weapon platforms, weight ratios and modding questions

[Fyron]

The other thing I've discovered is that British tons and tonnes are almost exactly the same mass, but American tons are slightly different.

Tons, like pounds, are a measure of Force, not Mass. The Slug is the british system (which only the US uses anymore) unit for Mass.

[orev_saara]

Thank you one and all. I think I'll go and look for the wish list for the next patch/SEV now.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by orev_saara:
[QB]I'm in the process of creating my own personal mod, and a thought struck me Last night: Why weapon platforms?

Because it's easier to build a reactor and weapons system on the ground than in space.

They really make no sense. For projectile guns and missile launchers, you have all of that gravity to overcome. Launching a missile out of orbit uses tremendous amounts of fuel.

SE4 starts at a technology level at the very least a few centuries removed from us. Planetary launches are a non-issue for every species, and their ships routinely travel at speeds far faster than anything we can manage today. Missiles would have no problems leaving the atmosphere on as much fuel as can drive a ship from Earth to Mercury in a week.

As for energy weapons, you have atmosphere to get through, which would degrade just about anything, espacially those projectile guns.

Once again you've misjudged the technology level. Your basic energy weapon in SE4 is capable of killing every single person on Earth today in a single combat. That cannot be more than five days by the timing system used in the game. That's a massive amount of energy, and such a weapon would not be affected a great deal by atmospheres.

[quote]A depleted uranium cannon firing from ground, through atmosphere, and escaping orbit? Ludicrous. Not really impossible, but far costlier than putting a similar launcher in orbit beforehand.

The whole concept of planetary weapon platforms is somewhat fanciful, but they can have a huge impact on SE games, especially if you allow any WP range extending mounts. If anything, there should be WP range-decreasing mounts. Maybe someone else already said all of this.

It's a science fiction game with warp points, usable organic based ships, and faster than light travel. I think that weapons mounted on planets are the least fanciful part of the game. Weapon platforms have increased ranges because theyare useless otherwise. Further, planetary weapons have a basis in science fiction, just watch The Empire Strikes Back.

[orev_saara]

Well put, Mr. Grice. I guess weapon platforms bother me because they're actually understandable in terms of modern science. I don't give wormholes any thought at all. I just file them under the necessary evils of an interstellar empire-building game and forget about it. Maybe I should do the same with weapon platforms, but I still don't see the need for them with satellites and bases. Of course, the beauty of SE is that I can just take em out if I don't like em. I might do that.

One Last nitpick: if an energy weapon bLasts out so much juice that atmospheric resistance is not an issue, wouldn't it kill people on the surface, too? I suppose that's really just another engineering problem that might be overcome by advance technology, so I shouldn't worry too much over it... still, can anybody think of a way to mod in planet-based ordnance degrading the planet it's fired from in some way? Ionizing radiation? Heat pollution? Toxic chemicals (love those acid globules)?

I NEED MORE MODDING OPTIONS!!!!

I probably have a little too much free time.

[MacLeod]

You could just assume the weapons platforms are orbital somewhat more like a modern space stations. This doesn't really conflict with the other two options as bases and satellites are drastically different from the modern Versions as the modern ones are orbital while the SEIV are designed for deep space.

That or you could just say "who cares?"

[Q]

Realistic or not I think weapon platforms are essential for the game because there is no other effective protection for colonies.

[ January 25, 2003, 06:50: Message edited by: Q ]

[Baron Munchausen]

Part of the 'Star Wars' missile defense included x-ray beams that would fire through the atmosphere. Yes, there would be some loss of power to the atmosphere but not that much. The thing that is unrealistic in most SciFi portrayals of ship's weapons hitting the ground (like Star Trek) is there is no secondary effect. It would be like a lightning strike, with a huge 'BOOM' after the beam stopped because the atmosphere would rush back into the vacuum left by the beam turning everything in its path to plasma. Weapons firing 'up' would be the same as ship's weapons firing 'down' in this regard.

Rail guns firing through the atmosphere are not improbable. The projectile just has to be able to survive the heat from friction with the atmosphere. You might well be able to take advantage of that heat to make your projectile a more effective armor piercer.

Missiles are even easier. NASA launches have to be as cheap as possible. They are going for efficiency, not speed. And of course they are launching large payloads. The old ABM missiles were much faster than any of the cargo launches you see today. They used a different (and much more expensive) fuel, and they only had to carry a warhead. As they develop this new defense system that GWB is pushing they'll probably develop new ABMs that are even faster. Assuming a few centuries of technology advancement there's no reason that huge numbers of (relatively) cheap missiles capable of reaching orbit and beyond very quickly could not be stocked up for planet defense.

I don't think weapon platforms are unrealistic at all. It's the planets themselves that are unrealistic. The generic 'conditions' (meant to be 'weather' I guess?) is just too vague to describe a planetary environment. We need gravity, radiation, and temperature ranges. I hope we'll get them in SE V.

And yes, the 'cargo capacity' of planets is arbitrarily limited. Realistically, even a medium-size planet like earth could hold more weapons that appear in an entire game of SE IV. But if we allowed all planets to have seven-digit cargo capacity it would be faily easy to stalemate the game by stocking one planet with a huge pile of weapons.

[ January 25, 2003, 16:20: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]