Main > World
A couple of questions regarding the nature of this universe...
macmacnick:
For the balloons, hyper-compartmentalized balloons. (Just my theory.) The balloons automatically cut off the supply of helium once they have enough punctured compartments, requiring them to be manually reset, in which, an internal mechanism sprays out some sealant that fixes the hole or holes in the balloon's internal compartments and to an extent, its exterior. The balloon's Lighter-than air buoyant gasses supply panel also has an intake where coolant is spread through the balloon to suppress fires, however, the coolant must be administered manually. (Just to make some semi-believable explanations that are wholly false.) Also, I tend to like to think that damage to the hull armor causes a gradual misalignment in hull armor plates, which culminates in the hull going down, or a gap in the armor for which gunshots have easy pickings at the internal hull structure. Hitting the hull plate controls (Hull armor repair point) with a mallet spanner or pipe wrench causes them to be realigned to a certain degree, as hitting with a mallet would shift a lever more than a pipe wrench or spanner, because of the larger surface area. Also, the fire stacks make the hydraulic fluid for these plates slowly expand, gradually misaligning these hull armor plates, which can be slowed or cancelled by applying coolant to the hull controls. To achieve the necessary buoyancy in proportion to ship mass in the air, the balloons employ an advanced mix of hydrogen and helium in the balloon compartments, so as to achieve more buoyancy without pulling a Hindenburg, by having the compartments with more hydrogen in towards the center, and the compartments with more helium towards the exterior. However, when a pilot occasionally overrides the helium supply with hydrogen, the compartments do not automatically adjust for the imbalance, thus the outer layers become more flammable as the hydrogen is not covered by a buffer of helium.
TL;DR:
Balloons = many compartments, hull armor = plates that get misaligned, balloon has systems to deal with repairing damage during rebuilds, and a fire-supression system that requires coolant (stuff from fire tools) to be administered manually.
Omniraptor:
..Which brings us to the question of tool availability. Why can't we just set the tools down near a relevant component, or borrow and pass them to each other. How can you inject kerosine into engines while staying on helm? Why doesn't the crew ever get injured? Why don't fires spread across the ship like normal fires? Why do I hammer things with my spanner instead of actually using it lilke a spanner?
three possible explanations- nanobots, magic, alternate laws of physics, or all the airmen are insane are we're experiencing their hallucinations (this would help justify the phoenix claw things).
TF2 for example has the same problem, most classes use 1950s-era technology, except the spy, who inexplicably has a device that lets him bend and shape light how he pleases, and the egni, who can build an turret that has an advanced visual targeting system and (even worse) can manufacture ammo out of thin air, and the medic.
I'm fairly sure the official stance is that all the characters in tf2 are insane. The spy can literally strap a cardboard cutout to his face and become indistinguishable from a teammate in the eyes of enemy characters.
Piemanlives:
--- Quote from: Omniraptor on April 26, 2014, 04:08:08 pm ---..Which brings us to the question of tool availability. Why can't we just set the tools down near a relevant component, or borrow and pass them to each other. How can you inject kerosine into engines while staying on helm? Why doesn't the crew ever get injured? Why don't fires spread across the ship like normal fires? Why do I hammer things with my spanner instead of actually using it lilke a spanner?
three possible explanations- nanobots, magic, alternate laws of physics, or all the airmen are insane are we're experiencing their hallucinations (this would help justify the phoenix claw things).
--- End quote ---
Consider the following:
* Most of what we've experienced of the world is through gameplay.
* It is reasonable to assume that an engineer would be fully equipped to deal with any situation instead of carrying just three tools.
* Considering Muse has to make things balanced, and also looking through a gameplay standpoint having to run kerosene to the engines would be unnecessarily complicated than just activating it through tool use.
* Also consider that being able to kill crew would not be very fun if you were on the receiving end, however it is reasonable to assume that killing crew is in fact physically possible however from a gameplay stand point it wouldn't work.
* Smacking things is much easier from a gameplay standpoint than having to, oh I don't know, actually repair things.
* The gameplay does not dictate the boundaries of a universe, that is rather two dimensional thinking.
Omniraptor:
The purpose of the thread is fan wank/epileptic trees/whatever, having fun by trying to justify how the mechanics of the game work in-universe. Of course they actually work that way because it was deemed more fun than 'pure realism', but it's still cool to speculate.
as for the spanner, it's just a matter of adding a different animation. In the original guns of icarus you actually used the spanner as a spanner, e.g. to screw things in. In GOIO you just smack things with it.
Piemanlives:
I'm pretty sure there was a smacking animation in there as well, of course there was actually much spannering to be had so I guess that's a reasonable assumption.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version