Chaymus Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Nothing major, but I get a little annoyed at being passed by numerous ships, from a turret's "blind spot", when we supposedly have one of the fastest classes of ships. I haven't played any other class, for those that do is there a difference between the ships or is it just a model replacement like I suspect? I know this is a very small part of the game, and is more of a mini-game than a class-definable role. It just feels like ship specifications don't enter into the equation for how you go about each mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melkathi Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) Just a model replacement. It's just a mini-game. As long as you don't read too much into it it can be what it was designed to be: a fun little diversion. Edited February 10, 2012 by Melkathi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rahiel Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Being the fastest doesn't necessarily mean flooring it all the time everywhere, though. And unlike a car, you don't have a top speed in space, other than "as fast as I can get to before I run out of fuel," so your freighter planning to fight the whole mission and jump to hyperspace afterward maybe can't burn as much fuel on a burst of speed as the Interceptors that can just dock once the needle pushes empty. During combat, you'd presumably want to slow down a bit anyway, so you can actually shoot at your target rather than zipping past them in the blink of an eye. I did get the upgraded engine on Nar Shadaa yesterday, though, and Risha told me I should be much more maneuverable, but I wasn't In a story sense it's frustrating that the space combat minigame is so simplistic, but on the other hand I REALLY enjoy it as it is, and I'm not sure more complexity would actually improve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaymus Posted February 10, 2012 Author Share Posted February 10, 2012 Thank you for all your feedback, answers my question perfectly. It's alright to have a casual friendly minigame, I just played a lot of flight sims and some fantastic space sims as well. Understanding limitations and abilities in those games changed the approach to the same objectives. They talk up each ship and it's differences compared to other ships, but it's just talk, and that is a little disappointing. The only thing missing from this is Pepe popping in to say "Do a Barrel Roll!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slink Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 I always thought the whole "It's the fastest ship in the Galaxy" was just a lie? That Solo (and other Smugglers in the EU in homage to him) would say it to get business or credits, but it obviously wasn't true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowanThursday Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Freighters are long-haul starships, by definition. Is your freighter faster than, for example, a Sith Interceptor on a long-haul burn between, say, Tatooine and Ilum (opposite sides of the galaxy)? Yes (not in game, obviously, where there's no real space flight outside of the space combat simulator), because she can probably carry rather more fuel than the Sith ship, has larger engines, has a wookiee, and has greater mass, mass in motion = momentum, so she can build up a greater speed *over time*. Is she faster zipping round a space station and playing hide and seek around frigates in an asteroid field? No, because the smaller Sith ship has greater manoeuvrability and *less* mass and momentum, meaning it can pour on sudden bursts of acceleration and changes of direction more rapidly than your bird can. If you tried to ramp up to Sith Interceptor speeds when ducking and weaving all over the place, a) it would take you rather longer to build the speed, and b) you'd end up pasting yourself across an asteroid because you'd build up too much momentum to control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanizaki Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Yes (not in game, obviously, where there's no real space flight outside of the space combat simulator), because she can probably carry rather more fuel than the Sith ship, has larger engines, has a wookiee, and has greater mass, mass in motion = momentum, so she can build up a greater speed *over time*.. Having greater momentum hasn't anything to do with building up greater speed over time. Your example is contrary to what is actually true. Since it takes more energy to get a larger body up to the same speed as a smaller body (mass is directly proportional to kinetic energy), larger things generally move slower than smaller things. Let's take your example out of the realm of fantasy into reality. Imagine a long, level, straight stretch of road. In one lane is a fully loaded tractor trailer (the smuggler ship). In the other lane is a Ducati motorcycle (the sith ship). Even though the tractor trailer has several times the horsepower and over ten times the fuel capacity of the Ducati, do you think the tractor trailer would ever catch up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rahiel Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Let's take your example out of the realm of fantasy into reality. Imagine a long, level, straight stretch of road. In one lane is a fully loaded tractor trailer (the smuggler ship). In the other lane is a Ducati motorcycle (the sith ship). Even though the tractor trailer has several times the horsepower and over ten times the fuel capacity of the Ducati, do you think the tractor trailer would ever catch up? Probably not, although I don't know nearly enough about the mileages etc. of those vehicles to say for certain. However, it's certainly possible that some other ratio of thrust, mass, and fuel capacity might give the larger ship the edge over long distances, especially with such vaguely defined technologies as hyperdrive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanizaki Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Probably not, although I don't know nearly enough about the mileages etc. of those vehicles to say for certain. Mileage has nothing to do with it. A fully loaded tractor trailer will never go as fast as that Ducati. However, it's certainly possible that some other ratio of thrust, mass, and fuel capacity might give the larger ship the edge over long distances, especially with such vaguely defined technologies as hyperdrive. Newtonian mechanics are going to apply to ships moving in the physical universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rahiel Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 (edited) Mileage has nothing to do with it. A fully loaded tractor trailer will never go as fast as that Ducati. If the motorcycle has bad enough mileage at high speeds, it might not be able to maintain a higher speed than the truck for a long trip using the fuel it carries. Then it has a choice between slowing down and arriving at the destination after the truck, or being ahead of the truck for a while before running out of gas and never reaching the destination at all. Newtonian mechanics are going to apply to ships moving in the physical universe. I admittedly don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of Star Wars canon, but AFAIK the entire point of hyperspace is that physics works differently there. Even if I'm wrong on that, it's not impossible for a larger vessel to end up faster than a smaller one over some distance, even within normal Newtonian physics. Edit: As in, a ship with twice the mass, but also twice the thrust can go just as fast. With twice the mass and three times the thrust, it will be faster. If the XS freighter's propulsion is disproportionately greater than its mass, it will be faster. It could accomplish this by devoting a larger fraction of its mass to engines/fuel, or by just having a better engine. Edited February 12, 2012 by Rahiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ontos Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Has nothing to in game speed during space missions. Its just ment as "I can get from point A to point B in 30 mins or less, or its free!" type thing. The space mission doesn't exist, but it would be like out running and surviving imperials before the hyper drive engine warms up by dodging asteroids then jumping out - then you would be faster then them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRieh Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 I was pretty much surprised that all ships differ only in models. Somehow I thought it logocally ok that those have different base stats according to class. E.g. smuggler moves faster, jedi's armor is better, trooper shoots harder, consular's shields regen quicker. It's just not right that smuggling "special" freighter (and dont tell me it's just a plain cargo-ship - it is not) and some jedi's "buisness-class" get same speed, armor etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthNerf Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Maybe the freighter has better flight computers than the interceptor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanizaki Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 If the motorcycle has bad enough mileage at high speeds, it might not be able to maintain a higher speed than the truck for a long trip using the fuel it carries. Then it has a choice between slowing down and arriving at the destination after the truck, or being ahead of the truck for a while before running out of gas and never reaching the destination at all. No. A smaller vehicle will always have better mileage than a larger vehicle. This is the major way in which car manufacturers improve fuel efficiency, by making the car lighter. A sports bike will easily have fuel efficiency of over 50 mpg, which figures such as 60, 70, or 80 mpg certainly not unheard of. On the otherhand, the tractor trailer with good fuel economy will get about 6 mpg. In no meaningful sense would a tractor trailer ever beat a sports bike. It any event, the poster who commented that higher momentum makes a body faster was wrong. I admittedly don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of Star Wars canon, but AFAIK the entire point of hyperspace is that physics works differently there. Even if I'm wrong on that, it's not impossible for a larger vessel to end up faster than a smaller one over some distance, even within normal Newtonian physics. I never said it was impossible. Yes, a larger object can go faster than a smaller one. For example, Carl Lewis would beat a toddler at an Olympic track event. My point is that it is harder for a larger object to reach the same speed as a smaller one, let alone overtake it. Edit: As in, a ship with twice the mass, but also twice the thrust can go just as fast. With twice the mass and three times the thrust, it will be faster. If the XS freighter's propulsion is disproportionately greater than its mass, it will be faster. It could accomplish this by devoting a larger fraction of its mass to engines/fuel, or by just having a better engine. That may be, but again, that was not the point of my reply to the original poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rahiel Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 (edited) No. A smaller vehicle will always have better mileage than a larger vehicle. This is the major way in which car manufacturers improve fuel efficiency, by making the car lighter. A sports bike will easily have fuel efficiency of over 50 mpg, which figures such as 60, 70, or 80 mpg certainly not unheard of. On the otherhand, the tractor trailer with good fuel economy will get about 6 mpg. In no meaningful sense would a tractor trailer ever beat a sports bike. It any event, the poster who commented that higher momentum makes a body faster was wrong. The smaller one will definitely have better mileage (unless it has a dramatically inferior engine for some reason). But as you said, the truck carries more than ten times as much fuel, so it doesn't need better mileage than the bike, only mileage good enough to get more miles out of its fuel tank than the bike gets from its smaller tank, at some given speed. (The concept of mileage doesn't directly apply very well to space travel, but the general idea of fuel efficiency does.) And yeah, that was all quite a tangent to the fact that higher mass definitely doesn't let you achieve higher speed, which is entirely true. It doesn't necessarily prevent higher speed, given sufficiently high thrust, but in an "all else equal" comparison, higher mass is strictly a disadvantage. Edited February 12, 2012 by Rahiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kheldras Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Well, if i see some NPC comment about "the size of the Engines & systems installed in this ship" i guess its suposed to be not standard.. but well yes space game is the same for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baelish Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 The smaller one will definitely have better mileage (unless it has a dramatically inferior engine for some reason). But as you said, the truck carries more than ten times as much fuel, so it doesn't need better mileage than the bike, only mileage good enough to get more miles out of its fuel tank than the bike gets from its smaller tank, at some given speed. (The concept of mileage doesn't directly apply very well to space travel, but the general idea of fuel efficiency does.) While this is to some extent true, the disparity between the speed of the one and the endurance of the other means that the Ducati would have to have a tank the size of a thimble to be forced to spend so long refuelling that it was slower than the semi in the long haul. A touring bike with a 4 gallon tank can go about 120 miles in an hour (on a straight flat road) and then it needs to refuel. So, even if the truck has a top speed of 100 miles an hour (which is generous for a 40-tonner) and never has to refuel (as opposed to simply having a long range), the Ducati has 12 minutes to put 4 gallons in at the filling station and still be ahead of the truck. In reality, the truck's top speed might be half what I suggested, with a full load, and the contest isn't even worth considering. Fuel consumption can make a difference at the edges (a diesel Audi, I believe won a Le Mans 24 hour race because it didn't have to pit as often as the slightly faster petrol engined cars) but it's not as big a factor as actual speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts