Main > Gameplay
Authenticity vs. Realism in our Weapons
Thomas:
It depends on the ammo type you're using. Different ammo types make the gun sound differently. (charged, lesmok, etc) Otherwise it should sound like a normal old flamethrower. (I think, it sounded normal last time I checked)
Hekkthor:
I know this is offtopic because this thread is about weapons, but it fits fere because of the realism discussion
F= m x (a[ship] x y) y= 2.5 for kerosine (+150%) y= 3.0 for moonshine (200%)
F= 50'000kg x 11.6m/s^2 x 2.5
F=1'450'000 N for kerosine/squid
F=150'000kg x 3.6m/s^2 x 3.0
F=1'620'000 N for moonshine/goldfish
Thrust of a russian engine that was used to at the space programm to launch exorbital missions: 1'638'000 N
Thrust of the engine used on the concorde airplanes ( they got a traveling speed of mach 1 ) :
169'200 N
AND WHY ARE THESE SHIPS STILL SLOWER THAN MACH 5?
don't take me serious, I love the game like it is and I'm waiting for the reality-discussions in the adventure mode
Queso:
Obviously the exact unit conversions were lost after the great war. While the numbers are meaningful compared to each other, they no longer remain the same due to the inaccurate historical records and improper calculations from the early days of post-war engineering. (That's my explanation and I'm sticking to it!)
Coldcurse:
--- Quote from: Hekkthor on December 01, 2013, 07:50:50 pm ---I know this is offtopic because this thread is about weapons, but it fits fere because of the realism discussion
F= m x (a[ship] x y) y= 2.5 for kerosine (+150%) y= 3.0 for moonshine (200%)
F= 50'000kg x 11.6m/s^2 x 2.5
F=1'450'000 N for kerosine/squid
F=150'000kg x 3.6m/s^2 x 3.0
F=1'620'000 N for moonshine/goldfish
Thrust of a russian engine that was used to at the space programm to launch exorbital missions: 1'638'000 N
Thrust of the engine used on the concorde airplanes ( they got a traveling speed of mach 1 ) :
169'200 N
AND WHY ARE THESE SHIPS STILL SLOWER THAN MACH 5?
don't take me serious, I love the game like it is and I'm waiting for the reality-discussions in the adventure mode
--- End quote ---
seems someone is on drugs here.
Saeth:
Gah, I had written an extensive and probably over-detailed post about this but my browser crashed and I lost everything ):
Anyway, summarizing the points I didn't get to make: I think the biggest issue right now are the ship weights, not the thrust of the engines or anything else. It's absolutely impossible for ships as small as they appear in the game to weight anything like 150 tons. That's the weight of a modern fast-attack ship, which is around 120 feet long (~37 meters) and MADE OF PURE STEEL. Not even the Galleon looks any longer than 100 feet, and its guns are comparatively smaller and lighter than those of any contemporary war ship.
Also, more implausible than the thrust for these kinds of weights would be the balloons. The only airship I know of that can lift that kind of weight (~160,000 Kg), the cargo CS-160, is over 720 feet long, and its balloon is just absolutely humongous.
Easy solution? Just change the ship's description so it reads less weird. Since all that matters on in-game physics are the compared weights, what you guys actually write down on your code doesn't matter.
Great job on the physics, by the way! It feels very fun and very realistic in spite of the weird numbers we see on the descriptions sometimes (:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version