[Woolie Wool]

Uhh, no, ships in space do not have a speed limit, it is completely impossible for them to have one because there is no friction in space. You apply thrust, it goes faster. Ships in cutscenes and animations have been seen going much, much faster than in gameplay. "Max velocity" is a gameplay contrivance that has no relation to the way actual space travel works. And if you're not going to attempt to reconcile the subject of a debate with actual real-life mechanics, there's no point arguing about anything because you can answer any question with "a wizard did it'.

A ship in space cannot have its speed limited by anything but fuel supply, space just doesn't work that way. Furthermore, speed is relative, so a ship traveling at 55 m/s relative to one planet might be moving 100,000 m/s relative to a star a few light-years away, which means that aside from being impossible, max speed doesn't even mean anything in space anyway because speed is entirely dependent on the observer.

[NGTM-1R]

For that matter, you still haven't explained why they're still going to be able to fight off a 150-year advanced over them force. In the twenty-odd years between the Great War and the second round of it, we saw how far the GTVA was able to progress their technology. In 150 years, their destroyers will chuckle at a Sathanas. Their average fighter squadron will chuckle at a Sathanas.

Unless it's in your head, apparently?

[Polpolion]

Uhh, no, ships in space do not have a speed limit, it is completely impossible for them to have one because there is no friction in space. You apply thrust, it goes faster. Ships in cutscenes and animations have been seen going much, much faster than in gameplay. "Max velocity" is a gameplay contrivance that has no relation to the way actual space travel works. And if you're not going to attempt to reconcile the subject of a debate with actual real-life mechanics, there's no point arguing about anything because you can answer any question with "a wizard did it'.

A ship in space cannot have its speed limited by anything but fuel supply, space just doesn't work that way. Furthermore, speed is relative, so a ship traveling at 55 m/s relative to one planet might be moving 100,000 m/s relative to a star a few light-years away, which means that aside from being impossible, max speed doesn't even mean anything in space anyway because speed is entirely dependent on the observer.

Except if you're having a discussion about Freespace, you need to bind yourself to Freespace's physics system, which quite clearly has a speed limit. Or do we want to talk about simply shooting sand at extremely high velocity in front of all of the Sathanas Juggernauts and breaking all of their equipment?

[Dragon]

For that matter, you still haven't explained why they're still going to be able to fight off a 150-year advanced over them force. In the twenty-odd years between the Great War and the second round of it, we saw how far the GTVA was able to progress their technology. In 150 years, their destroyers will chuckle at a Sathanas. Their average fighter squadron will chuckle at a Sathanas.

Unless it's in your head, apparently?

Exactly.
Given NGTM-1R's assumption of 150 years, they would've been greatly outdated and most likely melted by a cruiser beams.
Just look what we have now and what we had 150 years ago.
It would be like bombing horsemen with nukes, even in WWI cavalry was one of the most powerfull units on the battlefield.
Imagine charging on a horseback with a lance and a rifle from 1860 against M1 Abrams or attacking a Nimitz-class carierr with a Galleon.
And keep in mind that technology seems to advance quicker in the modern times than some time ago, so if this doesn't changes it would be going even faster at the time of FS2.
It's possible that standard cannons will be as strong as FS2 era Meson bombs and FS2 BFRed would barely scratch a cruiser.
That is if the cruiser won't have anti-beam, high energy shield that will render BFReds completely useless.
Also, Sathans may not be able even to fire it's beams, as beams after 150 years would recharge much quicker and simply fire first, slicing the Sathanas in half.

[Woolie Wool]

Uhh, no, ships in space do not have a speed limit, it is completely impossible for them to have one because there is no friction in space. You apply thrust, it goes faster. Ships in cutscenes and animations have been seen going much, much faster than in gameplay. "Max velocity" is a gameplay contrivance that has no relation to the way actual space travel works. And if you're not going to attempt to reconcile the subject of a debate with actual real-life mechanics, there's no point arguing about anything because you can answer any question with "a wizard did it'.

A ship in space cannot have its speed limited by anything but fuel supply, space just doesn't work that way. Furthermore, speed is relative, so a ship traveling at 55 m/s relative to one planet might be moving 100,000 m/s relative to a star a few light-years away, which means that aside from being impossible, max speed doesn't even mean anything in space anyway because speed is entirely dependent on the observer.

Except if you're having a discussion about Freespace, you need to bind yourself to Freespace's physics system, which quite clearly has a speed limit. Or do we want to talk about simply shooting sand at extremely high velocity in front of all of the Sathanas Juggernauts and breaking all of their equipment?

If FreeSpace's physics system were used, matter and life as we know it could not exist because the physical constants and nature of the universe would be completely different from that of our own. However, considering the fact that planets, stars, life, etc. seems to exist much the same way as they do now. Saying that the universe must have such insane physics is just as stupid as saying that in Doom's universe, guns must magically hold hundreds more rounds than can possibly fit. It's a distortion of the universe to fit a game, much a like an FPS game tends to take great liberties with the actual way guns work. Trying to argue about something like this without even allowing the universe to work in anything resembling a realistic way is completely pointless as the basic workings of everything involved are arbitrary, illogical, and impossible. There is no point to arguing about what amounts to "a wizard did it".

As far as "shooting sand", that's exactly what will happen to any ship traveling in deep space, especially a very large one--sooner or later a micrometeorite will hit you. One can only assume their armor can resist micrometeorites any any kinetic weaponry the GTVA can devise.

[Commander Zane]

For that matter, you still haven't explained why they're still going to be able to fight off a 150-year advanced over them force. In the twenty-odd years between the Great War and the second round of it, we saw how far the GTVA was able to progress their technology. In 150 years, their destroyers will chuckle at a Sathanas. Their average fighter squadron will chuckle at a Sathanas.

Unless it's in your head, apparently?

And this is based on what factor, that Shivans for some bizzare reason decide not to advance their technology?

[SpardaSon21]

No, but the Sathanas fleet won't be advancing in technology since it will be slow-boating from Capella to GTVA space.

[NGTM-1R]

And this is based on what factor, that Shivans for some bizzare reason decide not to advance their technology?

If you're taking the 150-year cold run, you won't be refitting your ships, much less doing research.

[ChronoReverse]

Uhh, no, ships in space do not have a speed limit, it is completely impossible for them to have one because there is no friction in space. You apply thrust, it goes faster. Ships in cutscenes and animations have been seen going much, much faster than in gameplay. "Max velocity" is a gameplay contrivance that has no relation to the way actual space travel works. And if you're not going to attempt to reconcile the subject of a debate with actual real-life mechanics, there's no point arguing about anything because you can answer any question with "a wizard did it'

Wow, someone arguing for "realistic physics" and then forgetting relativity.

Albert Einstein is tapping you on the shoulder.

[Qent]

One reason that I think the "universe" (the one that is supposedly different from the game mechanics) is irrelevant to these discussions is that it is impossible to communicate it. At best we can fantasize about how FreeSpace would be "in real life." Once people start talking about actual mods and campaigns, all the realistic physics suddenly gets translated back into FreeSpace game mechanics.

I feel like that didn't get my point across at all. So, yeah. [/rant]

[Commander Zane]

Well if FreeSpace was real proportions would definately be a lot different.

[Polpolion]

If FreeSpace's physics system were used, matter and life as we know it could not exist because the physical constants and nature of the universe would be completely different from that of our own. However, considering the fact that planets, stars, life, etc. seems to exist much the same way as they do now. Saying that the universe must have such insane physics is just as stupid as saying that in Doom's universe, guns must magically hold hundreds more rounds than can possibly fit. It's a distortion of the universe to fit a game, much a like an FPS game tends to take great liberties with the actual way guns work. Trying to argue about something like this without even allowing the universe to work in anything resembling a realistic way is completely pointless as the basic workings of everything involved are arbitrary, illogical, and impossible. There is no point to arguing about what amounts to "a wizard did it".

As far as "shooting sand", that's exactly what will happen to any ship traveling in deep space, especially a very large one--sooner or later a micrometeorite will hit you. One can only assume their armor can resist micrometeorites any any kinetic weaponry the GTVA can devise.

What are you trying to debate about? We're trying to make an extension to the Freespace game. You cannot do that by disregarding game physics. A Sathanas going faster than 25 m/s is impossible in the Freespace world. Freespace craft flying like they do in the game is impossible in real life. Take your pick which physics system you ignore, but if it's the freespace system you're ignore, please continue this discussion on the GD board.

[Woolie Wool]

The FreeSpace "physics" system doesn't work and is incompatible with the way the universe works; it is completely and utterly useless for debating. If you're not ging to debate using physics that follow actual rules relevant to reality, there's no point in debating anything because the entire universe ends up underpinned by absurd and arbitrary concepts. You can abandon these ridiculous concepts when debating about the universe independent of the actual game itself, or you can have no debate because the physics of the game are complete nonsense.

I repeat, the physics shown in the game are nonsense. They're not even worth thinking about except in terms of playing the game. FreeSpace ships openly defy them outside of mission gameplay anyway--see the fall of Vasuda Prime command briefing (where a Horus easily reaches escape velocity for a large rocky planet, which is several thousand m/s), and the FS2 ending cutscene (where Sathanas-class juggernauts travel what looks to be hundreds of meters per second). I don't work with nonsense, and no one else should either.

[Polpolion]

The FreeSpace "physics" system doesn't work and is incompatible with the way the universe works; it is completely and utterly useless for debating. If you're not ging to debate using physics that follow actual rules relevant to reality, there's no point in debating anything because the entire universe ends up underpinned by absurd and arbitrary concepts. You can abandon these ridiculous concepts when debating about the universe independent of the actual game itself, or you can have no debate because the physics of the game are complete nonsense.

I repeat, the physics shown in the game are nonsense. They're not even worth thinking about except in terms of playing the game. FreeSpace ships openly defy them outside of mission gameplay anyway--see the fall of Vasuda Prime command briefing (where a Horus easily reaches escape velocity for a large rocky planet, which is several thousand m/s), and the FS2 ending cutscene (where Sathanas-class juggernauts travel what looks to be hundreds of meters per second). I don't work with nonsense, and no one else should either.

Sathanas juggernauts themselves are nonsense. If you're not talking about Freespace in a manner that's bound to what's presented in the Freespace universe, then you're not talking about Freespace.

EDIT: Also, you don't need to reach escape velocity to leave orbit. Theoretically, it's possible to have an object go from the surface of a planet to out of orbit at a constant 1 m/s.

[Scotty]

Please explain why Juggernauts are nonsense.

...That's really all I have to contribute here for now.

[Woolie Wool]

At any rate, the Horus was moving much faster than 90 m/s, it traveled what looked like several kilometers from the Vasudan city to the foreground in seconds, and then was outside of Vasuda Prime's atmosphere a few seconds later. Plus the Sathanas juggernauts in FS2's ending were moving much faster than 25 m/s; they were moving a significant fraction of their >5000m length every second. These displays of speed are much faster than anything seen in the game.

Accepting something vaguely silly like a giant spaceship (whose inner workings are completely unknown and unexplained) with death rays (whose inner workings are also completely unknown and unexplained) is one thing, but accepting everything in the universe adhering to principles that are completely at odds with the most basic aspects of the universe (even the FTL doesn't do this, as it involves leaving the "real" universe for a period of time) and completely at odds with the existence of life or even planetary systems (which are a product of Newtonian principles of motion) is unacceptable. You might as well debate about magic. You need some sort of connection to reality to have any ability to debate beyond the "a wizard did it" level. Hell, the way FreeSpace handles speeds doesn't even mesh with the way speed works (it is always a value relative to the point of reference and the observed. Speed can only appear absolute in terrestrial cases because our velocity "at rest" is the same as the Earth's and thus the Earth is a "stationary" reference point for just about everything on Earth)! It's completely worthless for anything but a game mechanic!

FreeSpace desperately needs a novel or TV show, preferably written by someone with at least an elementary grasp of physics. Even if they weren't, at least we'd have a view of the universe that wasn't completely enslaved to serving a gameplay model.

[Commander Zane]

Meaning it doesn't really make a lot of sense to try to have a serious debate between Reality™ physics and FreeSpace game physics.
Sure, FreeSpace has state-of-the-art spacecraft that go no faster than a person, while Reality has spacecraft that's just used for going outside of orbit, nabbing a rock or something or deploying a satellite, then returning, all while going how many tens of thousands of whatever unit per second? Then you have 17 meter fighters carrying 23 meter bombs like it's nothing, this, that and the other, but it's a game, for fun, not for trying to apply true logic into it.

Unless you want to TC FreeSpace into something that attempts true logic, maybe.

[Woolie Wool]

FreeSpace game physics cannot support a debate, they're just too arbitrary and ass-backwards for it. That's why serious sci-fi debates must attempt to rationalize everything in a sci-fi universe with real physics. See the extremely elaborate explanations people have created for the properties, behavior, and nature of Star Wars "lasers". The general consensus is that they're particle cannons of some sort.

[Polpolion]

At any rate, the Horus was moving much faster than 90 m/s, it traveled what looked like several kilometers from the Vasudan city to the foreground in seconds, and then was outside of Vasuda Prime's atmosphere a few seconds later. Plus the Sathanas juggernauts in FS2's ending were moving much faster than 25 m/s; they were moving a significant fraction of their >5000m length every second. These displays of speed are much faster than anything seen in the game.

Accepting something vaguely silly like a giant spaceship (whose inner workings are completely unknown and unexplained) with death rays (whose inner workings are also completely unknown and unexplained) is one thing, but accepting everything in the universe adhering to principles that are completely at odds with the most basic aspects of the universe (even the FTL doesn't do this, as it involves leaving the "real" universe for a period of time) and completely at odds with the existence of life or even planetary systems (which are a product of Newtonian principles of motion) is unacceptable. You might as well debate about magic. You need some sort of connection to reality to have any ability to debate beyond the "a wizard did it" level. Hell, the way FreeSpace handles speeds doesn't even mesh with the way speed works! It's completely worthless for anything but a game mechanic!

You are exactly right.

Freespace is bound by its game mechanics. We are discussing (trying to, at least) ways to combat Shivans in Freespace. Therefore, what we discuss should be bound by Freespace's game mechanics.

EDIT: Enjoy trying to refute a sound valid argument.

[Woolie Wool]

But the very game mechanics they're bound by preclude any sort of rational discussion about the game divorced from the context of the game itself and its hitpoints, hitboxes, and other video game abstractions. FreeSpace the universe must be divorced from FreeSpace 2 the game for any sort of real debate on its story to be done because the game mechanics are useless as anything but game mechanics. It's as dumb as talking about Doom's story (such as it is, anyway) and including SR-50 and vertical autoaim.