[Kolgena]

I've always wondered whether jump nodes move or not. I don't recall any canon evidence for either possibility, but for sure they can't be static relative to absolute space. (Stars spin about the center of the galaxy at varying rates, but Sol is about 220km/s, not to mention the entire galaxy is going about 600km/s in a linear fashion).

So, it seems to me that jump nodes move (they kinda have to). And if they move, why would they have to remain static relative to the star they're associated with? Perhaps the reason that it's so hard to plant blockades on jump nodes is because it's hard to keep up with something that accelerates (the jump node must follow a curved path of some sort if it's to stay with its star system) but also doesn't have its own gravitational field that can be piggybacked on. So, Mjolnirs make sense because you drop them for a very short amount of time (probably a day or two tops) before their position begins to be offset from the position of the node. The mobility might be more of a necessity rather than a perk.

[Colonol Dekker]

I'd imaging a nodes drift rate to be on par with continental shift if not more simply due to the scale of a star system. So sentry gun mobility would seem to be a bonus rather than a requirement. Again as you say, there's no canon evidence to support or deny that though. . .

[redsniper]

Some like to think that they form at the system's La Grange points, so they wouldn't move relative to the local star(s) and planets.

[Eishtmo]

I've always wondered whether jump nodes move or not.

One of the jump nodes in FS1 is actually in the middle of an asteroid field, and thus rarely used, implying it had been there for a while.  Now does that mean it moves relative to the field or within the field, I don't know.

[Aramil]

Since when do nodes have a definite front, anyway?

One reason could be that if you treat the node as an exit to a corridor which points in-between the two nodes you would always exit facing away from the direction in real space that you came from. (Just thinking aloud.) and would also explain why the Knossos gates always seem to face exactly the way ships arrive from them.

As for the nodes not moving within a system "IE. the node in the asteroid field" what if the node was fixed by the forces exerted in that place. IE the effects of near by stars/planets/asteroids, act as an anchor to hold it stable, and so it would always be "X" km from the planet no matter how far around it's orbit the planet was.

both these would mean that the corridor would only slightly change exit angle as systems move, and so reasonable spread of ships in the exit area would be able to cover exiting ships. If two systems nodes shift a lot between cycles this would increase the angle needed to be covered, and may explain why fixed platforms are not always used.

Currently looking into a system to explain this better but I hope you get the basic idea.

[Liberator]

Ok, here's an idea I just had after reading the last post.

What if the Subspace Nodes always "point" in the same direction and are in the same place, not because they are in planetary La Grange points, but stellar La Grange points, IE the Node between Sol and Delta Serpentis formed because of some relationship between the stars gravity wells in subspace.  The nodes seem to remain stationary because of the immense time scales involved.

Oh man, this throws a whole new slant on why the Shivans blew up Capella.  Maybe they did it, at the expense of millions of they're own personnel to preserve us against a foe from elsewhere that would have emerged from a node that was in the process of stabilizing that we couldn't detect yet as the stars were coming into alignment, and the only way to stop it would be to explode one of the stars involved, maybe there's something so nasty the Shivans are trying to box it in by exploding stars to close off points of egress from where they have they closed off at.

[redsniper]

maybe there's something so nasty the Shivans are trying to box it in by exploding stars

Yes, the GTVA.

[Retsof]

maybe there's something so nasty the Shivans are trying to box it in by exploding stars

Yes, the GTVA.

Sure, but the fact that it's the GTVA means that it likely wouldn't start conquering every other race it came upon.  As the benifits of alliance have already been proven.

[redsniper]

I was just going for a "what a tweest" kind of thing there.

[Kolgena]

I'd play a campaign like that as long as it involved uber models on par with BP. (Just kidding. That's a stupidly large request).

However, your plot twist does make sense when considering that the shivans are a "symptom of something far bigger". Except, if they were trying to seal off stars, why are they nuking GTVA in the process?

Anyways, back to nodes... It'd be neat if nodes were actually formed in lagrange points around stars, except that would put them exceptionally far away from any one star system, and that's not what we see in the game.

[Liberator]

...why are they nuking GTVA in the process?

Because we're in the way, probably like the Ancients were.  But, it should be noted that during the Second Encounter, the Shivan's seemed less interested in wiping out the GTVA, they seemed more interested in keeping us out of the Nebula and later, in exploding Capella.  This leads to the idea that the Lucifer fleet was perhaps a remnant of the force that wiped out the ancients and perhaps mistook the Terran and Vasudan forces as Ancient.  I remember that Vasuda particularly seemed to be part of the Ancients empire as some point.

It's also possible the Ancients were perceived to be aligned with the Shivans true enemy and that's why they were wiped out.

[Aramil]

IE the Node between Sol and Delta Serpentis formed because of some relationship between the stars gravity wells in subspace.  The nodes seem to remain stationary because of the immense time scales involved.

I agree it would be a factor in making the link possable, but this...

It'd be neat if nodes were actually formed in lagrange points around stars, except that would put them exceptionally far away from any one star system, and that's not what we see in the game.

So I was thinking that, planets/asteroids or even spectacular events (star creation/death/nebulae etc) would provide some sort of gravitational anchor to focus this relationship and cause the node to be created (this would have to happen at both systems) as tying down one end would not form the corridor but may increase the forces at the other system possibly forcing it to form the node in the most likely mathematical (gravity/subspace distrotion etc) place.

This process of increased force could be what the Knossos gates does when reopening nodes, and interestingly if you knew the math very very precisely you could work out exactly where other potential nodes are to new systems. (did the ancients do this?)

As for nodes that work after a massive system event "Capella", you could say that links could become "more perminent" over time/use and so will hold after such an event but over time "with no real anchor" they would drift until collected by a different body/force/Knossos or slowly loose their link as they drift away from the system and go dead.

On a lighter note, glad you liked the idea  

[Kolgena]

Heh. So if nodes are based on the spacial geometry of the universe, solving Einstein's field equations would provide us with a nice extra perk, wouldn't it?

But seriously: It makes sense that nodes must be anchored to things with mass, or else they wouldn't be following the galaxy as it zooms around and around in circles at mindbreaking speeds. The only force we know of that is a direct result of the presence of mass, so it isn't too far of a stretch to believe that subspace is related to gravity.

That said, what does this have to do with tactics? I guess that you can argue that one can blow up massive objects like suns, moons, or planets to form/destroy/move nodes to make situations that favor you. Regardless, it could be a cool plot device to use in a campaign, as long as the means to blow stuff up like that isn't ridiculous.

[SpardaSon21]

Blowing up suns and moons?  Just leave that to Inferno.

[Aramil]

Heh. So if nodes are based on the spacial geometry of the universe, solving Einstein's field equations would provide us with a nice extra perk, wouldn't it?

That said, what does this have to do with tactics?

I was thinking that with this understanding and the Knossos technology it would be possable to create campaigns in which you could undo nodes "IE deactivate" and research positions of possible nodes and activate them. This way you could find: new systems/races/ possible back door routes to Shavian systems that you could open and close for hit and run attacks/reconnaissance (The Hunted Becomes the Hunter?) "good name eh"

Also you could have lots of fun opening up nodes to................... (add imagination here....)

So as for tactics the ability to appear unannounced in system, direct from another system, race for your objectives and get out before your enemy has time to react, and close the door behind you.

Obviously this would take the GTVA some time to make work (as you would need some form of mobile Knossos device/ship and a large amount of energy to force the unformed node open/shut) and this would have to be considered in any campaign, but it would be good to see an outnumbered/outgunned GTVA get some payback, and maybe some useful Intel. And may open up some new and exciting storylines.

[Killer Whale]

I always thought that everything in freespace was locked in orbit around the star. The planets, asteroids and jump nodes all had a pretty much constant speed if they're along the same orbital path. The speed you see in m/s is actually how far from the orbital speed they are at. eg. your ship is travelling... say... 30000 m/s around the sun, as is the jump nodes, planets, asteroids, other ships, plus the speed you see, say 100 m/s while afterburning. If you move closer to to the star, orbital speed increases, but the speed you see stays the same. The speed of a ship is relative to the orbit speed required for objects orbiting the sun. Make sense?

[Mongoose]

I always thought that everything in freespace was locked in orbit around the star. The planets, asteroids and jump nodes all had a pretty much constant speed if they're along the same orbital path. The speed you see in m/s is actually how far from the orbital speed they are at. eg. your ship is travelling... say... 30000 m/s around the sun, as is the jump nodes, planets, asteroids, other ships, plus the speed you see, say 100 m/s while afterburning. If you move closer to to the star, orbital speed increases, but the speed you see stays the same. The speed of a ship is relative to the orbit speed required for objects orbiting the sun. Make sense?

There's nothing canon that states it, but that's the same way I've always rationalized the speeds we see in-game for myself.  Even if you look past the non-Newtonian-ness of ships' motion as a necessity for the sort of gameplay that was going for, it's hard to rationalize why a bomber would be limited to the same speed as a city bus.

[NGTM-1R]

Considering the Lucifer was not actually under weigh in the last mission of FS1, I've always figured that speed is speed in relation to a fixed, large reference object. The Lucifer was the biggest thing in the subspace tunnel, so it was the reference object.

[Aardwolf]

Or maybe that was just a hack to make it easier to keep up with.

I am playing Devil's advocate here, just to get you to think about it... I personally don't have a strong opinion on the matter.

[wistler]

Or maybe that was just a hack to make it easier to keep up with.

I am playing Devil's advocate here, just to get you to think about it... I personally don't have a strong opinion on the matter.

How dare you make me squint!