Hard Light Productions Forums

Hosted Projects - FS2 Required => Blue Planet => Topic started by: rscaper1070 on June 19, 2012, 04:25:39 pm

Title: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: rscaper1070 on June 19, 2012, 04:25:39 pm
I'm guessing from the first mission that intrasystem gates have a limited range and that they are daisy chained throughout the system. Does anybody have any guesses as to the operational range of the gates?
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Kolgena on June 19, 2012, 04:40:19 pm
It seems to me that the gates teleport ships between them. Unlike Knossos portals, it seems intrasystem gates need an end-point gate to compliment it.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: rscaper1070 on June 19, 2012, 04:46:28 pm
Well, yeah, I know that. What I'm asking is what's the range? In the first mission you have two gates in the middle of nowhere. If all you need is a twin gate, why not have a gate from Europa to Mars? It seems that their range is limited and it's necessary to chain them to go far distances.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: headdie on June 19, 2012, 05:03:04 pm
I believe their function is to act as an external jump drive, so i suspect you might need one at both ends, but they do seem to turn up in fairly open space (the wargods mission to capture the logistics ship for example) so perhaps the route needs to be lined with them to some degree
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Vip on June 19, 2012, 06:17:25 pm
Am I the only one who read the title of this thread as "Intrasystem Gate RANGERS"? ^^
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Cyborg17 on June 19, 2012, 06:20:27 pm
Intrasystem gate rangers!!!
*guitar solo*

Intrasystem gate rangers!!!
MIGHTY MORPHIN SYSTEM GATE RANGERS!!!!!
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: headdie on June 19, 2012, 06:23:40 pm
Am I the only one who read the title of this thread as "Intrasystem Gate RANGERS"? ^^
nope that was my first thought to lol

Intrasystem gate rangers!!!
*guitar solo*

Intrasystem gate rangers!!!
MIGHTY MORPHIN SYSTEM GATE RANGERS!!!!!

 :wakka:
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Scotty on June 19, 2012, 06:46:42 pm
Re: gate ranges.

The short answer is that we don't know.

Presumably there is some kind of range, judging by the gates in the middle of nowhere, but this could honestly be a way to circumvent periodic mass shadows (orbiting planets) by positioning the in between gates above the system ecliptic.  It'd look like nowhere, but it'd make sure your freighter never accidentally jumped through Jupiter, or something.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: rscaper1070 on June 19, 2012, 06:51:38 pm
Bingo, that's the idea I was looking for. I had a similar idea but I didn't think to go off the ecliptic. Thanks.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: qwadtep on June 19, 2012, 09:25:47 pm
Intrasystem gate rangers!!!
*guitar solo*

Intrasystem gate rangers!!!
MIGHTY MORPHIN SYSTEM GATE RANGERS!!!!!
Secret project
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: X3N0-Life-Form on June 20, 2012, 12:32:52 am
Intrasystem gate rangers!!!
*guitar solo*

Intrasystem gate rangers!!!
MIGHTY MORPHIN SYSTEM GATE RANGERS!!!!!
Secret project
That explains sooo much.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: JerichoDeath on June 23, 2012, 03:56:51 am
These gates...
I have been thinking about those gates.
I had been wondering why they were so far apart from each other.
If one gate is linked, entry and exit, with another, then why have the entry to the next gate be so far away?

-but then I realized that it was likely because the ships need time to cool their engines down for the next jump.

---

Then, I wondered:
If Karunas and such use those gates, then wouldn't the GTA have the advantage of being able to jump all around the system anywhere they wanted to?
That is, if UEF Military ships have to use those gates to get around quickly... maybe I'm wrong, though.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: MatthTheGeek on June 23, 2012, 04:05:05 am
UEF military ships are all equipped with intra-system jump drives. Only some civilian ships aren't, for economical reasons.

On the strategical point of view, since you can track jump signatures in a system, you can use gates to slip by warships as long as you periodically fake-fire the gates you control, so the enemy can't tell between a real warship using the gate or just a fake jump generated by the gate.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: -Norbert- on June 23, 2012, 10:52:03 am
It also allows a ship to enter an area without using up it's own energy reserve, meaning the can jump out the moment the calculations finish (or make an immediate crash jump, if the situation is dire enough), rather than having to wait for the drives to cool and re-charge.... assuming the target area is close enough to a gate.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Scotty on June 23, 2012, 10:54:17 am
I'm pretty sure gates are linked, which means you don't even have to do calculations in the first place.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: -Norbert- on June 24, 2012, 01:30:06 am
Yes, but when I was talking about jumping out, I didn't mean turning around and flying back into the gate you came out of. I meant you can jump out with the ships actual jump drive, which (assuming the calculations are done reasonably fast) might be quicker than the whole turning, depending on the ship in question of course.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: BlasterNT on June 25, 2012, 12:21:24 pm
In that case though, Jericho has a valid point.  If there's no cooldown necessary in using gates, why are consecutive gates spaced so far apart? 
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: rscaper1070 on June 25, 2012, 12:36:38 pm
My technobabble explanation would be something like gates produce an artificial Lagrange Point and having two in close proximity would interfere with their gravity fields.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: JerichoDeath on June 25, 2012, 01:02:04 pm
I think that we've seen planetary gravity fields produce errors in subspace jumps before. So, that explanation might make sense.

The only possible problem that I see is "why don't warships' own intra-system jump drives give each other errors, then?"

-but there are multiple solutions to that.
Maybe they sync with each other, or the Intra-System Gates are just way more powerful then the jump drives inside of ships, or maybe ships' jump drives have some kind of dampening system installed in order to prevent such errors from taking place.

There might also be strategic reasons for keeping the gates apart... when were they built, anyway?
Or maybe it has something to do with trade associations or space-faring law at the time they were built.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: -Norbert- on June 25, 2012, 01:38:55 pm
Maybe activating a gate is creating a gravity pull. For ships this isn't a problem, but a static gate would be pulled out of allignment. And placing them further apart was simply more economic than fitting them with manouvering thrusters and systems that automatically realign the gater, after a neighboring gate activated.

The six gates near Mars (as seen in Sunglare) look like they are connected, so they wouldn't suffer from the same problem, if that really is the case.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: BlasterNT on June 25, 2012, 02:19:40 pm
Which begs the question of why gate pairs that circumvent mass shadows aren't simply connected together. 
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: -Norbert- on June 26, 2012, 01:50:31 am
Good question...

Do we know for sure that gates are paired?
Could it be, that they work a bit like the trade-lanes in Freelancer (I know they only speed you up, instead of making an extra-dimensional tunnel... it's a very loose metaphor), where they form a line of many gates and you can exit and enter at anyone of them?
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: JerichoDeath on June 26, 2012, 03:32:30 am
I'm not sure I understand the question.
How is that different?

Sure "pairs" might be misleading. It might be better to look at them as a linked chain that goes both ways.
In any case, what he meant by "pair" was you using one gate to come out of the jump, then the next connected gate to jump again immediately.
Rinse, and Repeat, so to speak, until you reach your destination.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: NGTM-1R on June 26, 2012, 05:52:52 am
The reason for spacing gates apart does not have to be related to their functioning. It could be a security measure to separate them, or possibly other reasons.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: MatthTheGeek on June 26, 2012, 05:58:04 am
Space drift ?
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: -Norbert- on June 26, 2012, 06:02:25 am
I'm not sure I understand the question.
How is that different?

Sure "pairs" might be misleading. It might be better to look at them as a linked chain that goes both ways.
In any case, what he meant by "pair" was you using one gate to come out of the jump, then the next connected gate to jump again immediately.
Rinse, and Repeat, so to speak, until you reach your destination.
The difference is that in case of paired gates, you would need to make a lot of mini-jumps between entry and exit point, just like you described.

But if they work loosly like in Freelancer, you could make just a single jump and inside the subspace tunnel, you aren't even aware through now many gates you've flown. But if you want to, you could programm the gate to only take you halfway the distance from Earth to Mars for example, rather than the whole way.
You could say instead of creating several short tunnels, the gates connect all those tunnels together, so you can make a single uninterrupted jump, if you so choose.


...That way a manipulated gate could unexpectetly throw a ship/convoy out of the tunnel in the middle of nowhere, which could make a nice plot-device, without the need to come up with some form of subspace inhibitor, come to think of it.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: rscaper1070 on June 26, 2012, 11:03:22 am

The difference is that in case of paired gates, you would need to make a lot of mini-jumps between entry and exit point, just like you described.

But if they work loosly like in Freelancer, you could make just a single jump and inside the subspace tunnel, you aren't even aware through now many gates you've flown. But if you want to, you could programm the gate to only take you halfway the distance from Earth to Mars for example, rather than the whole way.
You could say instead of creating several short tunnels, the gates connect all those tunnels together, so you can make a single uninterrupted jump, if you so choose.


...That way a manipulated gate could unexpectetly throw a ship/convoy out of the tunnel in the middle of nowhere, which could make a nice plot-device, without the need to come up with some form of subspace inhibitor, come to think of it.

In "The Cost of War" we have a convoy moving from a gate they just exited to a gate they need to go through. If the GTA forced them out at that location why would they allow them to leave? Or why wouldn't the GTA make all the gates just lead back to where they started so they could pick off or capture them? To be sporting?

I think the simpler answer is that the gates are paired, and that follows with how subspace seems to work in Freespace, an entry point paired with an exit point.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: MatthTheGeek on June 26, 2012, 11:06:42 am
A decent technobabble would be that each gate emmits enough subspace disturbance that the next gate must be moved a few kilometers away for the two gates to not interfere with each other.

That plus space drift.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Scotty on June 26, 2012, 11:08:02 am
A decent checkpoint and system security decision under nominal circumstances (that you still have control of most of the system), too.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: NGTM-1R on June 26, 2012, 11:39:56 am
A decent checkpoint and system security decision under nominal circumstances (that you still have control of most of the system), too.

Pretty much this. Plenty of time to stop people between gates even if they have proper authorization or can somehow override a lockout.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: BlasterNT on June 26, 2012, 02:42:11 pm
I wonder how easy it is to move/relink gates then.  iirc, doesn't the altan orde reprogram the gate in TBI in a couple of minutes?
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Damage on June 28, 2012, 11:44:15 am
A decent technobabble would be that each gate emmits enough subspace disturbance that the next gate must be moved a few kilometers away for the two gates to not interfere with each other.

Except that we can clearly see gates stacked next to each other in the ending cutscene at Mars.  Likely there's other major intersections at highly traveled locations.  I think it more likely that it provides a kind of traffic control, and allows that security window Scotty mentioned.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: headdie on June 28, 2012, 11:47:41 am
Probably to allow for multiple ships transiting at once
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: -Norbert- on June 28, 2012, 05:46:16 pm
Maybe the multiple gates at the trafic hubs have some kind of special isolation against the interference from other gates, but that isolation is so costly, that it is only installed, where it's necessary.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: mormon_boy on July 01, 2012, 05:40:50 pm
here's a thought

roads on earth don't always make sense(see: the entire state of Oregon)
so why should roads in space be any different? take the cost of war pair for example perhaps they had plans to install a station there that didn't pan out and it would be to costly to correct or something.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Gunteen6 on July 05, 2012, 09:25:09 am
How about... this:

The Gate system isn't a point A to point B thing, its a web, with multiple paths intersecting one another. The gaps in the lanes allow for entries into the web for anything that happens to be there. It seems less that its purely a technological limitation and more that its also a design feature to allow for ease of access. At the same time though we know that gates can be reprogrammed to have a different destination, so the gates being "paired" can't be a permanent thing.

OH. OH. ALSO.

Planets move and stuff, so point A to B setups are going to be disrupted anyway by gravity wells and other annoying things at different intervals. BUT. If the web was for the most part ABOVE the solar plane (I.E. above the planets if we use the relative orbits of the planets as a plane) then the web might actually be far more extensive than we get to see, with gates anchored next to planets, then gates above that to "enter" into the web, and then artificially anchored gates in-between the planets themselves spaced in such a way as to overcome the orbits of the planets themselves. Because of this, gate pairing would need to be dynamic as the system is constantly changing. This would also suggest that interplanetary transit has seasons in which going from one planet to another might still cost more because you gotta jump more times cause its like, all the way fricken over there now instead of where it was 6 months ago.

Since they're spaced the way they are, this would allow the gates to be produced cheaper and more plentifully, making the saturation of the system in gates far more practical.

Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: mormon_boy on July 05, 2012, 10:32:22 pm
ok i missed something. why in one mission are you escorting a convoy from one gate to the other?
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: -Norbert- on July 06, 2012, 04:50:07 am
I can think of only two explenations:
1) The GTVA (which was already present, when you arrived) hacked the gate to prematurely spew the convoy out of subspace.
2) The range is limited, so you have to make a few stops in realspace, if you are traveling a long route.

The first would be the case if the gates link together to form one very long tunnel for a transit (a bit like Freelancer Tradelanes).
For the second that can still be the case, but with a limit to how many gates you can link together. Or the gates are paired (like X Series jumpgates... or Freelancer Jumpgates too, come to think of it).
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Dragon on July 06, 2012, 05:09:55 am
Considering there's a need for "gate farms", I'd say they're paired.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Gunteen6 on July 06, 2012, 07:07:09 am
They certainly have to be paired, but they can't possibly be static pairs. Planetary orbits and gravity wells would screw those up constantly.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: headdie on July 06, 2012, 07:37:50 am
Considering there's a need for "gate farms", I'd say they're paired.

It depends on the capacity of a gate, I imagine much like with nodes there is a limit to how much can be in transit through a gate at any one time.  in this case a "Gate Farm" acts more as a mass transit point like a motorway/autobahn compared to a single gate which operates like a regular road.

But seeing a pared gates is the popular theme for such devices they probably are.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: -Norbert- on July 06, 2012, 01:00:09 pm
Just because it's popular, doesn't mean it's a fact. There are good arguments for either stand point (though the paired theory seems to have more of them).
Either way I'd rather wait for some "official" comment.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Trivial Psychic on July 06, 2012, 05:55:40 pm
Perhaps the gate pairing employs Quantum Entanglement as a means of maintaining a real-time data link between both ends of the gate to ensure 100% accurate info on the gravitational environment at the other end, and control both ends of the jump at the same time for ships without or not using their drive systems.
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: Trivial Psychic on July 10, 2012, 05:08:50 pm
4 days and no further comments.  I guess my explanation has seemed the most plausible.  :pimp:
Title: Re: Intrasystem Gate Ranges
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 11, 2012, 12:46:33 am
I think we're just ok with the technobabbling.