Radiation Fields Vs. Ships

Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:59 pm by Frobozz

Has anyone explored how Radiation Fields effect ships? I have three theories:

1. Only hull strength matters. Titan lasts longest.

2. Size matters. Within a class, armor matters (VHF Titan longer than VHF Eagle).
However, a 3600 hull Dragon lasts longer than a 3600 hull Dromedary, less surface area.

3. All ships decay at the same percentage rate, therefore last the same amount of time.
Only variation is in Nanobot supply.

Measurement:

A small field, say the one around the Flint wreck would be best repeatable test ground.
Two data numbers; first is time from radiation warning to hull breach warning.
Second data is total survival time expending full Nanobot supply.

Anyone done a similar test? Not gut feeling, a real test? Anyone want to give it a go?

"Got anything for me?" - Trent, A.K.A. 'Mr. Eloquent'

Thu Jun 19, 2003 5:18 pm by Gowserpaul

your thoery about the strength of hull is a good one and one which is very true

"Make it so Number One"
Captain Picard 'Star Trek the Next Generation'

Thu Jun 19, 2003 8:56 pm by maswastage|BG

I'd say that theory number one is probably the right one.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:11 pm by Sherlog

I think hull armour is the crucial factor. The ship stats in the game data do not contain the surface area, and I don't think that the game uses the mesh data of the ship for this.

The armour of the Titan is more than ten times as strong as the armour of the Starflier and the difference is extremely noticeable if you visit the radioactive cloud with the Unknown Jumphole in Omicron Gamma, for example. The radiation eats through the armour of the Starflier at an alarming rate and the hull strength indicator goes down really fast. Same with the radiation in the minefield surrounding the experimental shipyard in mission 10 (Frankfurt?); for a class 6 ship the radiation damage is is hardly noticeable but a Starflier or Patriot won't make it through without thrusters or cruise engines (or nanos).

Radiation is very bad for expensive external equipment, though. You can run up really huge repair bills if you remain in hot zones for long, and it seems that nanos do not help in this regard. You could probably even lose external equipment like guns or shield (!) that way.

The shield may affect radiation damage also to a certain degree. ISTR that I had some nasty surprises in connection with jettisoning cargo in a strong radiation zone, but I am not sure that I remember the circumstances correctly.

Fri Jun 20, 2003 3:49 am by Medigo

i agree the titan does last longer in intense radiation like omega-41

-((sTk))-MEDIGO**

Sun Jun 29, 2003 2:30 pm by DragonBreath

i fly mostly with a drake with pyros class 5 and 6 weap (outcast particle cannons)

only hull strength matter, go with a starflier into the radiation field in new york system (by the shipwreck agressor), in the starflier u can't get by the ship and fly back without using nanobots and with a class 10 fighter u can go many times trou without notice some damage.

if size matters the dromedary must breack apart in radiation fields and the patroit and drake can stay for a very long time and notice lichly damage.

and flying without shield will get ur hull ripped a part faster... i did that also a few times, drop stuff into radiation fields, and if i'm right the damage a second of the radiation field (if u use a class 10 shield) almost 2 times as fast...

and the type of shield matters also, a postitron and molecular shield r better against radiation then graviton shields, the div between molecular and positron shields i don't know

Important Message

You are browsing the archived Lancers Reactor forums. You cannot register or login.
The content may be outdated and links may not be functional.

To get the latest in Freelancer news, mods, modding and downloads, go to
The-Starport