Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Corsair on February 18, 2002, 04:33:52 pm
-
Am I wrong? Cuz in space the more you leave your thruster on the faster you accelerate...which means if a Perseus leaves its thrusters on then it will not maintain its speed of 80 m/s but it will keep getting faster. Right?
Is this just the kind of thing that because its a videogame its like that? Like SW where they leave the engines on and keep the same speed?
-
You're thinking Newtonian physics, like in Independence War 1/2
-
Yeah, after playing FS for a while, Iwar gets annoying to play...
-
In Newtonian physics decel should take longer than acel. That's why all my ships are really bad at stopping.
-
the engine system is all wrong, but its more fun. Real space physics would make you want to scream.
-
They probably left that out to keep people from doing rediculous speeds that would affect game balance.
-
Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
In Newtonian physics decel should take longer than acel. That's why all my ships are really bad at stopping.
not true, it just takes more fuel to decellerate at the same rate.
-
Uh, no. The energy required to get to a speed is the exact same energy as it would take to stop from that speed. It's the whole F=MA thingy. The same force is required to stop you as it was to start you.
I like Tachyons controls where you can use the glide button to kick in some Newtonian physics for a bit.
-
yeah, I think an0n is right about that. Deceleration is just a negative acceleration, so if you do the math, the absolute value of the force should come out as the same.;)
-
Where's Mik when you need him?
-
I like the FS physics! :mad2:
-
Well, FS physics are a LOT more fun than I-War physics. Come on, admit that the pseudo-newtoninan stuff from I-War can get annoying at times, even though the game is fun.
-
I can't stand Newtonian games. I even shy away from regular flight sims cozza the gravity. I hope Earth And Beyond doesn't have crappy physics.
-
Sorry to be late, an0n.
It takes more fuel to decellerate than accellerate? What?!
The Newtonian physics model is really really simple. You only use fuel to change speed or direction. If you're moving 80m/s, you'll keep moving at that speed if you cut the engines. The only way you'll stop is by firing the engines on the exact opposite course for the exact same amount of time as it took to get up to speed.
Freespace, as you'll notice, doesn't do this. It has an inertial drop off (you coast to a stop when you cut engines) and no instant inertial damping (changine directions is instantaneous). Call it 'arcade physics'.
I prefer Independence War's psuedo newtonian model because it makes the game less twitch oriented and it allows you to pull off some really nifty stunts. On the other hand, it doesn't let you pull off a Return of the Jedi Death Star Mk2 reactor run quite as easily (You're likely to carom off the walls). Mostly, however, I like the IW model because you can turn it on or off at will.
-
I don't remember for sure, but Darklight Conflict was halfway between FS2 and Iwar2, and I remember think it was cool :)
You could make U-turns and stuff like taht w/o any pb, and yet you could also make crazy sliding moves to avoid missiles and tsuff liek that. The game wasn't great I suppose, but the handdling was really fun ( from what I can remember, I have to repeat)
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Sorry to be late, an0n.
It takes more fuel to decellerate than accellerate? What?!
i wasn't clear. if you want to accelerate to a certain amount of speed, say 30 m/s, in a certain time, say 30 seconds, it will take a certain amount of fuel (arbitrary) 30 kg. Now if you want to accelerate to 30 m/s in 30 seconds and then turn around and deccelerate from 30 m/s to 0 in another 30 seconds, it will take 30 times 30 kg of fuel or 900 kg instead of the intuitive 60 kg.
this is because in the first case all youre accelerating is the ship and fuel for the one way trip. for a round trip, you have to accelerate the ship, its fuel for the one way trip, and the fuel needed to deccelerate at the end of the trip. Its the weight of the extra fuel that makes you have to bring along more fuel.
hope that clears it up
-
FS ships run on some sort of deuterium-based nuclear fusion reactors though, so the difference in mass would be neglegible.;)
-
Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
In Newtonian physics decel should take longer than acel. That's why all my ships are really bad at stopping.
If you're facing forward and using some type of reverse/vectored thruster to help you slow down, that would explain the different speed, since braking engines would be smaller; but otherwise, Newtonian physics has a completely symmetric system. :)
-
Originally posted by NegspectahDek
i wasn't clear. if you want to accelerate to a certain amount of speed, say 30 m/s, in a certain time, say 30 seconds, it will take a certain amount of fuel (arbitrary) 30 kg. Now if you want to accelerate to 30 m/s in 30 seconds and then turn around and deccelerate from 30 m/s to 0 in another 30 seconds, it will take 30 times 30 kg of fuel or 900 kg instead of the intuitive 60 kg.
this is because in the first case all youre accelerating is the ship and fuel for the one way trip. for a round trip, you have to accelerate the ship, its fuel for the one way trip, and the fuel needed to deccelerate at the end of the trip. Its the weight of the extra fuel that makes you have to bring along more fuel.
hope that clears it up
What???? This is all too confusing to me. I'm just sticking to my old theory where invisible little men floating around in space push your ship around. :)
-
Originally posted by venom2506
I don't remember for sure, but Darklight Conflict was halfway between FS2 and Iwar2, and I remember think it was cool :)
You could make U-turns and stuff like taht w/o any pb, and yet you could also make crazy sliding moves to avoid missiles and tsuff liek that. The game wasn't great I suppose, but the handdling was really fun ( from what I can remember, I have to repeat)
I have that game. Fun but much, much harder to survive. Crappy plot tho.
-
Originally posted by YodaSean
What???? This is all too confusing to me. I'm just sticking to my old theory where invisible little men floating around in space push your ship around. :)
:yes: sounds like a plan.
To NegahSpectahNek: You lost me...it is semetrical... F=MA
-
Originally posted by Analazon
To NegahSpectahNek: You lost me...it is semetrical... F=MA
i know, i just clearing up something