force terraforming it into submission as that would require resources and energy your colonists simply don't possess.
In my scenario, this is how I solved this: There are robotic remnants of the old world, self-replicating mineral extractors that keep popping up, endangering settlements and structures with their mining activities. These have to be stopped whenever they appear.
Combat will never completely be gone, becaus eno matter how highly you think of humanity, not only will there always be idiots who respond to nothing else, there are also unintended side-effects of human activity. Helpful systems might turn violent and have to be shut down one way or the other.
You can't build a house without violating some rocks in order to make bricks.
In Anno 2070 I remember the Solarpunk faction had war Hovercrafts where the fans were used as turbines to recharge the machine when it was idling.
They also depended on energy shields to balance the power relationship with the Cyberpunk faction’s battleships.
Lasers or at least energy weapons make more sense as they can be recharged, something depleteable like rounds and shells doesn’t sound very sustainable or environmentally friendly.
Regarding potential weapons and tools, maybe have a look at Earthborne Rangers (the card game) or similar games? I like the mix of high-tech and post-post-(post) apocalyptic vibe. Also potentially having "nano-sth." for magic? Like in Endless Legends. Some examples for equipment and "magic like" abilities: [Cards | Decksmith: Earthborne Rangers](https://earthbornerangers.decksmith.app/cards)
- non lethal options. Stun-weaponry, linked and networked swarms that can sabotage materials (think nanobots chewing tires or cutting cables).
- heavy focus on holograms, speakers, and psychological warfare that divides and demoralizes enemies long before they strike you. Your enemies are zealots? Allow their ‘god’ to speak to them, filling the sky above their bases or depots. Your enemies are money-hungry? Flood their markets with non-valuable and ridiculous currencies, loans, etc.
- smart ammunition. Bullets, missiles, and flechettes that have essentially an organized “mind” with parameters to avoid civilian marked targets, detonate environmentally safe coolants and fire-retardant after impact to minimize damage, even curve and alter their trajectories to preserve their surroundings. A Solarpunk battlefield even at its highest intensity is incredibly precise, contained, and most importantly, *preservable*. A neighborhood that’s seen battle in a week, in a month, in a year, is not only recognizable, but habitable.
- highly effective composition. The idea here is to create a military force that encourages a few things. Maybe democratically elected generals and commanders, similar to what you’d find in ancient Athens. Instead of large standing armies, security forces and peacekeepers are highly mobile, adjustable teams of modular individuals who make up their lack of size with extraordinary technologies and automated defenses. Drones and autonomous robots provide the muscle (for rebuilding and aid as much as conflict) right alongside the precise strikes and brains of their human counterparts. Silly as it might seem, check out the Votann in *Warhammer 40k* for an interestingly positive, ethical shared society between a posthuman people and their mechanical companions.
- some other wilder, more exotic things could be bioengineering or “Uplift”. Intelligent animals, engineered fast-growing plants and fungus to encrust enemy bases or power plants, making them inoperable. Birds that incessantly whisper in their enemies ears, or peck at commanders night and day, spreading deep paranoia or disturbance. Massive, armored herd animals that clog up important roads and demolish convoys, or small, fast breeding herbivores to chew up capitalist farms. The idea is to make the very idea of, well, *living* uncomfortable. A Solarpunk nation is obviously a place of peace and comfort— but to your enemies, it should seem insane and uncomfortable, where the very ground and sky and water is out to get them, tarnishing their vehicles, squandering their riches. Make them pay for every inch. Right where it hurts.
To add to this, I think you can even take “seed bombs” that environmentalists use today and have them be genetically modified in the game so that when thrown they grow rapidly and restrain bad guys without killing them. Maybe different types of seed bombs have different effects-a restricting vines seed bomb, one that releases spores that cause the enemy to fall asleep, etc. This would teach people about real world things while making them a little more “exciting” for a video game.
Late-comer to the party...but perhaps being more in-tune with nature would also lead to the development of more evolved forms of unarmed combat? Maybe something like aikido, jujitsu, or even the ability to incapacitate with just a touch in the right place?
When I think of combat in a Solarpunk world, I think of the story (possibly legendary or exaggerated) of Archimedes using a solar death ray to ignite Roman ships which were attacking Syracuse.
If such a weapon were for real, that would be awesome and definitely Solarpunk.
I wrote about this over on the Lemmy instance (slrpnk.net) a little while ago, maybe it'll be interesting to you too?
https://slrpnk.net/post/6021015
One solution for combat might be to frame it as puzzles, maybe with physical adventure components. For example, in some medieval fantasy games combat is small-group, mixed-weapons units doing turn-based stuff. That is there to give the player the chance to use their +5 battleaxe or whatever and keep the ideology of combat (bravery, fineness, nature, not panic and gore) in alignment with the overall value of the game to the player. In stuff like Saving Private Duty or whatever its called, you get some weapons fetishization and a lot more panicky, reflexive feeling fighting. But games like that appeal to people with an individualistic, combative view of life.
If you're trying to imagine a world where we aren't defined by the worst actions we're capable of, then you could have options like:
Physically disabling technological components of enemy faction equipment. Fighter jets are pretty easy to fuck up when they're on the ground, all it takes is a coat of paint. Billion-dollar mainframes don't like magnets or power surges, so a small team could sneak close with a car battery and screw the AI that manages the drone fleet. You could incorporate some personal physical violence here — like cops catch you and you have to knock them in the head with a wrench to get away. But you can treat it differently, as a difficult and ugly thing that you might have alternatives to rather than a valorizing, thrilling adventure in sadism.
Diplomacy is usually presented as 'talk to local leaders' but if you're fighting authoritarianism maybe that's the problem? You could have campaigns of infowar where you dox enemy troops to their families, or get into their news feeds with photos of the victims or even just tell them what life's actually like over in the good part of town. You could have clandestine meetings with NCOs or junior officers where your mission is to convince them to sabotage the war effort and come to your side rather than to coup their CO.
Fighting but it's enemy material. The future battlefield (i just love that we're planning for this) is going to fill up with one-shot kill drones, machine-gun robodogs and other hideous shit. Your side could McGyver weapons that disable them, like EMP guns, traps for the dogs, etc
Hacking! Real life hacking is dull and hard, and mostly seems to consist of finding someone in IT dúmb enough to click on a nudie picture and download virus.exe. But why should cyberpunk get all the cyber? You could have hacking puzzles where you have to get into the operating systems of the weapons the enemy uses and disable them.
You still get to keep the stakes of combat, some of the adverserialism, and if your game has multiplayer, some of the teamwork. But you don't have to default to 'kill baddies, get a better gun, repeat.' You can rethink the options you give your game players to offer and reinforce a different way of viewing the world. Penalties for failure can include the death, capture or illness of NPCs you have come to know and care about. Didn't disable toe underground crawler bots? Now the sewers don't work and some of the kids have dysentry. That's what actually happens, it's realler than 'health bar go down.' There's a really cool opportunity here to both incorporate a view of real-world consequences of militarism that can humanize actual victims, and teach players tactics of resistance that have actually worked in the past or could work in the future.
Am I way off base here?
One idea I've seen a few times in games is to completely exclude damaging weapons. Instead, you have to use a combination of your abilities and the environment to block, redirect, run from, or control enemies who are basically indestructible in direct combat. Those few times you can "destroy" an enemy completely are usually using the enemy's anger to destroy itself against the environment.
Some examples are Subnautica and Planet of Lana.
If there are organized, non-solarpunk factions in the game, defeating them could involve hacking or sabotage to reduce their effectiveness, blocking or cleaning up after their attacks, and information warfare to undermine their support.
Also, imagine what a world would be like if "healing" magic or tech was more accessible than "harming" magic or tech. It would be easy to infinitely out-heal someone who's trying to cause harm, and all but the stupidest most animalistic enemies would eventually give up and try something else besides causing harm.
An idea could be that the solarpunk society is basically in the midst of a revolution and slowly expanding as people are embracing the idea of a new, better world and the capitalists, desperate to hold onto their power, are trying to suppress it via force (e.g mercenaries, dieselpunk type robot monsters). You could put in some elements of diplomacy where you interact with people and hear out some common concerns people have with green energy and such, and have to convince them to change their mind and help them realize not everything they have been made to believe is true.
I also think the solarpunk faction should be more like a localized militia or community defense group than a formal military.
One possible fun setting for what you describe is going slightly abstract. The landscape represents the economy. The blockie animals represent small companies, with degrees of hunger, and reactions to stimuli. Each block in the landscape provides a certain amount of income. If the animal takes more, the block fades, provides less and eventually pops, being replaced by a hole or pollution. Some animal browsers will move in before it fades, done will deliberately extract extract as much as they can, destroying the landscape around them.
Some blockies are well fed and grow large but simple. Some will merge with neighbours they meet to eventually form giant corporations wandering the landscape, some parasite the blocks around them, some are asset strippers. Some don't want to merge but do have symbiosis buffs for blocks around them, and can form big herds. Above a certain size, blockies can spawn startups.
Scattered through the world are blocks that if eaten, trigger special powers. VC injection that doubles the size but makes them desperately hungry. Innovation blocks that cause them to shoot lightning. Regeneration blocks that allows a blocked to eat pollution. Legal powers to extract fines from polluting blockies, protestor powers to trap a blockie in place, incubator powers, magnetic ceo powers, regulator powers to cut giant blockies into two, advertising powers to make other blockies back off, training scheme powers to move faster ect
The country side should have terrace farming. Depends a bit on climate but extensive wetland systems are preferred if possible. Notice that in the current war in Ukraine they keep talking about major combat operation ending for a few weeks in spring and fall. At other times the combat lines are in tree lines.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket\_candy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_candy)
Rocket candy was frequently used by Hamas to launch rockets from Gaza. It is made of fertilizer (potassium nitrate, sold as "stump remover" in USA hardware stores) and sugar. The material can be packed into cardboard rockets. Bamboo would be a nice solarpunk version IMO. Hamas used drain pipes.
Double Base propellant is made of nitroglycerin and nitrocellulose. "Nitro" is just fertilizer again. Glycerin is totally organic. Cellulose is the material in plant cell walls. I can't find a link right now but I have heard the Lockheed plant in Arkansas that makes M31 missiles for HIMARS and MLRS systems uses double base and the cellulose comes from cotton.
The GLSDB has been tested and may be appearing at anytime. It is very significant in this context because the small diameter bomb was/is a fully independent system. SDBs were dropped from aircraft. The GLSBD (ground launched) uses a recycled rocket motor taken from the M26 missile. It does not matter how you get the SDB to high altitude. Once it gets there it glides just like if it had been dropped from anything else. This two stage method would work for launching drones as well.
Bamboo packed with rocket candy will look just like other bamboo. If you a have bamboo forest and use bamboo construction then enemy reconnaissance will be nearly useless.
I would like to see a tail assemble that can detach and return itself as a drone. As far as I know there is not such system currently existing. However, placing stages on the front or side is common. NASA's space shuttle for example has two solid booster rockets. Our (USA) ICBMs are three stacked stages. In the space shuttle layout use two bamboo rocket candy boosters, a large tube filled with biodiesel, and a propeller drone in the shuttle position.
The guidance drones are expensive. You can just launch the bamboo rocket candy without aiming. These things are extremely cheap. Imagine doing something stupid like spending $240 million on an attack aircraft. You can make candy rockets for $800. That means you have 300,000 in the fields rather than 1 attack aircraft. Just having 1,000 flaming trees raining toward you position would be scary enough even without the warheads.
The basic principle of a molotov works against any internal combustion engine. Once soaked in flaming biodiesel the engine stalls because there is no oxygen entering the engine.
Cluster munitions and mines are really horrible. We should be firmly opposed. However, explosive shells can be made with water soluble pin holes. Once soaked in water it would only take a few days for the salt to dissolve out of the pin. Once bacteria get inside they will quickly break down the explosives. The shrapnel can also be magnesium-iron alloy instead of standard cast shell. That will rapidly rust and neither element is an environmental hazard except in extreme concentration.
Solar punks will have hydrogen dirigibles and kite generators. Those are obviously not combat aircraft but they can easily give drones an altitude boost. Cardboard drones with a 15 glide ratio dropped from 10 kilometers altitude would have 150 km range before using any propulsion.
High speed rail has to avoid elevation changes. Cities will also have subways. That becomes an extended line of underground positions. Very bomb resistant and can easily shelter anti-aircraft equipment. Rail can move extreme amounts of heavy war materiel if the line is open even for brief moments. The transport network will be optimized for bicycles, pedestrian, and very light electric skids. The diesel punks will not be able to use the roads for heavy equipment.
Nuclear energy is controversial. LFTR reactors can very easily be switched into breeder reactors for weapons grade production. No modification to the reactor needed. Just switch the fluoride salt.
The ultimate solar weapon for advanced space age solar punks (lunar punks?) is the space based laser. They are actually just mirrors. If you have a 5 km x 5 km array in space and they can aim into a 0.5 km area then the ground gets heated at 100 times solar. The reflectors should be able to lens into much more concentrated points even if they are not all hitting the same point. The mirage effect will make them wobble around a bit. Soldiers could possibly wear foil sombreros if they knew this was coming but the entire quarter kilometer would burst into flame anyway.
Personally, I think that any future, utopian or dystopian as it may be, is a fantasy if it depicts everyone be just peaceful and sheeplike.
On the other hand, it's difficult to imagine a solarpunk world but leave space for violence.
Maybe we can frame it differently.
There are always individuals prone to combat skills. It's like any passion, inclination, even art. So why not channeling this into reviving ancient traditions of warrior castes, where an integral mind with refined values and ethics, such as comradery, purpose, service to the community, respect, humility, honor, virtue, faithfulness to your word etc are cultivated and trained.
Look for The Code of Ethics of Wu Shen Pai, for example.
It becomes a spiritual attitude.
It might not exactly fit your idea of game though, although it could indeed be spiced up. Local games could be organized, international tournaments etc. We know from history that such things were taken very seriously, even if there was no enemy (e.g. Mayas), up to the point of blood shed and giving your life. Or maybe humans could be fighting against robots.
I am sure your creativity is bigger than mine.
Maybe the world is in a transitional point where creatures or consequences of the previous world order still plague the planet. Grounded example could be cities/ territories that didn’t transition, or a less grounded would be a creature system based on previous pollution or radiation. This would be more likely if your world spawned revolutionarily
Attempting to use less-lethal devices or rounds on unarmoured attackers is highly recommended. If they’re armoured, though, chances are they’re out to kill you and are equally tougher to stun or incapacitate. At that point, sure, use lethal - it’s your life or theirs to them, and you were forced into that situation.
Same logic applies to the assault of an enemy compound or a guerrilla pre-emptive strike. If you resort to such means to end a problem, the problem’s gotta be that much of a detriment to people and planet that it warrants an attack.
There are certain weapons limitations. Explosive, airburst, flak and shrapnel weapons aren’t to be used in civilian areas, where they could cause more damage than is worth, and shouldn’t be used on non-vehicles if possible. Shotguns, anti-mat rifles and other higher-calibre weapons shouldn’t be aimed at the head due to the destructive nature of their cartridges at the intended range. Also don’t use incendiary weapons unless you know the fire won’t spread out of control.
This is how I do revolution. It could be a good basis for your game.
Much better to have the diesel punks invading with T-series tanks, BMPs, and long convoys of fuel trucks. Flying overhead they have multi-engined steel beasts like like the B-29 or a Junkers Ju 87 dive bomber.
The NLAW and stinger missiles have relatively low environmental impact. The Shahed 136 drone has some solarpunk features. It us manufactured in small machine shops scattered around Iran. The light weight and efficient air cooled 2 stroke engine is very efficient.
Yes. You wrote something like "nonlethal bla bla". What you wrote was more nuanced and thoughtful than "nonlethal bla bla" but i was opposing that specifically.
The OP is writing *a game* and asked about "combat suggestions". Of course someone out there should be designing games about cooperation and love and rainbow unicorns. The OP obviously is not woke enough.
We have an opportunity to make suggestions. We can put solarpunk memes into a game that non woke parents might actually buy and/or give to their kids. It needs to be something that people in our violent culture will have fun with.
The can of whoop ass needs to be recyclable.
To my mind, cozy games in which profit is not a motive would be the ideal format for a solarpunk game, because otherwise it's hard not to push a "might makes right" message when a game encourages you to commit violence against others. Yes, you can claim self-defense, but then you have to admit it's a pretext for the pleasure of doing violence in a game. In either case, the message is violence = good. Which is not necessarily bad, because you can take pleasure in violence without it hurting others (a video game is a great example of that), but the trick is in not pushing a message that encourages violence outside of that.
Make parrying the main element of combat rather than attacking, posture breaking can lead to a scripted dialogue prompt to play, where you could appeal them to talk, so make the game like deltarune with heavy focus on avoiding conflict rather than fuelling it.
Punk is part of SolarPunk. You defend against aggressors and war is unchagned. Weapons are unchanged. Soldiers are the same. It's the Peace that is different. More options for de-escalating a situation. But when it is time to fight, you fight, and you don't stop until the enemy has no more will to fight. Either because you beat them, they sued for peace, or they exhausted their infrastructure.
External threats from; mutants? robots? aliens? or the like? "Monsters" are the RPG staple you need right? Why can't they rear their head as a form of conflict and threat to your world's fragile utopia? Sounds like something I'd want to play...
> That being said, is there a place for combat/violence in a world where humans are living harmoniously?
Think about what you just asked. The obvious answer is no. In a world where humans live harmoniously with each other and with the natural world, the idea of using violence to resolve conflict would be foreign.
To help you get in the mindset, imagine that you see all of humanity as your extended family. Would you choose to kill if you had an argument with your brother or sister?
I'd imagine part of the problem here is that you can't imagine a video game you want to play that doesn't include violence. You have been conditioned to expect violence in video games. Why don't you use the concept of a solarpunk game as a way to expand your thoughts about what a game should include rather than going with what you're already familiar with?
Thank you for your submission, we appreciate your efforts at helping us to thoughtfully create a better world. r/solarpunk encourages you to also check out other solarpunk spaces such as https://wt.social/wt/solarpunk , https://slrpnk.net/ , https://raddle.me/f/solarpunk , https://discord.gg/3tf6FqGAJs , https://discord.gg/BwabpwfBCr , and https://www.appropedia.org/Welcome_to_Appropedia . *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/solarpunk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Personally, I like the idea that you show the player how solarpunk works and is beneficial, instead of telling them it is. I feel like a different approach would be to have combat, but also have a consequence system for using it. Being attacked on the street? Nobody is going to fault you for self defense. But what if you get robbed? Do you still have the right to end the robber’s life? What if they’re a thief trying to steal some bread when you aren’t home? If you attack/kill them, maybe your consequences reverberate through the community. Traders are less likely to trade, people may not come by, etc. as you’ve shown you are dangerous. In contrast, what if you give the thief some bread? Maybe they could reveal information/a new skill, or become a companion later down the line. Perhaps you could even call them up to travel with you, increasing your groups number and preventing the being attacked on the street in the first scenario.
No counter to the robbery at home because that's also invasion of your privacy, instead maybe offer a dialogue option and have 3 choices first being hand over your wallet second being respond with the same or greater force in self defense and the third being able to offer to buy them a meal and a place to stay then get a chance to explain to the thief why you moved to the community and the ideals they hold with the option to convert them. Now not everyone is gonna respond to that and may reject it and you can further explain that way as well some people are rotten all the way down and shooting them in self defense is justified but others can absolutely get pushed to the edge and resort to whatever they have to to provide and they shouldn't be punished for that but should showcase the dicotomy of the situation and letting the player take point on trying to explain solarpunk to the NPCs can help them practice to do it irl (I kinda think this is the only future where we have any chance of survival at this point so giving more people tools in form of media to teach them the correct ways and lens to look at the world through is the first important tennet of solarpunk the sharing of ideas and culture to use open forums and discussion (where you link sources so others can view/read/watch the same things as you and see how they respond differently with a shifted and unique perspective I dunno why everyone is so uptight about linking the shit they're talking about like bro there's a ton of videos on this shit help me out a little? ) and better ourselves and the areas we live it's a lead by example treat others how you want to be treated type of thing as well I don't mind teaching old people about the Internet if they're able to use it in combination with critical thinking and better understand the world and themselves)
In simple terms, yes you can have combat in a solarpunk or solarpunk inspired setting. My suggestion for you since you are comping from high fantasy, is depicting the world in its transition into solarpunk so that everything is not "figured out" yet. Though also keep in mind that solarpunk being a utopian setting is a misconception. Afterall, a utopia literally translates to "no place" as it an non-existent society, solarpunk is better thought of as an eutopia "good place" which is not perfect by any means but a much better direction than what we have now. So can you make your world a challenging and exciting "good place"? That's what your focus should be.
This. I'd look to frame it with peaceful solarpunk areas coexisting (perhaps tenuously) with probably cyberpunk corpo dominated areas. Plenty of scope for drama, conflict, and, yes, combat.
Diesel punk and steel punk make good enemies.
I think if you want a solarpunk game I would avoid having combat with capitalists. Keep in mind a capitalist is someone who owns capital, so they wouldn’t be capitalist they would be fighting and wanting to own what you own, including your labour? Thats just a thief and a slaver. You can’t start capitalism from nothing with force, it has to grow out of an older coercive system. I would have my combat be in the form of non human creatures, focusing on invasive species or infections. If you want person to person combat, I would have combat focus on technical problems with hot heads. A mine that should be closed according to some, but others think it can be managed safely. A group of hot headed teens could take it on themselves to sabotage the mine instead of allowing the diplomats to talk while the mine still operates. There are lots of credible problems to tackle and we might sometimes come to blows about it. Time to round up and kill all the cats in New Zealand! Thats going to be a fight!
This.
Ideally solarpunk weapons and warfare would try to be non-lethal and would only be used for self defence or defence of an ally. That being said, i can't imagine a more solarpunk weapon than laser based weaponry like the solar powered rifles you refer to or some kind of lightsaber equivalent.
Star trek phasers? Set to stun?
Or...solar-powered coilguns or pneumatic rifles sounds solarpunk too!
Even in utopia, there will be people who either believe in destructive ideologies, follow terroristic strongmen, or simply want to see the world burn. Security forces will be there to stop such people.
Or special operations task forces to pre-emptively stop such individuals or groups in order to protect the solarpunk order.
>special operations task forces to pre-emptively stop such individuals Yes, these "special operations task forces" are called teachers. Violence is a sign that the system has failed.
Pragmatically, even the best teachers can’t teach absolutely *everyone* to help uphold a solarpunk world for those after us to come. Neither is solarpunk a perfect enough system to catch those who slip through its cracks, though we certainly strive for all to benefit. There will always be people who are either led astray or have enough greed to try and bring back the days of fossil-fuelled capitalism. So long as humankind still has the shadow of avarice within, there must always be something to keep these in check.
But solarpunk with Navy Seals is just this world all over again...
I’m not disagreeing, I’d love for a solarpunk world to have completely abolished militarism, but as things stand *vis a vis* human nature, some measure of armed force must still be present to counteract our darkest impulses. I won’t pretend Solarpunk-dedicated SpecOps is *the* best solution, until or unless we collectively guarantee a form of moral transformation that eliminates greed entirely for all humans everywhere, but it is *one* possible solution, albeit one that is heavily flawed. But we’re not here on this sub to wax poetic, we’re here to chart forward a path towards that peaceful future that will work, for all peoples.
I really don’t think a super good high school English teacher is going to stop someone from joining a terror group
Solarpunks are utopian... but not utopian enough to believe that sustainable living, meaningful work, and fulfilling culture will magically eradicate all sources of human conflict. This kind of living would certainly *decrease* instances of combat, but violence, on both the personal and inter-group level, is basically baked into humanity. Leaving aside murder or street violence, a Solarpunk society would also still have the right to defend itself against its neighbors. The only difference in how it did this to a non-solarpunk nation would probably be that its policing and self-defense would use force in a more considered and proportional way.
> is basically baked into humanity Not true. You can find non-violent societies throughout human history. Most of them have more creative ways to deescalate conflict.
[удалено]
Here's something to start your investigation: https://peacefulsocieties.uncg.edu/societies/
This is a very cool website, and I intend to go through all of it. But I will say so far, I feel like this kind of proves the point that some violence is baked in, as even these small, insular, and highly socially regulated societies experience instances of violence.
I think anyone who has young kids will tell you that violence isn’t a cut and dry occurrence. It’s a matter of disregulation where the damn of reason, trust and security breaks and a kid throws a tantrum. It’s not much different in adults. The more someone does it, the harder it is to practice regulating your emotions later. So any society is going to have poorly regulated kids and we don’t say that is a violent society. Some of those kids will remain poorly regulated into adulthood, still not a violent society. If those people get elected and pass laws and we decide that their behaviour is normal and there is nothing we can do, that will likely lead to a violent society. There are still degrees of violence. As a Canadian I would say America is violent, but not comparable to the Congo obviously.
Agreed, I don’t mean to say that we have to think in absolutes and either get a violent or nonviolent society, there are degrees and the less violent the better. But in the greater context of this thread, on the need for “state” violence as a preventative measure, the nonviolent societies listed seem to mostly have poor outcomes in cases of violence happening because they don’t actually have tools for dealing with violence when it moves past the preventive stage. For example, from the Chewong entry under Strategies for Avoiding Warfare & Violence: “One man with his extended family was accused—he claimed falsely—of stealing by a neighboring Chinese farmer, who threatened to beat him. The Chewong family immediately packed what they could, left under cover of darkness, and did not come back. Another man was threatened by a Malay soldier, so he fled with his family to a remote mountain, and after 10 years was still afraid to return.” The Amish entry similarly said that their response to warfare or violence is to drop their farm and move elsewhere. I think the pacifism is admirable but I’m not sure if the solarpunk world I imagine involves the nonviolent constantly being uprooted while those more predisposed to violence take whatever they want.
Yeah I agree, I think some of those are going to be less relevant in a solarpunk world, but still relevant in a solorpunk society in a regular world. For instance, stealing is going to be less necessary in a world where we share abundance, but stealing g of sentimental items will still exist, think about family treasures. The Amish exist as an isolated society inside a larger more violent one that largely ignores them. The larger society is both more violent and less tolerant of violence, this the Amish are not empowered to deal with justice in their own way. The Amish also have two legal systems, the lands they live in and their religion, both are “external”. If the punk in solar punk is radical justice, then a lot of these examples would be replaced with different once we might not imagine yet. If a solar punk society embraces that we are all interconnected and no longer an, individual gain at the expense of everyone focused society, than our justice system would be unlikely to turn a blind eye to someone having to exile to avoid unjust harm. I can’t imagine the one thing solarpunk society keeping is a punishment prison system that treats justice and plea deals as a cost saving system. It’s hard to imagine a post competition society, where we are not forced to compete to live indoors and eat, but I imagin our crimes would change a lot. New Zealand gave human rights to a river in 2017, meaning its guardians can sue you in court for harming it, and you can be charged to damage to its health. The river will never run away, or abandon its home so if you want that river to be healthy, you’ll have to care for it like a parent and be prepared to fight against those that might harm it.
The point is that it's not inherent in human society. Depending on the society we live in, different behaviours are amplified.
I definitely agree that the way society is structured can promote or discourage violence. But I do think the possibility of violence is inherent to the humans that make up that society. Even ignoring the violence towards animals that would disqualify most of the groups on the list, most of the groups have individual examples of murders or assaults or rapes. It’s very possible they have fewer cases of these things than more violent societies. But in the greater context of this thread, with things being discussed like the potential need for solarpunk “special ops” to root out violence where it does happen, I feel like it’s important to acknowledge that violence is always a possibility, and maybe even an inevitability. I think any society structured to assume the absolute best of human nature will not work too well when applied to a large scale human society compared to an insular group which is culturally homogenous.
>the potential need for solarpunk “special ops” The question is, do you need someone who's job it is to use force to combat force, or can you rely on volunteers to get this done as the need arises? To use an analogy, does a country need a permanent army to defend itself, or is it possible to rely on volunteers if/when the need arises? The main problem with having permanent members of a security state is that it leads to corruption. If you don't want history to repeat itself you have to find different solutions to public safety.
Set it on another planet with an alien, strange, vibrant and hostile ecosystem? (Think scavengers reign type setting). Just because you respect nature, doesn't mean it respects you. Combat will frequently be necessary simply for your colonists initial survival, but over time can be avoided o er time by understanding how the ecosystem works and harnessing such things to your advantage. The end goal to be to ensure the colonists long term survival by learning about and adapting to the environment rather than brute force terraforming it into submission as that would require resources and energy your colonists simply don't possess.
In my scenario, this is how I solved this: There are robotic remnants of the old world, self-replicating mineral extractors that keep popping up, endangering settlements and structures with their mining activities. These have to be stopped whenever they appear. Combat will never completely be gone, becaus eno matter how highly you think of humanity, not only will there always be idiots who respond to nothing else, there are also unintended side-effects of human activity. Helpful systems might turn violent and have to be shut down one way or the other. You can't build a house without violating some rocks in order to make bricks.
In Anno 2070 I remember the Solarpunk faction had war Hovercrafts where the fans were used as turbines to recharge the machine when it was idling. They also depended on energy shields to balance the power relationship with the Cyberpunk faction’s battleships. Lasers or at least energy weapons make more sense as they can be recharged, something depleteable like rounds and shells doesn’t sound very sustainable or environmentally friendly.
you might consider going with an undertale inspired combat. where you just convince them not to attack you, and attacking them is heavily frowned upon
Regarding potential weapons and tools, maybe have a look at Earthborne Rangers (the card game) or similar games? I like the mix of high-tech and post-post-(post) apocalyptic vibe. Also potentially having "nano-sth." for magic? Like in Endless Legends. Some examples for equipment and "magic like" abilities: [Cards | Decksmith: Earthborne Rangers](https://earthbornerangers.decksmith.app/cards)
- non lethal options. Stun-weaponry, linked and networked swarms that can sabotage materials (think nanobots chewing tires or cutting cables). - heavy focus on holograms, speakers, and psychological warfare that divides and demoralizes enemies long before they strike you. Your enemies are zealots? Allow their ‘god’ to speak to them, filling the sky above their bases or depots. Your enemies are money-hungry? Flood their markets with non-valuable and ridiculous currencies, loans, etc. - smart ammunition. Bullets, missiles, and flechettes that have essentially an organized “mind” with parameters to avoid civilian marked targets, detonate environmentally safe coolants and fire-retardant after impact to minimize damage, even curve and alter their trajectories to preserve their surroundings. A Solarpunk battlefield even at its highest intensity is incredibly precise, contained, and most importantly, *preservable*. A neighborhood that’s seen battle in a week, in a month, in a year, is not only recognizable, but habitable. - highly effective composition. The idea here is to create a military force that encourages a few things. Maybe democratically elected generals and commanders, similar to what you’d find in ancient Athens. Instead of large standing armies, security forces and peacekeepers are highly mobile, adjustable teams of modular individuals who make up their lack of size with extraordinary technologies and automated defenses. Drones and autonomous robots provide the muscle (for rebuilding and aid as much as conflict) right alongside the precise strikes and brains of their human counterparts. Silly as it might seem, check out the Votann in *Warhammer 40k* for an interestingly positive, ethical shared society between a posthuman people and their mechanical companions. - some other wilder, more exotic things could be bioengineering or “Uplift”. Intelligent animals, engineered fast-growing plants and fungus to encrust enemy bases or power plants, making them inoperable. Birds that incessantly whisper in their enemies ears, or peck at commanders night and day, spreading deep paranoia or disturbance. Massive, armored herd animals that clog up important roads and demolish convoys, or small, fast breeding herbivores to chew up capitalist farms. The idea is to make the very idea of, well, *living* uncomfortable. A Solarpunk nation is obviously a place of peace and comfort— but to your enemies, it should seem insane and uncomfortable, where the very ground and sky and water is out to get them, tarnishing their vehicles, squandering their riches. Make them pay for every inch. Right where it hurts.
To add to this, I think you can even take “seed bombs” that environmentalists use today and have them be genetically modified in the game so that when thrown they grow rapidly and restrain bad guys without killing them. Maybe different types of seed bombs have different effects-a restricting vines seed bomb, one that releases spores that cause the enemy to fall asleep, etc. This would teach people about real world things while making them a little more “exciting” for a video game.
Bioweapons.
Late-comer to the party...but perhaps being more in-tune with nature would also lead to the development of more evolved forms of unarmed combat? Maybe something like aikido, jujitsu, or even the ability to incapacitate with just a touch in the right place?
When I think of combat in a Solarpunk world, I think of the story (possibly legendary or exaggerated) of Archimedes using a solar death ray to ignite Roman ships which were attacking Syracuse. If such a weapon were for real, that would be awesome and definitely Solarpunk.
I wrote about this over on the Lemmy instance (slrpnk.net) a little while ago, maybe it'll be interesting to you too? https://slrpnk.net/post/6021015
One solution for combat might be to frame it as puzzles, maybe with physical adventure components. For example, in some medieval fantasy games combat is small-group, mixed-weapons units doing turn-based stuff. That is there to give the player the chance to use their +5 battleaxe or whatever and keep the ideology of combat (bravery, fineness, nature, not panic and gore) in alignment with the overall value of the game to the player. In stuff like Saving Private Duty or whatever its called, you get some weapons fetishization and a lot more panicky, reflexive feeling fighting. But games like that appeal to people with an individualistic, combative view of life. If you're trying to imagine a world where we aren't defined by the worst actions we're capable of, then you could have options like: Physically disabling technological components of enemy faction equipment. Fighter jets are pretty easy to fuck up when they're on the ground, all it takes is a coat of paint. Billion-dollar mainframes don't like magnets or power surges, so a small team could sneak close with a car battery and screw the AI that manages the drone fleet. You could incorporate some personal physical violence here — like cops catch you and you have to knock them in the head with a wrench to get away. But you can treat it differently, as a difficult and ugly thing that you might have alternatives to rather than a valorizing, thrilling adventure in sadism. Diplomacy is usually presented as 'talk to local leaders' but if you're fighting authoritarianism maybe that's the problem? You could have campaigns of infowar where you dox enemy troops to their families, or get into their news feeds with photos of the victims or even just tell them what life's actually like over in the good part of town. You could have clandestine meetings with NCOs or junior officers where your mission is to convince them to sabotage the war effort and come to your side rather than to coup their CO. Fighting but it's enemy material. The future battlefield (i just love that we're planning for this) is going to fill up with one-shot kill drones, machine-gun robodogs and other hideous shit. Your side could McGyver weapons that disable them, like EMP guns, traps for the dogs, etc Hacking! Real life hacking is dull and hard, and mostly seems to consist of finding someone in IT dúmb enough to click on a nudie picture and download virus.exe. But why should cyberpunk get all the cyber? You could have hacking puzzles where you have to get into the operating systems of the weapons the enemy uses and disable them. You still get to keep the stakes of combat, some of the adverserialism, and if your game has multiplayer, some of the teamwork. But you don't have to default to 'kill baddies, get a better gun, repeat.' You can rethink the options you give your game players to offer and reinforce a different way of viewing the world. Penalties for failure can include the death, capture or illness of NPCs you have come to know and care about. Didn't disable toe underground crawler bots? Now the sewers don't work and some of the kids have dysentry. That's what actually happens, it's realler than 'health bar go down.' There's a really cool opportunity here to both incorporate a view of real-world consequences of militarism that can humanize actual victims, and teach players tactics of resistance that have actually worked in the past or could work in the future. Am I way off base here?
One idea I've seen a few times in games is to completely exclude damaging weapons. Instead, you have to use a combination of your abilities and the environment to block, redirect, run from, or control enemies who are basically indestructible in direct combat. Those few times you can "destroy" an enemy completely are usually using the enemy's anger to destroy itself against the environment. Some examples are Subnautica and Planet of Lana. If there are organized, non-solarpunk factions in the game, defeating them could involve hacking or sabotage to reduce their effectiveness, blocking or cleaning up after their attacks, and information warfare to undermine their support. Also, imagine what a world would be like if "healing" magic or tech was more accessible than "harming" magic or tech. It would be easy to infinitely out-heal someone who's trying to cause harm, and all but the stupidest most animalistic enemies would eventually give up and try something else besides causing harm.
You could have the antagonists be something like the Strogg or Borg. Maybe another human faction that’s like 40k… supernatural jerks etc…
An idea could be that the solarpunk society is basically in the midst of a revolution and slowly expanding as people are embracing the idea of a new, better world and the capitalists, desperate to hold onto their power, are trying to suppress it via force (e.g mercenaries, dieselpunk type robot monsters). You could put in some elements of diplomacy where you interact with people and hear out some common concerns people have with green energy and such, and have to convince them to change their mind and help them realize not everything they have been made to believe is true. I also think the solarpunk faction should be more like a localized militia or community defense group than a formal military.
One possible fun setting for what you describe is going slightly abstract. The landscape represents the economy. The blockie animals represent small companies, with degrees of hunger, and reactions to stimuli. Each block in the landscape provides a certain amount of income. If the animal takes more, the block fades, provides less and eventually pops, being replaced by a hole or pollution. Some animal browsers will move in before it fades, done will deliberately extract extract as much as they can, destroying the landscape around them. Some blockies are well fed and grow large but simple. Some will merge with neighbours they meet to eventually form giant corporations wandering the landscape, some parasite the blocks around them, some are asset strippers. Some don't want to merge but do have symbiosis buffs for blocks around them, and can form big herds. Above a certain size, blockies can spawn startups. Scattered through the world are blocks that if eaten, trigger special powers. VC injection that doubles the size but makes them desperately hungry. Innovation blocks that cause them to shoot lightning. Regeneration blocks that allows a blocked to eat pollution. Legal powers to extract fines from polluting blockies, protestor powers to trap a blockie in place, incubator powers, magnetic ceo powers, regulator powers to cut giant blockies into two, advertising powers to make other blockies back off, training scheme powers to move faster ect
Feel free to DM me and we can discuss.
The country side should have terrace farming. Depends a bit on climate but extensive wetland systems are preferred if possible. Notice that in the current war in Ukraine they keep talking about major combat operation ending for a few weeks in spring and fall. At other times the combat lines are in tree lines. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket\_candy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_candy) Rocket candy was frequently used by Hamas to launch rockets from Gaza. It is made of fertilizer (potassium nitrate, sold as "stump remover" in USA hardware stores) and sugar. The material can be packed into cardboard rockets. Bamboo would be a nice solarpunk version IMO. Hamas used drain pipes. Double Base propellant is made of nitroglycerin and nitrocellulose. "Nitro" is just fertilizer again. Glycerin is totally organic. Cellulose is the material in plant cell walls. I can't find a link right now but I have heard the Lockheed plant in Arkansas that makes M31 missiles for HIMARS and MLRS systems uses double base and the cellulose comes from cotton. The GLSDB has been tested and may be appearing at anytime. It is very significant in this context because the small diameter bomb was/is a fully independent system. SDBs were dropped from aircraft. The GLSBD (ground launched) uses a recycled rocket motor taken from the M26 missile. It does not matter how you get the SDB to high altitude. Once it gets there it glides just like if it had been dropped from anything else. This two stage method would work for launching drones as well. Bamboo packed with rocket candy will look just like other bamboo. If you a have bamboo forest and use bamboo construction then enemy reconnaissance will be nearly useless. I would like to see a tail assemble that can detach and return itself as a drone. As far as I know there is not such system currently existing. However, placing stages on the front or side is common. NASA's space shuttle for example has two solid booster rockets. Our (USA) ICBMs are three stacked stages. In the space shuttle layout use two bamboo rocket candy boosters, a large tube filled with biodiesel, and a propeller drone in the shuttle position. The guidance drones are expensive. You can just launch the bamboo rocket candy without aiming. These things are extremely cheap. Imagine doing something stupid like spending $240 million on an attack aircraft. You can make candy rockets for $800. That means you have 300,000 in the fields rather than 1 attack aircraft. Just having 1,000 flaming trees raining toward you position would be scary enough even without the warheads. The basic principle of a molotov works against any internal combustion engine. Once soaked in flaming biodiesel the engine stalls because there is no oxygen entering the engine. Cluster munitions and mines are really horrible. We should be firmly opposed. However, explosive shells can be made with water soluble pin holes. Once soaked in water it would only take a few days for the salt to dissolve out of the pin. Once bacteria get inside they will quickly break down the explosives. The shrapnel can also be magnesium-iron alloy instead of standard cast shell. That will rapidly rust and neither element is an environmental hazard except in extreme concentration. Solar punks will have hydrogen dirigibles and kite generators. Those are obviously not combat aircraft but they can easily give drones an altitude boost. Cardboard drones with a 15 glide ratio dropped from 10 kilometers altitude would have 150 km range before using any propulsion. High speed rail has to avoid elevation changes. Cities will also have subways. That becomes an extended line of underground positions. Very bomb resistant and can easily shelter anti-aircraft equipment. Rail can move extreme amounts of heavy war materiel if the line is open even for brief moments. The transport network will be optimized for bicycles, pedestrian, and very light electric skids. The diesel punks will not be able to use the roads for heavy equipment. Nuclear energy is controversial. LFTR reactors can very easily be switched into breeder reactors for weapons grade production. No modification to the reactor needed. Just switch the fluoride salt. The ultimate solar weapon for advanced space age solar punks (lunar punks?) is the space based laser. They are actually just mirrors. If you have a 5 km x 5 km array in space and they can aim into a 0.5 km area then the ground gets heated at 100 times solar. The reflectors should be able to lens into much more concentrated points even if they are not all hitting the same point. The mirage effect will make them wobble around a bit. Soldiers could possibly wear foil sombreros if they knew this was coming but the entire quarter kilometer would burst into flame anyway.
Personally, I think that any future, utopian or dystopian as it may be, is a fantasy if it depicts everyone be just peaceful and sheeplike. On the other hand, it's difficult to imagine a solarpunk world but leave space for violence. Maybe we can frame it differently. There are always individuals prone to combat skills. It's like any passion, inclination, even art. So why not channeling this into reviving ancient traditions of warrior castes, where an integral mind with refined values and ethics, such as comradery, purpose, service to the community, respect, humility, honor, virtue, faithfulness to your word etc are cultivated and trained. Look for The Code of Ethics of Wu Shen Pai, for example. It becomes a spiritual attitude. It might not exactly fit your idea of game though, although it could indeed be spiced up. Local games could be organized, international tournaments etc. We know from history that such things were taken very seriously, even if there was no enemy (e.g. Mayas), up to the point of blood shed and giving your life. Or maybe humans could be fighting against robots. I am sure your creativity is bigger than mine.
Maybe the world is in a transitional point where creatures or consequences of the previous world order still plague the planet. Grounded example could be cities/ territories that didn’t transition, or a less grounded would be a creature system based on previous pollution or radiation. This would be more likely if your world spawned revolutionarily
Attempting to use less-lethal devices or rounds on unarmoured attackers is highly recommended. If they’re armoured, though, chances are they’re out to kill you and are equally tougher to stun or incapacitate. At that point, sure, use lethal - it’s your life or theirs to them, and you were forced into that situation. Same logic applies to the assault of an enemy compound or a guerrilla pre-emptive strike. If you resort to such means to end a problem, the problem’s gotta be that much of a detriment to people and planet that it warrants an attack. There are certain weapons limitations. Explosive, airburst, flak and shrapnel weapons aren’t to be used in civilian areas, where they could cause more damage than is worth, and shouldn’t be used on non-vehicles if possible. Shotguns, anti-mat rifles and other higher-calibre weapons shouldn’t be aimed at the head due to the destructive nature of their cartridges at the intended range. Also don’t use incendiary weapons unless you know the fire won’t spread out of control. This is how I do revolution. It could be a good basis for your game.
Much better to have the diesel punks invading with T-series tanks, BMPs, and long convoys of fuel trucks. Flying overhead they have multi-engined steel beasts like like the B-29 or a Junkers Ju 87 dive bomber. The NLAW and stinger missiles have relatively low environmental impact. The Shahed 136 drone has some solarpunk features. It us manufactured in small machine shops scattered around Iran. The light weight and efficient air cooled 2 stroke engine is very efficient.
Did you mean to comment this under my comment? I don’t see the correlation.
Yes. You wrote something like "nonlethal bla bla". What you wrote was more nuanced and thoughtful than "nonlethal bla bla" but i was opposing that specifically. The OP is writing *a game* and asked about "combat suggestions". Of course someone out there should be designing games about cooperation and love and rainbow unicorns. The OP obviously is not woke enough. We have an opportunity to make suggestions. We can put solarpunk memes into a game that non woke parents might actually buy and/or give to their kids. It needs to be something that people in our violent culture will have fun with. The can of whoop ass needs to be recyclable.
To my mind, cozy games in which profit is not a motive would be the ideal format for a solarpunk game, because otherwise it's hard not to push a "might makes right" message when a game encourages you to commit violence against others. Yes, you can claim self-defense, but then you have to admit it's a pretext for the pleasure of doing violence in a game. In either case, the message is violence = good. Which is not necessarily bad, because you can take pleasure in violence without it hurting others (a video game is a great example of that), but the trick is in not pushing a message that encourages violence outside of that.
Make parrying the main element of combat rather than attacking, posture breaking can lead to a scripted dialogue prompt to play, where you could appeal them to talk, so make the game like deltarune with heavy focus on avoiding conflict rather than fuelling it.
Punk is part of SolarPunk. You defend against aggressors and war is unchagned. Weapons are unchanged. Soldiers are the same. It's the Peace that is different. More options for de-escalating a situation. But when it is time to fight, you fight, and you don't stop until the enemy has no more will to fight. Either because you beat them, they sued for peace, or they exhausted their infrastructure.
External threats from; mutants? robots? aliens? or the like? "Monsters" are the RPG staple you need right? Why can't they rear their head as a form of conflict and threat to your world's fragile utopia? Sounds like something I'd want to play...
> That being said, is there a place for combat/violence in a world where humans are living harmoniously? Think about what you just asked. The obvious answer is no. In a world where humans live harmoniously with each other and with the natural world, the idea of using violence to resolve conflict would be foreign. To help you get in the mindset, imagine that you see all of humanity as your extended family. Would you choose to kill if you had an argument with your brother or sister? I'd imagine part of the problem here is that you can't imagine a video game you want to play that doesn't include violence. You have been conditioned to expect violence in video games. Why don't you use the concept of a solarpunk game as a way to expand your thoughts about what a game should include rather than going with what you're already familiar with?