> jon@gzero.dungeon.com> wrote:
> >Vector Movement Modification Proposal:
[...]
> Hmmm, an interesting thought, and one that I can see the rationale
It still doesn't solve the problem an MD burn of 6 combined with any thruster
push will give a total thrust of over 6.
For example MD6 and TP6 at right angles gives a thrust of just under 8.5
- worse than in the original example, and with no heading changes
involved.
The simplest solutions I can see are either:
a) ban thruster pushes altogether (although they can be used for docking, the
effect is too small to show up in combat)
or
b) don't allow ships to use thruster pushes in the same turn as MD burns.
Alun,
No offense but either of those are really good solutions. A) really tears a
lot of the fun out of maneuvering and B) is just weird. <G> How would you
rationalize not having the ability to turn on the "side engines" when the
"back engines" are running? I would refuse delivery on a spaceship that
couldn't maneuver and propel at the same time... <G>
All, I am not sure about the physics of space travel. Hell, I barely remember
my college physics, so bear with me... <G> If one ignores gravitational
effects of near masses, isn't it true that every little push on a mass
contributes to its velocity and acceleration?
Aren't 10 engines that can exert 1 foot/pound of thrust equal to one
engine
exerting 10 ft/lbs in zero-G? If that is the case, then what is the
difference when it comes to thrusters and main drives? Each propulsion
subsystem would and should be able to act independently. Also, wouldn't a
1-G acceleration drive eventually propel a ship towards light speed,
just
slower than a 10-G drive?
I find it logical (and pleasing) to imagine a ship boosting itself in one
direction then whipping around to fire off the mains. It "feels" right. And,
since this "Thruster Effect"(tm) is common to all ships using vector movement,
this isn't a game unbalancing problem.
-=Kr'rt
> ----------
alun.thomas@convergys.com[SMTP:alun.thomas@convergys.com]
> The simplest solutions I can see are either:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Wasserman, Kurt wrote:
> <G> How would you rationalize not having the ability to turn on the
> I am not sure about the physics of space travel. Hell, I barely
In my games, I don't allow thruster pushes at all. The reason is that the main
drives have to be huge to produce even 0.01g. There's no way you could afford
the mass (or fuel) for three more "thrusters" which are essentially main
drives. If you want to use physics to justify a rule (and I realize not
everyone does), then thruster pushes which are any significant fraction of the
main drive thrust are totally unrealistic. "Maneuvering thrusters" (which I'm
sure were the inspiration for this
rule) provide tiny course-correction bursts which are effective only
when the ship's velocity is near zero (e.g., docking).
Of course, if your engines produce huge thrust, have a tiny mass, and burn no
fuel, then there's no reason not to use thruster pushes, you just can't use
real physics to justify it. And since the vector movement is supposed to model
(approximately) real physics, that's where I think the system breaks down.
There's more info on my FT engines page if anyone is interested, the URL
is http://www.erols.com/kwatt/SolarThrust.
> If one ignores gravitational effects of near masses, isn't it true
That's right and that's my point exactly. Under the vector rules as written,
every ship has an exhaust nozzle about half the size of their main nozzle on
the front, port, and starboard side. Kind of
funny-looking.. <g> And as I said, the fuel and mass required just for
engines and thrusters would be huge.
There's no real reason to have thruster pushes, and they're unrealistic,
so my thoughts are why use them - especially when there's the problem
that's being discussed present.
Just my opinion..
> At 4:30 AM -0800 3/9/99, alun.thomas@convergys.com wrote:
> The simplest solutions I can see are either:
my 2 cents:
c) put thruster pushes and MD burns under the same limit; i.e. a ship with 6
thrust could thrust MD 4 and push 2 to starboard.
I'll also suggest that the thruster pushes be limited, perhaps pushes count
double against the thrust limit.
This should eliminate the problem nicely, and leave thruster pushes in the
game
> Alun wrote:
> It still doesn't solve the problem an MD burn of 6 combined with any
That is correct. It is also what tends to happen when you have extra
independent (but weaker) engines mounted perpendicular to the main
one...
As long as the maneuver thrusters and main drive pushes don't push the ship in
the same direction (which they can't if you can't rotate the ship between the
pushes), I don't see the fact that you accelerate faster if you use both sets
of engines at once as a problem. Neither in the game nor in reality...
Regards,