Topic: Question to SFC3 fans... about ship movment! (Read 4480 times)

ShadowViper · « **Reply #20 on:** May 21, 2003, 05:38:11 pm »

Quote:

I watched DS9 and personally I think they made some of those big vessels TOO maneuverable. I can understand a small Corvetter or Frigate being that maneuverable, but I think the bigger the vessel it should be much less maneuverable.

You're basing this comment on DS9, which is also a TV show...

If you watch the big battle scene in ST:Nemesis, the Enterprise, the two Valdores, and the Scimitar seem to be pretty maneuverable. Those Valdores were pulling 180 degree turns in a pretty small distance...and the Scimitar was all over the place.

I would think that these ships would move slowly initially but once they have some speed/inertia built up they're capable of moving/maneuvering at a pretty good speed.

Also, remember...there's nothing in space to provide a resistant force against these vessels. No air resistance, no aerodynamics to worry about.

The_Pelican · « **Reply #21 on:** May 21, 2003, 06:39:16 pm »

The only thing you need to make a ship move & turn faster in space is more power. The bigger the ship, the more power you require, but of course, you can have a much bigger power source. In SFC(and in the shows), the ships arc as they turn, something which is unnecessary in space, and would in fact require more power, as you'd be turning in two directions not one. But it is done because it looks good, and the majority of people think that it is necessary.

TNG was set 90 years after TOS, If my memory serves me correctly, that gave them 90 years to figure out how to generate enough power to make even the biggest ship turn at high speed.

feargusf · « **Reply #22 on:** May 21, 2003, 11:01:04 pm »

I just watched Nemesis tonight, and even the massive Scimitar turned on a dime, so I have to go with the Pelican here. If you give a ship enough engine power, it should turn as quickly as you desire. Especially with the low drag of interplanetary space, and the absence of wind resistance. There is a reason that the Borg are able to make ultra-fast cube-shaped vessels.

ActiveX · « **Reply #23 on:** May 22, 2003, 12:35:24 am »

Speaking about the leaning into the turns...is there a way to get rid of it?

The_Pelican · « **Reply #24 on:** May 22, 2003, 01:35:53 am »

No, all races except the Borg arc as they go into their turns, I've actually tried the opposite, to get the Borg to arc in their turns, as I've replaced them with the Dominion, and a few people have asked if it's possible (after all, it does look better, even if it doesn't make any sense).

Magnum357 · « **Reply #25 on:** May 22, 2003, 02:27:04 am »

Well, I guess I was basing my theories off of SFB. In the old SFB game, ships had turn modes because the Feild that is produced by the Engines to help generate movement was limited. Ya, their is no resitance in space, but these ships are pretty massive and if you made the ship turn on a dime, I don't think even the inertial dapeners would componsate for such high velocities. Remember, when you see speed "30" in SFC3, that is suppose to be like 5000 km/sec. At that velocity, I think ships would need to turn slowly otherwise the ship would tear itself apart.

Credo Narth · « **Reply #26 on:** May 22, 2003, 04:37:29 am »

But in space, inertia still exists. And not that I'm a physicist, but isn't the power required to move any given mass equal to its mass squared, maybe also times the speed of light?

The bigger the vessel, the greater the square of the power needed to cancel inertia. So effectively there's a diminishing return on maneuvrability as the ship gets bigger. Which would explain why smaller ships should be more maneuvrable.

But I'm just a consultant, so don't quote me in court on this, ok?

The_Pelican · « **Reply #27 on:** May 22, 2003, 10:52:19 am »

That's why they have a structural integrity field, they wouldn't even be able to MOVE at that kind of speed otherwise.
You are correct, inertia is created(probably an incorrect term but it will have to do), I don't remember the formula either, though it could be energy = mass x speed of light squared, so don't worry about it.
You do require more power to turn a ship with a larger mass, that is what I said above. But think about it, you are going to need plenty of power to get a ship to Warp Speed, but when you're at impulse, you aren't using that power, so not only will a ship have plenty of power to turn the ship quickly, it will have it to spare. The only thing that'll reduce the turning rate is the capabilities of the structural integrity field & the inertial dampners. On DS9, we've seen the Defiant avoid Klingon Disruptors (Beam type) at point blank range. No TOS ship had anywhere near that kind of maneouvrability.

MrCue · « **Reply #28 on:** May 22, 2003, 11:00:58 am »

The warp field exists to lower the mass of the object(s) contained within (TNZ episode 03x14 - Deja Q) explains this with words & diagram.

The closer to the edge of the ship that the thrusters are mounted & the slowe the ship is moving, the faster the ship would turn.

DONOTDELETE · « **Reply #29 on:** May 22, 2003, 04:10:41 pm »

Recall what Mags asked: Do you "feel" the ships move too fast.
Personally, I prefer larger ships to feel like larger ships...

Don't bust a neuron over this guys. The "science" of Trek is tenuous at best.
The ships move the way they do because it fit the desired look or storyline.

Writer: Enterprise is at the galactic edge
Tech advisor: How old is the crew? 100,000 years?!? Galactic speed limit=c
Write: Ok, we travel in another really-fast dimension called "subspace"

Writer: The Defiant swoops in and dodges Klingon fire
Tech advisor: Impossible. The energy required to change the impulse (m*v) of a ship traveling that fast is nearly infinite and the crew would be squashed like bugs!
Writer (waving magic writers wand): Ok, we have an "inertia damping field"
Tech Head: But you want guys on the bridge to fall out of their chairs????
Writer: Yea, it's cool! The "inertial damping field" has a time delay....yea, that's the ticket....a time delay upon unexpected movements!
Tech Annoyance: But then those pretty long engine nacelles would snap off!
Writer: We like the nacelles... and we have a...a.... "Structural integrity field"!!!
Tech "Still doesn't get it" Guy: Your "Integrity" responds instantly, but the "damper" doesn't???
Write: Look, shaddup! Do your job and think of more techobabble for me!

Argos65987 · « **Reply #31 on:** May 23, 2003, 02:42:31 pm »

My opinion (based on gameplay and not any practical, theoretical or pseudo scientific explanation) is that the ships do "feel" like they turn too fast. There doesn't seem to be any difference in maneuverability over the range of ship classes, so I would prefer the larger ships to turn slower.

I also think that it would increase some of the tactical strategy necessary in the game, rather than just getting the largest ships available and hammering on each other.

Magnum357 · « **Reply #32 on:** May 23, 2003, 08:12:52 pm »

Agreed! I play on Gamespy a lot and I'm sort of tired of everybody choosing the biggest badest ship in the game and pounding each other with tons of weapons. I think the larger the ship, the less maneouverable it will be. At least with this implemented the smaller ships might be selected more often for their advantage in manouverability. And like I said above, I find it hard to beleiver, even in the 23 or 24th century, that inertial dapeners could easily componsate for a Galaxy class starship that it could with a Klingon B'rel at 5000 Km/sec.

And if you got trekkies using TV for reference of how Star Trek ships should move, in the episode "Yesturdays Enterprise" the massive ships in that episode maneouvered a lot less then they do in SFC3.

nx_adam_1701 · « **Reply #33 on:** May 23, 2003, 10:01:35 pm »

I totally agree, remember the episode in TNG, Redemption, well after the Enterprise got the destress call from Gowron, Picard told welsy to leave and the 180 was like damn, for a galaxy, it was unbelievable, but on the other hand, in DS9 The Jem Hadar, the Odyssey took very long to turn back to the wormhole before it was destroyed, so I cant really say, I think the people who do those space scenes really dont care, it pertains, to the mood there in, its real funny one galaxy is zoooooooomm, the other slow as hell, but in my game I have the Galaxy as the slowest, it just feels better, and it seems right that the defiant or runabout does loops around it

Adam out

The_Pelican

Re: Question to SFC3 fans... about ship movment!

News: