Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Shadowlord]

Imagine slowly breaking instead of slamming the brakes.

*mental picture of ship breaking down and tearing apart*

Are you sure you pushed the right button?

[forsaken1111]

You were saying that putting ports at the front of the ship to release bursts to slow down would damage the crewmembers due to inertia, but isn't the action of slowing down, the same as turning the ship around to fire the engines to slow you down???

Yes, but short bursts would necessarily require higher energy bursts because the duration is shorter. My point is that you must expend the same amount either way, but a long burn allows you to do it slowly and gradually, short bursts of energy are jarring and dangerous.

Anyway, don't most engines give off alot of heat aswell to their thrusting ability, this heat can turn into energy itself that could be fired through small openings in the front of the ship to slow them down. You wouldn't need a whole engine...

I did include that option. One cannot 'release heat' in space. Empty space is an powerful insulator. Generally there must be matter present for good heat transfer. Reaction drives work (usually) by releasing physical mass. This can be anything from cold gasses to white-hot plasma. Using a system like you propose would require a lot of extra ducts and tubing and shielding going through the ship from the engine to the 'front' to safely release whatever reaction mass the engine uses. Most of the tech in the game is rather abstract, so I don't know what kind of engine we're talking about here. Again, all of this is assuming the absence of any magical technology which breaks the laws of physics as we know them.

[Neyvn]

You were saying that putting ports at the front of the ship to release bursts to slow down would damage the crewmembers due to inertia, but isn't the action of slowing down, the same as turning the ship around to fire the engines to slow you down???

Yes, but short bursts would necessarily require higher energy bursts because the duration is shorter. My point is that you must expend the same amount either way, but a long burn allows you to do it slowly and gradually, short bursts of energy are jarring and dangerous.

Anyway, don't most engines give off alot of heat aswell to their thrusting ability, this heat can turn into energy itself that could be fired through small openings in the front of the ship to slow them down. You wouldn't need a whole engine...

I did include that option. One cannot 'release heat' in space. Empty space is an powerful insulator. Generally there must be matter present for good heat transfer. Reaction drives work (usually) by releasing physical mass. This can be anything from cold gasses to white-hot plasma. Using a system like you propose would require a lot of extra ducts and tubing and shielding going through the ship from the engine to the 'front' to safely release whatever reaction mass the engine uses. Most of the tech in the game is rather abstract, so I don't know what kind of engine we're talking about here. Again, all of this is assuming the absence of any magical technology which breaks the laws of physics as we know them.

\\Points at how the Space Shuttles are designed to land on the moon safely...\\

[forsaken1111]

Are you just trolling?

[FPSX4]

I never said it wasn't. It looks odd flying backwards, that's it. I'm not saying it shouldn't be that, but saying it would be wise to up that in priority so as to implement fully working physics, instead of having a scout travel 12 lightyears backwards.

[forsaken1111]

I never said it wasn't. It looks odd flying backwards, that's it. I'm not saying it shouldn't be that, but saying it would be wise to up that in priority so as to implement fully working physics, instead of having a scout travel 12 lightyears backwards.

That is how real physics work. You have to spend half the trip slowing down. It isn't a bug, it is realistic.

Generally you accelerate for half the trip and then decelerate the other half.

Also, what does it matter which direction you're facing in space? Other than aesthetic reasons, there is no up and down in space and there is no downside to pointing away from the direction of travel. In fact it is beneficial in most situations as you can move in one direction while firing in another, or point a directional sensor array wherever you need it. The point of pointing 'backwards' is to use the drive on the back of the ship to slow down.

[FPSX4]

It is a bug if you're moving backwards when not in gravity wells, or near them for that matter.

[forsaken1111]

It is a bug if you're moving backwards when not in gravity wells, or near them for that matter.

What does a gravity well have to do with it?

[Aklyon]

It is a bug if you're moving backwards when not in gravity wells, or near them for that matter.

Dude, you still have inertia. Not a bug.

[Dwarf]

It is a bug if you're moving backwards when not in gravity wells, or near them for that matter.

Have you ever heard of inertia?

Ninja'd.

[FPSX4]

Sorry, mind lapse. But still, my ships sometimes start off flying backwards. And also, sarcasm is not needed for something I found odd.

[Aklyon]

Sorry, mind lapse. But still, my ships sometimes start off flying backwards.

Are you sure you arent looking at them from the wrong direction?

[Shadowlord]

It is a bug if you're moving backwards when not in gravity wells, or near them for that matter.

You fail physics forever.

Can we move on now?

[forsaken1111]

Sorry, mind lapse. But still, my ships sometimes start off flying backwards. And also, sarcasm is not needed for something I found odd.

Okay, it is certainly a bug if they start accelerating backwards yes. That isn't what you had said. Sarcasm is warranted when you say something patently absurd, however.

[Eagle_eye]

tried the demo, its pretty cool. Does anyone know if the developers are still working on it?