Author Topic: space ships should be on fire (Read 5866 times)

Nuke · **on:** February 25, 2004, 07:41:25 pm

is it posible to get a d3 style bunining effect. a ship that is on fire should take damage. it would work sorta like emp, with a flame flag, you should also be able to define effect time and damage factor (foctor of the weapon's damage tag). it would be cool. and dont give me that no fire in space bs, this is sci-fi emphasis on fi.

Bobboau · **Reply #1 on:** February 25, 2004, 10:12:39 pm

'space' ships... fire...
you do know how very very wrong this is right?

Nuke · **Reply #2 on:** February 25, 2004, 10:13:56 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Nuke
and dont give me that no fire in space bs, this is sci-fi emphasis on fi.

JC Denton · **Reply #3 on:** February 25, 2004, 10:25:37 pm

Well....if you want something like a reason, maybe there's an atmosphere leak that the fire's being fed off of? Or maybe some other material is reacting/combusting, and can do so in a vacuum?

Either way, think of the Homeworld/Homeworld2 ships when they get lambasted by a wall of Ion Frigates. It's eyecandy, and a better visual aid to know the state of a ship without targeting it to see the hull integrity.

And besides, a ship at 20% hull certianly doesn't look it right now.

Bobboau · **Reply #4 on:** February 25, 2004, 10:43:17 pm

nono, he doesn't want a damage eye candy effect he wants a napalm cannon. a flaim thrower, or something that sticks to the ship, causeing damage. I could hardly buy robots, made of meatal, burning in D3, space ships in space made of thick armor, in space, would just be distractingly wrong, to the point that I wouldn't be able to get around it

JC Denton · **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2004, 10:58:58 pm

Ah, misread that post...been doing that an awful lot lately.

Well, in that case, I think the idea's, well....*shrug*

And maybe it'd warrant splitting the thread, but is a HW/HW2-esque damage effect feasible for post-3.6?

Turnsky · **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2004, 11:04:45 pm

he wants a smoke 'n fire effect ala freelancer..

Bobboau · **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2004, 11:10:04 pm

no, he wants a D3 style stuff burning and dieing from it, effect

Drew · **Reply #8 on:** February 26, 2004, 12:16:13 am

mm.... particles...

Stryke 9 · **Reply #9 on:** February 26, 2004, 12:39:25 am

I want both. Gradual damage doesn't have to be attributed to fire, y'know, could just as easily claim that some missile's a breacher pod fulla marines that slowly tear up the inside of the ship or some gray goo ubervirus. And some kind of nice damage effect for normal weapons, a significant enhancement on those little particle spews you see now, would be just plain cool.

Carl · **Reply #10 on:** February 26, 2004, 01:33:20 am

i'm sorry, but the fiction in science fiction doesn't mean go against the laws of physics, dispite what some people believe.

Bobboau · **Reply #11 on:** February 26, 2004, 01:37:22 am

and stryke, arn't you one of the people who hates soft sci-fi

Turnsky · **Reply #12 on:** February 26, 2004, 02:00:58 am

how 'bout a coolant leak somewhere?..

Nico · **Reply #13 on:** February 26, 2004, 02:05:49 am

Quote

Originally posted by Carl
i'm sorry, but the fiction in science fiction doesn't mean go against the laws of physics, dispite what some people believe.

Which is bull since there's stuff that can burn w/o air, but people here like to blatantly ignore that fact so they can ***** to no end.

Carl · **Reply #14 on:** February 26, 2004, 02:08:52 am

i'm not saying there aren't things that can burn without air, i'm saying don't throw science out just because fiction told you to.

Nico · **Reply #15 on:** February 26, 2004, 02:12:40 am

which is, in that case, absolutly irelevant since what he's proposing doesn't go against science.

Carl · **Reply #16 on:** February 26, 2004, 02:18:32 am

i know, but it is relevent to this:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Nuke
and dont give me that no fire in space bs, this is sci-fi emphasis on fi.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nuke · **Reply #17 on:** February 26, 2004, 03:44:49 am

now that i think about it its not fi. you could mix hydrogen peroxide with napalm and it will work just fine in space, though it may scatter a bit. another thing, metals are a key ingredient in explosives, once an enemy's hull starts melting, it will only make the fire hotter. and medals are slowly becoming obsolete to composites. carbon fiber is becoming a very desirable component in space craft, and as i recal carbon is in the non-metals section of the periodic table. but actually id like to make plasma cannons that make ships burn.

Setekh · **Reply #18 on:** February 26, 2004, 06:07:46 am

Quote

Originally posted by Nuke
a ship that is on fire should take damage.

To a limit. Partly the whole damage system is completely ridiculous, you can shoot at a single part of a ship for eons and that will bring the whole ship crashing down in explosions and shockwaves. That said, it would look pretty cool to be on fire, fictional as it would have to be.

Turnsky · **Reply #19 on:** February 26, 2004, 06:29:06 am

yeah, for eyecandy's sake..

News:

Author Topic: space ships should be on fire (Read 5866 times)

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

Re: space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire

Re: space ships should be on fire

space ships should be on fire