Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: [Gameplay] MES as non-reactionless "ballistic jump" FTL

  1. #1

    [Gameplay] MES as non-reactionless "ballistic jump" FTL

    Hello,

    From what I could gather from the current Alpha and this link, it seem that the FTL-Drive is basically a Reactionless-Drive (even using the unproven drive).


    This suggestion is not purely motivated by personal wish or most canonical stardrive would be candidate.

    It concern primarily a FUNDAMENTAL aspect of the Gameplay : Preserving the normal calculation of "RANGE" based on vessels fuel capacity, or in space-nuts dialect : Delta-V capacity.
    Secondarily, it promote "ballistic SPEED" over "brachistochrone SPEED", why ? Because currently the only way to allow the engine to cross Moon-to-Moon in little time is to make them ridiculously overpowered for any shorter transfer.
    Eventually, it would Negate Multiplayer "Desynch problem" entirely as it only skip the distance-traveled without needing to accelerate the universe clocks.
    It can also be kept compatible with SAN for non-trivial reason.


    The concept :
    - You burn fuel as if you did a MTS transfer, requiring targeting a vector and all.
    - Then you activate "MES/WARP" for a "duration-turned-into-distance".
    - A (magical, we can't do otherwise) equations make you appear close to the planet (but still with a large difference of velocity, as it's conserved).
    - You burn to get into orbit.

    Pictured :

    (268794 hours on photoshop 9000)


    Preserving SAN(suspended animation) & spaceship-maintenance aspect planned. Especially for INTERSTELLAR-drive :
    - Although this "WARP" make you cross 10 month worth of travel in a second...
    - ...The ship itself DO SPEND 10 month within the "WARP".
    This idea is lifted directly from the webcomic FREEFALL (which is surprisingly more Hard-SF than it appear).
    I would post the link explaining the idea but the forum seem to have died.


    Point to work on :
    - This technically allow "surprise" arrival during COMBAT, so some sort of "ranged warp inhibitor" is required
    - I don't really know how said "magical equation" would look like mathematically


    That's all,

  2. #2
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,119
    Hi.

    Something like what you're suggesting above will need to happen for multiplayer, yes (not instantaneous of course, but a VERY shortened travel time); UNLESS multiplayer is strictly limited to all players within the same ship. While multi-crew is definitely going to happen, I don't really want to limit RogSys to JUST that. Regardless though, when interstellar travel is introduced we'll still need something like this....

    The engine that will handle this I'm currently calling the "Dark Drive". It will be another Main Engine System drive that will be used in single-player for system-to-system travel, and in multiplayer as the sole MES type. I've not spent a lot of time yet on how it will work, what sort of time lapse would be involved (for multiplayer there can't be any lapse of time apart from what actually transpires so that everyone stays synced), etc.

    So yes, feel free to talk more about it, make suggestions, etc.
    __________________
    "There is no spoon..."

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    112
    I winced at "magical equation"
    Isn't the whole concept of RogSys having a (99%) realistic future extrapolation of current technologies and theories? Let's not start adding magic please.

    I always thought of the "Dark Drive" as a form of Warp(Alcubierre) drive.
    FTL, but still not instantaneous travel that doesn't actually move any mass at FTL speeds but "folds" the space in-between. That's within the realm of plausibility, and subject to physics as we know it.

    Now we might need gimmicks in multiplayer to account for the travel times...but it should be confined there.

  4. #4
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,119
    Now we might need gimmicks in multiplayer to account for the travel times...but it should be confined there.
    And it is. In single player there will be a time advance (similar to time advancing while in SAN). In multiplayer, that time advance could not happen, other than the actual time it takes. Unless, as I mentioned, multiplayer was confined to co-op multi-crew on a single ship, with AI accounting for everything else; but this is not my preferred goal.
    __________________
    "There is no spoon..."

  5. #5
    I really like your approach here!

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Brasil
    Posts
    173
    Unfortunately I haven't the knowledge that is needed to create a realistic approach about those voyages, but I have some suggestions anyway :P

    I always liked the Homeworld approach, it's more like the drives creating a hole that engulf the ship, it's virtually a instant trip, but in Rogue System this could have some caveats like:

    • Time demanding, you can't use it with frequency.
    • Requires high amount of energy, maybe the ship needs to stay in low energy operation for 3 to 5 minutes as the drive charges, no radio, no navigation or vms active, just vital systems operating (more sytems operating = more heat, less charge for the drive and more time vulnerable in space.
    • Safe zones, the system can be sensible to gravity wells, the pilot can't use this close to other bodies.
    • Cooldown: another 3 to 5 minutes until the ship is safe to fly (you could skip this, but there is a high risk of fry everything).
    • This could be a risky maneuver for poorly maintained vessels.

    I know that this isn't a realistic approach, but can solve the multiplayer issue, at the same time, safe zones are there to assure you that we still have some distances to cover with MES or MTS.
    I apologize in advance for any grammatical error or misuse of words, unfortunately my english is not good, but I've been working to improve it. Thank you all.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Juliano View Post
    Hi.

    Something like what you're suggesting above will need to happen for multiplayer, yes (not instantaneous of course, but a VERY shortened travel time); UNLESS multiplayer is strictly limited to all players within the same ship. While multi-crew is definitely going to happen, I don't really want to limit RogSys to JUST that. Regardless though, when interstellar travel is introduced we'll still need something like this....

    The engine that will handle this I'm currently calling the "Dark Drive". It will be another Main Engine System drive that will be used in single-player for system-to-system travel, and in multiplayer as the sole MES type. I've not spent a lot of time yet on how it will work, what sort of time lapse would be involved (for multiplayer there can't be any lapse of time apart from what actually transpires so that everyone stays synced), etc.

    So yes, feel free to talk more about it, make suggestions, etc.
    Things is : Why an idea good for multiplayer can't feel more realistic in single players as well ?
    Correct me if I'm assuming too much or wrongly, but it feel like you are dismissing this concept of "ballistic jump" because of its near instantaneity ?

    To me, pursuing "proportional travel time" would prove counter-productive to the pursuit of global realism.
    You can justify Wear&Tear and SAN without sacrificing Conservation of Mass/Energy, same for instantaneous travel.

    As I suggested, you can force all the TIME you didn't spend within the universal-reference, within a MES-generated bubble of ship-reference.
    Travel time should have taken 10 month ? -> The spaceship actually generated a field during 10 month, but moved instantly for everybody outside.


    Quote Originally Posted by Klionheart View Post
    I winced at "magical equation"
    Isn't the whole concept of RogSys having a (99%) realistic future extrapolation of current technologies and theories? Let's not start adding magic please.

    I always thought of the "Dark Drive" as a form of Warp(Alcubierre) drive.
    FTL, but still not instantaneous travel that doesn't actually move any mass at FTL speeds but "folds" the space in-between. That's within the realm of plausibility, and subject to physics as we know it.

    Now we might need gimmicks in multiplayer to account for the travel times...but it should be confined there.
    I know your feeling, but I insist this suggestion is actually meant to preserve even more realism (explanation below).
    Myself I wince MORE at the idea of "Reactionless Drive" than at the idea of "near instantaneous travel requiring the same/more effort than a conventional transfer"
    Neither the ALCUBIERRE drive (which require exotic matter/the energy of several STARS) or the EM-Drive (which have yet to be tested above sensor tolerance) are any less magic.

    Btw : please note that my suggestion's concept is nowhere close the Alcubierre drive, in fact I've yet to see more than one unknown webcomic use it

    Concession have to be done for speculative fiction, I'm just trying to brainwa...sel...give to Michael Juliano a method that will give him a CAKE, that he can EAT and even SHARE more, multiplayer & singleplayer alike.

    CURRENTLY :
    - MES produce thrust magically from energy (just as the EM-drive is supposed to do)
    - Meaning that distance doesn't matter, in fact you have to wonder why there's MTS thruster at all unless you invent SF-ish rules to limit MES.
    - Meaning that realistic management of Mass and Delta-V capacity is basically lost (As it barely matter if you are MESing 1tons or 1000tons)
    - Despite that, minimizing travel time require LUDICROUS SPEED (know your reference).
    - SAN is clearly being considered to relate to the very Hard-SF concept of "cold sleep".

    SUGGESTED :
    - MTS and fuel is the only way to produce thrust and actually move.
    - MES would NOT product thrust anymore, simply "warp", along a ballistic trajectory equivalent to if you had made a real transfer.
    - Meaning that your vessel Mass and Delta-V capacity once again become relevant.
    The only change is :
    - SAN usage become slightly trickier to justify (I can suggest two ways, one was already given above)

    My specific "Ballistic-Jump" might be magical, but it produce less unexpected consequences (for instance, right now the MES reactionless-drive allow easy planet-buster Kinetic projectiles)


    EDIT : Did my first post disappeared because (first) edit must be approved by moderator as well ?

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Germany, Hamburg
    Posts
    44
    I have to think more about your idea. At the moment it feels like you want to replace a handwavey, super optimistic extrapolation of current science and technology by a completely new idea. Or are you suggesting a kind of 4th wall breaking thing, like "you would have travelled like that but in multiplayer we can't skip forwards so we'll put you right here directly"?

  9. #9
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,119
    Yes, your first post included a link, so it had to be moderated. Back now...
    __________________
    "There is no spoon..."

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by Kegereneku View Post
    Things is : [B]Why ... planet-buster Kinetic projectiles)
    The "Reactionless drive" is something that is baffling everyone, but it works. The energy requirement for the "Warp drive" (I believe it's the Alcubierre drive you mention) has had an improvement in it's theory. Using a taurus, instead of a bubble, the power requirement was brought down that that of a large scale nuclear reactor. Not viable yet, but progress nonetheless. Side note, upon exiting an Alcubierre drive's bubble, it is theorized that it generates a gravitational wave that could do some serious damage.

    As for the EM-Drive, it doesn't need physical fuel, but it does require energy. Vast amounts of power. To use it as an RCS system would not be worth it due to the size of it. Remember, mass and inertia are still present and your acceleration is relative to that.

    Rogue System has been pushed from the beginning as something as close to reality as we can get, extrapolating current technology as it currently stands. The EM drive exists. Your drive however, does not. I find it to be too much of a handwavium solution to help with instantaneous travel.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kegereneku View Post
    CURRENTLY :
    - MES produce thrust magically from energy (just as the EM-drive is supposed to do)
    - Meaning that distance doesn't matter, in fact you have to wonder why there's MTS thruster at all unless you invent SF-ish rules to limit MES.
    - Meaning that realistic management of Mass and Delta-V capacity is basically lost (As it barely matter if you are MESing 1tons or 1000tons)
    - Despite that, minimizing travel time require LUDICROUS SPEED (know your reference).
    - SAN is clearly being considered to relate to the very Hard-SF concept of "cold sleep".

    SUGGESTED :
    - MTS and fuel is the only way to produce thrust and actually move.
    - MES would NOT product thrust anymore, simply "warp", along a ballistic trajectory equivalent to if you had made a real transfer.
    - Meaning that your vessel Mass and Delta-V capacity once again become relevant.
    The only change is :
    - SAN usage become slightly trickier to justify (I can suggest two ways, one was already given above)
    Yes, the current MES produces delta-v from energy. Magically makes it sound as if it 's made up. It's not. That's like saying a light bulb magically makes light with energy, not consuming any flammables.
    Distance does matter. Your LENR is constantly consuming fuel to produce that energy that the MES uses. It's not appearing out of thin air. If you run out of fuel, you run out of delta-v.
    Realistic management does exist. an EM drive gives a set delta-v. With the current size and mass of the Flying Fox, that gives you 1.02 G of acceleration. If you were to put the same size engines one a much much larger object, your thrust would be negligible.

Similar Threads

  1. Server join - Errors "Data Transfer Timeout" and "Password Invalid"
    By Christopher Elliott in forum rFactor 2 General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-05-2016, 12:27 PM
  2. "Join Time Out" and "Connection Lost" issues
    By epik1 in forum rFactor 1 Technical Support
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-21-2015, 02:50 PM
  3. Fanatec CSW V2 - BMW GT2 "Spec A" VS BMW GT2 "Spec B" VS Porsche 918 RSR
    By Spinelli in forum Hardware Building/Buying/Usage Advice
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-20-2015, 09:20 AM
  4. "rFactor has stopped working" error message at random when racing
    By sloch in forum rFactor 1 Technical Support
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-01-2013, 08:50 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •