Important MessageYou are browsing the archived Lancers Reactor forums. You cannot register or login. |
Is the K what I think it is??
This is a free discussion forum on Freelancer. This is the place to discuss Freelancer issues NOT covered by the other boards!
Sun Apr 06, 2003 7:18 am
Sounds like a similar conundrum to that of Galactic Civilizations - the sheer time it would take to get from one planet to the next would render all politics and factional intrigue null and void for it'd take forever and a day to even respond to anything, let alone send help. Imagine if having computer parts manufactured in Hong Kong required them to be sent - on foot - for weeks across land to Jerusalem or Istanbul, where they'd be put on a clipper ship and spend another month at sea before reaching New York. Why, New York'd be nothing but Lenape Indians with a handful of cold, frightened English folk because nobody'd be bothered to make the trip. Just as well, because Hong Kong would be a fishing village where the locals would care f*ck all about microchips.
However, there aren't any dogfights now with our super-advanced fighter jets because their wing-mounted cruise missiles or long-range SAMs would deal with the threat before it ever showed up visually. Besides, the jets cost far too much to be sold to poor independant mercenaries, anyway. That's not what we want, anyway. What makes the space action game fun is that it's pirates - but in space! So, what we want is to emulate the 100 or so years in our history when travel took too long for everything to be connected, but long enough so that it was a hassle. In terms of flight, not shipping, we want that short-lived era where we've mastered prop planes but not yet gotten to jet planes. Kinda like WW2. So how do you translate that into a space sim? Easy! You don't even need to bend the laws of physics, either. You just mess with the technology.
Make metal cheap, make distances large enough where people can invent the light bulb many times over, for originality's sake. So, Africa to the Indies, circa 1790's. Slingshot space stations, where you're bolted like a bullet is cool, tho it doesn't allow for the Lane Hackers or similar pirates. So, your own personal faster-than-light travel (that can be shunted mid-flight), with electronic starmap and short-range scanner. Dogfights can still be possible with computer-aided tracking (wouldn't freighting be so much easier!) on your weapons.
Asimov didn't have space dogfights, tho he made the galaxy that open-yet-not-too-open with rifts that were tenuous, and only allowed for small ships with one-way travel at a time. You could get there if you wanted, but you wouldn't want to do so for just a jaunt to lunch. Ships could get vaporized or just left out in the open void, with dead crew. But politics would work. It's all in how you mess with it.
Just my two cents.
However, there aren't any dogfights now with our super-advanced fighter jets because their wing-mounted cruise missiles or long-range SAMs would deal with the threat before it ever showed up visually. Besides, the jets cost far too much to be sold to poor independant mercenaries, anyway. That's not what we want, anyway. What makes the space action game fun is that it's pirates - but in space! So, what we want is to emulate the 100 or so years in our history when travel took too long for everything to be connected, but long enough so that it was a hassle. In terms of flight, not shipping, we want that short-lived era where we've mastered prop planes but not yet gotten to jet planes. Kinda like WW2. So how do you translate that into a space sim? Easy! You don't even need to bend the laws of physics, either. You just mess with the technology.
Make metal cheap, make distances large enough where people can invent the light bulb many times over, for originality's sake. So, Africa to the Indies, circa 1790's. Slingshot space stations, where you're bolted like a bullet is cool, tho it doesn't allow for the Lane Hackers or similar pirates. So, your own personal faster-than-light travel (that can be shunted mid-flight), with electronic starmap and short-range scanner. Dogfights can still be possible with computer-aided tracking (wouldn't freighting be so much easier!) on your weapons.
Asimov didn't have space dogfights, tho he made the galaxy that open-yet-not-too-open with rifts that were tenuous, and only allowed for small ships with one-way travel at a time. You could get there if you wanted, but you wouldn't want to do so for just a jaunt to lunch. Ships could get vaporized or just left out in the open void, with dead crew. But politics would work. It's all in how you mess with it.
Just my two cents.
Sun Apr 06, 2003 7:31 am
Time of trolling is at hand... hee hee hee
Super-advaced jets eh? So advanced that they mount SAMs (Surface to Air Missile) on them? (For the ill-educated, SAMs are fired from the ground, hence the "surface".
I think you meant AIMs?
Also, dog-fights still exist today. The only difference is that they use heat-seeking missiles when within VR.
Modern jets (especially your "super-advanced" ones, like F-22) tend to have internal loading bays to conceal missiles as to acheive radar stealth. If you hang those tubes outside long enough, you won't be dog-fighting anything.
However, there aren't any dogfights now with our super-advanced fighter jets because their wing-mounted cruise missiles or long-range SAMs would deal with the threat before it ever showed up visually.
Super-advaced jets eh? So advanced that they mount SAMs (Surface to Air Missile) on them? (For the ill-educated, SAMs are fired from the ground, hence the "surface".
I think you meant AIMs?
Also, dog-fights still exist today. The only difference is that they use heat-seeking missiles when within VR.
Modern jets (especially your "super-advanced" ones, like F-22) tend to have internal loading bays to conceal missiles as to acheive radar stealth. If you hang those tubes outside long enough, you won't be dog-fighting anything.
Sun Apr 06, 2003 8:33 am
Poor grammar on my part, sorry, but I meant to write that long range SAMs (and I know what they mean) and/or long range missiles fired from fighters usually end the fight before it begins, or at least are supposed to. We don't have many air battles anymore (due to lack of competitors), and I doubt if we did we'd be using anything but missiles.
Wed Apr 16, 2003 1:29 pm
If someone had nothing better to do (cough, cough...), he could simply compare the speed of laser weapons with the speed of light. Lasers have a speed of 750m*/s. The speed of light is approximately 300 000 km/s. Thus the m* in freelancer is equal to 400 km, and the K is 400 000 km. Which means ships can travel at most at 300*400 km/s = 120 000 km/s which is still lower than the speed of light. Good!
Wed Apr 16, 2003 3:19 pm
n4tune8: Just one slight problem with that--it means planets must be several million kilometres across, at the scale they appear in the game.
However, it's a GAME. If tricks have to be done with scales and distances to make the game fun, I'm all for it; and as far as making a fun game is concerned, I think Digital Anvil have managed it.
Moderator--X2 Forum
However, it's a GAME. If tricks have to be done with scales and distances to make the game fun, I'm all for it; and as far as making a fun game is concerned, I think Digital Anvil have managed it.
Moderator--X2 Forum
Wed Apr 16, 2003 7:56 pm
Are you kidding? The weapons in the game are not "laser"... Just like "laser" in StarWars is not laser. You cannot see laser nor does it travel in neat little packs.
Why can't people just accept the fact that K stands for Km in the game? Why must we make sense of everything? Are our lives so shallow that we must give everything we do a meaning so that we can feel some sort of acheivement?
This sort of discussion has come up again and again. Why? A game doesn't have to follow the rules of reality. It is only fun because of the deviation. We make games to escape from the torment and suffering that is real life. If our lives were free and careless wonderland, who then will ever care for games?
Why can't people just accept the fact that K stands for Km in the game? Why must we make sense of everything? Are our lives so shallow that we must give everything we do a meaning so that we can feel some sort of acheivement?
This sort of discussion has come up again and again. Why? A game doesn't have to follow the rules of reality. It is only fun because of the deviation. We make games to escape from the torment and suffering that is real life. If our lives were free and careless wonderland, who then will ever care for games?
Wed Apr 16, 2003 8:10 pm
"Why can't people just accept the fact that K stands for Km in the game?"
Because it doesn't. Next time you're near a planet bring up the info on it. Notice that it's diameter. For instance, last night I brought up the info on a nearby planet I had just launched from. It listed as just over 23,000 kilometers in diameter.
23,000 kilometers.
Digest that a moment. Whatever the game mechanics may lead you to believe, K cannot possibly be kilometers.
Because it doesn't. Next time you're near a planet bring up the info on it. Notice that it's diameter. For instance, last night I brought up the info on a nearby planet I had just launched from. It listed as just over 23,000 kilometers in diameter.
23,000 kilometers.
Digest that a moment. Whatever the game mechanics may lead you to believe, K cannot possibly be kilometers.
Wed Apr 16, 2003 8:34 pm
The info in the description are in no way matching with the actual representation. The planets simply look too small to be 23,000 km in diameter.
And m does not mean 10 in terms of unit measurement for distance.
In the metric system, m (or metre) is 1, and all other units are based on that.
For example, k = 1000, hence km = 1000 m while c = 0.01, hence cm = 0.01 m
Only in unit measuring data does m stands for mega, but even then it means 1 million, and not very precise at that. As 1 Mb > 1000 Kb. I doubt anyone could take 1 Mb as 10 bytes?
And m does not mean 10 in terms of unit measurement for distance.
In the metric system, m (or metre) is 1, and all other units are based on that.
For example, k = 1000, hence km = 1000 m while c = 0.01, hence cm = 0.01 m
Only in unit measuring data does m stands for mega, but even then it means 1 million, and not very precise at that. As 1 Mb > 1000 Kb. I doubt anyone could take 1 Mb as 10 bytes?
Return to Freelancer Discussion