Posted by: UnLimiTeD
« on: October 03, 2011, 06:03:29 PM »Every modern computer system will completely break down. 
So waiting for the day. (no irony, I really do)
So waiting for the day. (no irony, I really do)
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: September 30, 2011, 12:47:16 PM »That makes sense...
Still, it would be neat to see that accounted for in Newtonian. It wouldn't even have that much overhead as far as I can tell; it can recalculate fuel weight every time it does a maintenance check, and all the other cargo whenever it changes (missiles fired, cargo unloaded)
As for the weight of missile ships changing, that makes sense. Of course, a ship like that should have to compromise; if a significant amount of the ship is made up of missiles, it is probably poorly armored, very slow anyway, or some other compromise.
That is accounted for in Newtonian Aurora. Every time you launch a missile, your mass and acceleration rate is recalculated. Also, every sub-pulse in which you use fuel the same thing happens. Ditto for cargo, colonists, launching fighters, etc.
Steve
Posted by: PTTG
« on: September 30, 2011, 12:04:51 PM »That makes sense...
Still, it would be neat to see that accounted for in Newtonian. It wouldn't even have that much overhead as far as I can tell; it can recalculate fuel weight every time it does a maintenance check, and all the other cargo whenever it changes (missiles fired, cargo unloaded)
As for the weight of missile ships changing, that makes sense. Of course, a ship like that should have to compromise; if a significant amount of the ship is made up of missiles, it is probably poorly armored, very slow anyway, or some other compromise.
Still, it would be neat to see that accounted for in Newtonian. It wouldn't even have that much overhead as far as I can tell; it can recalculate fuel weight every time it does a maintenance check, and all the other cargo whenever it changes (missiles fired, cargo unloaded)
As for the weight of missile ships changing, that makes sense. Of course, a ship like that should have to compromise; if a significant amount of the ship is made up of missiles, it is probably poorly armored, very slow anyway, or some other compromise.
Posted by: Brian Neumann
« on: September 30, 2011, 11:42:59 AM »No, the weight shown is the same regardless of what they are loaded with. Think of the tonnage as displacement volume not weight. The ship is the same size whether it has a full load or has been gutted and is not more than a shell. What the trans-newtonian materials do is base your speed on your volume and not any actual weight considerations. It is mostly to keep things simple but it is very handy when you are trying to catch those bloody missile ships that are just a tad bit slower than you are. Otherwise after firing all of their missiles they would be faster and you could never catch them.
Brian
Brian
Posted by: PTTG
« on: September 30, 2011, 11:23:14 AM »Do freighters (and other vessels with significant cargo weight, such as rocket, troop, and fuel carriers) include loaded/unloaded weight in speed calculations? I know that in designer mode at least, they show their loaded speed. In practice, are they faster unloaded?
