Matrix Games Forums

I dont particulary care about fighters, but I wouldnt mind them being in this game. Galciv2 didnt have them, but I didn't mind.

The ability to represent Fighters would be nice
 
But I agree that they woudn't make much sense in the DW Universe.
 
The LAC idea is awesome however  (and sort of functions the same way??)
 
Lets go with that then!
 
 
 
 
Honorverse: http://honorverse.wikia.com/wiki/LAC#LAC
 
The term 'LAC' was an abbreviation for Light Attack Craft. LACs were intrasystem craft, incapable of entering hyperspace. Their traditional roles had been that of very light picket ship and for customs duties. (HH2) Third or fourth tier states such as those on the verge of the Solarian League often had navies entirely composed of LACs. (SI1) Improved technology and the advent of the CLAC had reinvigorated the LAC as a war-fighting vessel near the end of the First Haven-Manticore War.
 
 
 
[:D]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

http://scienceblogs.com/interactions/2007/07/newtons_laws_in_science_fictio.php

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... ceFriction

I know, technobabble makes anything work in space-fi. But as was mentioned above by someone, that word realism.

Thanks for these links. Very interesting reading.

ORIGINAL: Bartje

Right, so DW ships don't entirely follow the laws of physics do they? Or do they? I'm confused!

Is there an ingame explanation in the sense of hyperdrive and sublight speed drive ignoring newton's laws?

It must be a Quantum Effect Field! [;)]

There are quite a few inaccuracies. When a ship is being damaged and it slows to a halt because its engines go offline. The ship should really maintain its inertia. It's possible each ship has a designed emergency stop to explain this, but why would that not be damaged too? In any case, it would be extremely difficult to keep track of your ships drifting away into the cosmos, so it's just as well.

Travelling faster than light is, at this time, not plausible given our understanding of physics and technology. In Star Trek they use fictional devices such as sub-space and dylithium crystals.

Also where fuel is concerned, The ships should use less fuel when in orbit or patrolling a planet. It would actually require more fuel for the ships to sit stationary inside a star system where enormous gravitational forces are acting on them.

I don't see any way to make the ships in this game act completely true to physics at the same time keeping the game fun to play. Personally, I'm waiting to see what Frontiers Elite IV brings to the table. Elite II had a very accurate newtonian flight system.

DW realism doesn't bother me. IMO, the game is all about creating an expansive, involving, dynamic experience. That means implementing carrier support with fighters would be a great thing indeed.[:)]

ORIGINAL: Wade1000

Fighters, even soon on Earth, are going the way of automated/non piloted.

No, but remote piloted with alot more computer automation of systems yes. This is actually one of those questions I kinda fight about with myself (yes kinda ridiculous but I actually do think about drones alot). Especially way off in the future when you get into space combat where I believe a fighter type of small craft could definetly play a role, I think fishman is 100% wrong in his missle assement I think both have a place in the battlespace of the future. Now, as to whether or not an organic lifeform would actually being piloting any of these craft either remotly or in the craft itself is debateable. mainly because history has shown us that every time a scientist thinks they can eliminate a human from a combat system it usually ends up badly. I think at the point where it would be viable your looking at a highly developed ai for 100% non organic control and once you get to that point, well we have all seen the Matrix, Terminator,and played the 100's of computer games on the subject of why you don't hand of weapons systems to high functioning AI, lol.

It would make sense to remove the pilot from the craft itself but keep him in control.
 
In space this would mean the pilots still need to be near the battle because otherwise the "signal" would have to travel too long. (unles the fighter is really very autonomous)

This could be a "DW" explanation for why carriers keep relatively close to battles though try to stay out of range. They need to "control" the fighters.
 
Which also means it's hardly a crime to leave a losing battle and strand a dozen or so fighters; It's just equipment.
 
Awesome delaying tactics...
 
 

space fighters are horribly impractical and unrealistic...
Also I do not find them to be cool, in fact I find them to be the opposite. I hope DW doesn't get fighters.

ORIGINAL: Bartje

It would make sense to remove the pilot from the craft itself but keep him in control.

A fighter without a pilot is now a missile. With really bad lag, because light-speed transmission only gets you so far, which can be jammed.

ORIGINAL: Bartje

In space this would mean the pilots still need to be near the battle because otherwise the "signal" would have to travel too long. (unles the fighter is really very autonomous)

And when you've removed the pilot from the equation and made the craft autonomous, it is now a missile. Given that you are no longer retrieving a living being, you now lack any real incentive to pay 4x Delta-V for the same job, so you crash the missile and forget about it.

ORIGINAL: Bartje

Which also means it's hardly a crime to leave a losing battle and strand a dozen or so fighters; It's just equipment.

Or, you know, you could just crash them into your target.

fighters and bombers with a carrier might make an interesting addition to the present system.

While a fighter could not beat a shield or armor defence against a capital ship it could destroy enemy freighter traffic and provide intel ahead of a fleets path. bombers could be used to attack with single torpedo at a safe distance to the fleet and combined with capital ships attacking would split the offensive power of the defender.

Would be interesting to see my fleet being hounded by fighters and bombers while never really knowing where the enemy carrier fleet is. It would make me very paraniod as I know that I have been spotted.

I am trying to think this outside the box so that a carrier and its cargo could really play a good tactical role instead of being a waste. It make sense to use carriers as a stand-off platform for intel and blockading with fighters as fast extension of sensor ranges with bombers providing single use weapon delivery at ranges where the enemy cannot see the fleet.