New, alternate means of modelling QNP in v1.78

jimbob · #1 August 23rd, 2002, 02:30 AM

Pax said:

Quote:

You don't have to revert to bonus movement (one of the aspects of propulsion in SE4 I never did like overmuch).

Yeah, I don't like the bald use of the bonus movement thing all that much either. But it can be a useful tool. As far as I can determine it would be the only way to allow a total movement of >1 for Basemoons (and other huge ships) in the current QNP systems because of the RCE problem. Consider it RCE bipass surgery

[ August 23, 2002, 01:31: Message edited by: jimbob ]

geoschmo · #2 August 23rd, 2002, 02:39 AM

Three cheers for Pax, and three cheers for the tonnage minimum restriction in compenhancments that makes this possible.

Pax · #3 August 23rd, 2002, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jimbob:
Pax said:

quote:
You don't have to revert to bonus movement (one of the aspects of propulsion in SE4 I never did like overmuch).

Yeah, I don't like the bald use of the bonus movement thing all that much either. But it can be a useful tool. As far as I can determine it would be the only way to allow a total movement of >1 for Basemoons (and other huge ships) in the current QNP systems because of the RCE problem. Consider it RCE bipass surgery

Why bother? If it takes 10% of mass to move at the MP of the engine technology known, Battle Moons would use 1000kT engine components. If the component gave 5 movement points, the 'moon woudl move at 5.

It'd just take a single, truly MASSIVE engine to do it. 8)

jimbob · #4 August 24th, 2002, 01:59 AM

yeah, okay, I see your point now. Somehow I missed the fact that we'd drive the "engines per movement" field back down to 1. I guess I was a little to stuck on the old QNP method.