Forums » Suggestions
ship speed
this is not so much a suggestion as a comment.
it occurred to me to actually do the math, and even the fastest ships in VO can only go about 220 m/s... which translates into about .65 Mach under normal conditions. Is there a reason why these greatly advanced spaceships are so slow?
If one person says "balance," we'll take it as read that that stands for fifty, so no need for everyone to jump on the bandwagon...
it occurred to me to actually do the math, and even the fastest ships in VO can only go about 220 m/s... which translates into about .65 Mach under normal conditions. Is there a reason why these greatly advanced spaceships are so slow?
If one person says "balance," we'll take it as read that that stands for fifty, so no need for everyone to jump on the bandwagon...
Who says "m" stands for meters?
Anyway, as speeds increase, we lose the ability to accurately hit with weapons. We'd be down to fire-and-forget and uber aim-assist weapons.
Anyway, as speeds increase, we lose the ability to accurately hit with weapons. We'd be down to fire-and-forget and uber aim-assist weapons.
I think the non-meter definition of the 'm' used in the units is "magical space unit"... but then, to be perfectly fair -- considering the size of the ships, we're still not moving all that fast.
i think the fighters should be a bit faster but the behemoths and the centaurs are perfect right now
and i still don't understand why the valk only has 225 top speed
Valk = 230
IBG = 225
the way i see it its the serco that complained to the devs and they nerfed yet they never listen to us when we tell them the prom has too much armor
and i still don't understand why the valk only has 225 top speed
Valk = 230
IBG = 225
the way i see it its the serco that complained to the devs and they nerfed yet they never listen to us when we tell them the prom has too much armor
Interesting theory, but totally wrong.
See: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/11361#134049
I found this by doing a search for "faster ships" and then clicking the first post from incarnate.
See: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/11361#134049
I found this by doing a search for "faster ships" and then clicking the first post from incarnate.
Yeah, I suggested that all the ship and weapon stat numbers be scaled up, so we can atleast break Mach I without the aid of concussion mines. What if your Cent was in fact a 20 meter ship, that flew about at 130m/s! Still, 65m/s dog fighting isn't bad, and I do like the idea of flying in a small fighter.
http://vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/16923
http://vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/16923
scaling:
perceived distance = f( ship speed / ship size )
perceived combat range = f( ship size / ( weapon speed / ship speed ) )
In some regards, the only true meaning these numbers have, are in relation to each other. It can be easily arranged to have larger numbers all the way around.
If you are wanting to change the ratios, then you have started a completely different topic.
perceived distance = f( ship speed / ship size )
perceived combat range = f( ship size / ( weapon speed / ship speed ) )
In some regards, the only true meaning these numbers have, are in relation to each other. It can be easily arranged to have larger numbers all the way around.
If you are wanting to change the ratios, then you have started a completely different topic.
why not just change the numbers and leave the speed the way it is.
Only 220? What are you talking about? They do FTL... (in-system jumps)
It's only the gravitic short range drives that have that admittedly low speed limit.
But then again comparing their efficiency and the distances they need we need to cover on them it seems just fine.
[/crappy explanation]
It's only the gravitic short range drives that have that admittedly low speed limit.
But then again comparing their efficiency and the distances they need we need to cover on them it seems just fine.
[/crappy explanation]
Well, considering that we don't need any fuel for our ships (AHEM) I'd say .65 Mach is pretty good.
The gravitic pulse engines have been reactor driven since before AD2661. No fuel needed save the occasional fuel rod, and plenty of power.
But the real issue is that if we go faster we willl lose the twitch-based combat as we know it.
But the real issue is that if we go faster we willl lose the twitch-based combat as we know it.
While I don't disagree that a boost in ship speed would cause serious problems for pilots, I should point out:
An American F-series aircraft can exceed .65 Mach and use it's machine gun against aggressor aircraft.
I'd just change the way the computer displays that information, not actually alter the way in which the ships move themselves, just change the way it's displayed, just like converting Yards to Meters, you come up with a different number without changing the size of what you're doing.
I'd just say that instead of ships traveling at "220m/s" make them all "440m/s" which solves the problem of propulsion conversions, but won't effect combat because the numbers alone will change.
An American F-series aircraft can exceed .65 Mach and use it's machine gun against aggressor aircraft.
I'd just change the way the computer displays that information, not actually alter the way in which the ships move themselves, just change the way it's displayed, just like converting Yards to Meters, you come up with a different number without changing the size of what you're doing.
I'd just say that instead of ships traveling at "220m/s" make them all "440m/s" which solves the problem of propulsion conversions, but won't effect combat because the numbers alone will change.
The pilot of an American F series aircraft may correctly anticipate his target's flight path based on the limitations of atmospheric flight. With the exception of turbo, our targets may choose virtually any flight path.
two points:
1) no one has ever made any assertion as to the type of propulsion vo is using. so, arguments saying athmospheric planes can shoot while going mach 1 or what-have-you is pointless.
2) it's a frickin game. really. we care not that we're nearing light speed or not. for as long as it's playable. right now, while i think some of the ships were unjustly reduced in speed, things are mostly manageable. but for crying out loud, stop screwing with game mechanics. every now and then we have these "balancing" of the universe and every time it's screwed up more. the worse one was the 2005 balance. the damage is done. so stop it already. leave it alone. gah.
1) no one has ever made any assertion as to the type of propulsion vo is using. so, arguments saying athmospheric planes can shoot while going mach 1 or what-have-you is pointless.
2) it's a frickin game. really. we care not that we're nearing light speed or not. for as long as it's playable. right now, while i think some of the ships were unjustly reduced in speed, things are mostly manageable. but for crying out loud, stop screwing with game mechanics. every now and then we have these "balancing" of the universe and every time it's screwed up more. the worse one was the 2005 balance. the damage is done. so stop it already. leave it alone. gah.