Engines, speed and movement

[Prototype]

Fenway, trust me, infinite acceleration at sub warp is probably not a good idea, if you had no speed limit, you could have players breaking the speed of light.

[҉]

You tell me - 10 m/s^2 is a lot or not ?

Anyone who has managed to get through high school knows what m/s^2 means. In terms of space combat, 10 m/s/s probably isn't all that much, but it's all relative, just like maximum speeds would be. Whether or not that's a lot depends on whether or not most ships can do that. If they can, it's not a lot. If they can't, it probably is.

Prototype, the time it would take to hit lightspeed with any engine we're likely to include in the game would be ridiculous. Even if you were accelerating at a kilometer/second/second, which is *much* faster than we have any reason to be accelerating, you'd have to do that for some 83 hours to hit lightspeed, and equally long to slow down again. No ship could carry enough fuel to do that.

[Professor Fenway]

Obviously there is a speed limit, say 50% the speed of light where acceleration dramatically slows down. But it isn't an arbitrary 'top speed', it's an actual value defined by physics.

And acceleration is NOT a useless value. If someone is making a dropship, and sees that one accelerates at 10 m/s/s, and the other does at 20 m/s/s, then he would choose the latter. EVEN WITH top speeds, acceleration is a needed value. If there was a 500 m/s speed limit, someone's going to want to know which engine will reach it fastest.

Say ship A accelerated at 20 m/s/s and ship B accelerated at 15 m/s/s. Ship A will know that he can catch ship B, while ship B won't be able to escape him.

And a NORMAL PERSON? Your definition of a 'Normal Person' seems to be someone who never went to school and doesn't have a rudimentary understanding of BASIC PHYSICS. It's not rocket science to know that 10 m/s/s is faster than 20 m/s/s.

This wouldn't make it some 'crappy simulation'. It would add some DEPTH to an otherwise overused idea- Speed limits in space. SPACE IS NOT AN OCEAN.

[ACH0225]

Maybe bigger engines accelerate slower, but reach a higher limit because they are more powerful? Acceleration is just as important as top speed. Acceleration defines how fast you go, because you need to accelerate to get to faster speeds. You don't go from 0 to 100,000 meters per second in an instant. That would probably break the game, because you could fly a dreadnought around like a fighter. Acceleration should be carried out with an exponential growth pattern until it reaches the limit, with the base growth and limit defined by ship mass and engine power. This also allows ships to accelerate faster if they put more power into their engines.

[҉]

Maybe bigger engines accelerate slower, but reach a higher limit because they are more powerful?

But that's not how physics works...

[Iv121]

Well LJS and everyone who passed high school knows that 10 m/s^2 is around free fall acceleration so you tell me is falling fast ?

I'd rather say yes, others will say no, and the more clever ones will say you can't tell BECAUSE ACCELERATION IS NOT SPEED , and for us the normal people who are not walking computers it is meaningless, we cannot comprehend it the way we can distance or speed for example. You can’t tell by it which ship is faster and by how much, if you answer "the one with the bigger number" your answer is also meaningless, especially considering that if the enemy ship's starting speed is bigger than yours it will be faster than you, you will eventually catch up to it but it doesn't change the fact it was faster.

There is a reason why most games measure engines in top speed and not acceleration, if you don't trust my word learn from them and quit trying to invent the wheel, on such mistakes games with potential get 4/10s.

[҉]

Well LJS and everyone who passed high school knows that 10 m/s^2 is around free fall acceleration so you tell me is falling fast ?

I'd rather say yes, others will say no, and the more clever ones will say you can't tell BECAUSE ACCELERATION IS NOT SPEED , and for us the normal people who are not walking computers it is meaningless, we cannot comprehend it the way we can distance or speed for example. You can’t tell by it which ship is faster and by how much, if you answer "the one with the bigger number" your answer is also meaningless, especially considering that if the enemy ship's starting speed is bigger than yours it will be faster than you, you will eventually catch up to it but it doesn't change the fact it was faster.

Noooo.... I said it "probably isn't all that much, but it's all relative, just like maximum speeds would be. Whether or not that's a lot depends on whether or not most ships can do that. If they can, it's not a lot. If they can't, it probably is." And yes, you can tell which ship is faster. As Fenway said, if one ship can accelerate at 20 m/s/s and another can accelerate at 15 m/s/s, the one that can do 20 is faster. I don't know what you're talking about with that last sentence. I counter it with: Say you put two birds on trains. The first bird on the first train is moving at 100 k/h. The second bird on the second train is moving at 50 k/h. Which bird is faster? The second, because it's a peregrine falcon and the first bird is a raven. Is that relevant? Not really, but at least as much as yours is. If you can't handle thinking in terms of acceleration, which is what I'm mostly getting from your posts, you need to go back and spend more time in freshman-level physics classes.

[Prototype]

So, do we want this:




Or this (imagine its a smooth curve)



Simple question?

[҉]

The first one.

[Prototype]

Should I set up a poll?

[҉]

Polls don't really mean anything. Ultimately Fr0st and Mack are going to have to be the ones who choose. The same goes for this argument, really.

[Iv121]

Well alright LJS - I gave a clear reason NOT to use acceleration as measurement unit - it complicates thing unnecessarily and you try to measure speed with acceleration (Yes that is exactly what you do because ships move at speeds and not at accelerations and the questions you ask is which ship is faster and not which one accelerates faster), in addition to the fact that pretty much every single person in the gaming industry or in the modding communities is working with speeds as measurements. I agree there is acceleration as part of the program included in minecraft but I see no reason to write on an engine "Acceleration 10" instead of "top speed 20".

If you manage to bring any reasonable reason as to why should we do the opposite at least there will be something to argue about (if not there is nothing to talk about and engine speed remains engine speed)

BTW LJS it seems like you agree with me by simply choosing the graph with constant acceleration.

[҉]

Well alright LJS - I gave a clear reason NOT to use acceleration as measurement unit - it complicates thing unnecessarily

I don't consider it unnecessary. I think it's a good and useful addition that will make things more interesting and realistic.

you try to measure speed with acceleration (Yes that is exactly what you do because ships move at speeds and not at accelerations and the questions you ask is which ship is faster and not which one accelerates faster)

No I don't. I measure acceleration with acceleration. Measuring speed with acceleration makes only marginally more sense than measuring weight with temperature. If you ask which ship is faster, the answer would be the one that accelerates faster, because it gains higher speeds more quickly.

in addition to the fact that pretty much every single person in the gaming industry or in the modding communities is working with speeds as measurements. I agree there is acceleration as part of the program included in minecraft but I see no reason to write on an engine "Acceleration 10" instead of "top speed 20".

That isn't relevant. What others are doing has no bearing on this discussion, and "I see no reason" is not by itself an argument.

If you manage to bring any reasonable reason as to why should we do the opposite at least there will be something to argue about (if not there is nothing to talk about and engine speed remains engine speed)

What you're saying here is that your opinion is correct until someone else can override it. I'm not the only person here who has to support his ideas; you aren't correct until proven wrong. If there's no argument, you don't just win by default. We have all been bringing you reasonable reasons for the past few pages of this thread. It is now your turn.

BTW LJS it seems like you agree with me by simply choosing the graph with constant acceleration.

This line gives me the impression that you don't understand what the argument is about.


What engines provide is force, not speed or acceleration. The force provided by the engines divided by the mass of the ship gives you the acceleration. The acceleration multiplied by the time the engines have been running gives you the current speed of the ship. Top speed isn't even remotely relevant in space. Check out some source on science fiction ships, like Wookieepedia. The stats listed are maximum acceleration and maximum speed in atmosphere. Speed remains relevant in space because of air resistance, but it's not applicable to spaceflight.

[Chairman_Tiel]

[Prototype]

Allow me to just interrupt, the purpose is not whose idea is best, but what works best for FC.

And Tiel, I've brought popcorn to this one.