Physics of Elite Dangerous

[careBear1]

Any (effective) ftl travel would allow logical paradoxes, so you still need a mechanism to deal with these – parallel universes, hawkins chronological protection conjecture, special frame of reference, etc.

The game is based on arbitrary magic. Both in ignoring known physics and breaking the known universe.

(BTW I thought star trek used the special frame of reference (aka sub-space) 'mechanism'.).

 

[Substacer]

Physics always has to be simplified and take shortcuts when it's real-time and on a home computer, whether it be Orbiter, Universe Sandbox or Elite. In what aspects and how depends on a game.
Elite dangerous is a multiplayer game, so even if there was no speed limit it would take inadequate amount of time (without time acceleration, as i said before) to achieve orbit in most cases, let alone interplanetary travel, so why bother with complex physics calculations related to that.
That said, i'm still think that is technically an orbit in those videos of Enceladus. If gravity had no effect on the ship it would have gone away from the planet, cause ship doesn't adjust for degrees relative to planet when you fly in a straight line.
Sorry if it's hard to understand me, i'm having trouble finding correct wording in english.

 

[Substacer]

Physics always has to be simplified and take shortcuts when it's real-time and on a home computer, whether it be Orbiter, Universe Sandbox or Elite. In what aspects and how depends on a game.
Elite dangerous is a multiplayer game, so even if there was no speed limit it would take inadequate amount of time (without time acceleration, as i said before) to achieve orbit in most cases, let alone interplanetary travel, so why bother with complex physics calculations related to that.
That said, i'm still think that is technically an orbit in those videos of Enceladus. If gravity had no effect on the ship it would have gone away from the planet, cause ship doesn't adjust for degrees relative to planet when you fly in a straight line.
Sorry if it's hard to understand me, i'm having trouble finding correct wording in english.

 

[Cmdr Fixme]

IMO, the most glaringly obvious violation of physics in the game is the astonishing fact that cargo in space stops moving, and spinning, very quickly. Bumb into a cargo canister while trying to scoop it, and you set it spinning and careening away. Wait a few seconds, and it just stops. What is up with that? Friction in space?

 

[Silure]

IMO, the most glaringly obvious violation of physics in the game is the astonishing fact that cargo in space stops moving, and spinning, very quickly. Bumb into a cargo canister while trying to scoop it, and you set it spinning and careening away. Wait a few seconds, and it just stops. What is up with that? Friction in space?

That's for the benefit of T10 pilots doing a manual scoop. Stops you throwing you're t.v./dog/cat/other half out the window.

 

[Twisted Epiphany]

That's for the benefit of T10 pilots doing a manual scoop. Stops you throwing you're t.v./dog/cat/other half out the window.

Yeah, that's me. I have noticed that cargo canisters close to a planet drift towards it. Makes manual scooping even more fun...

 

[Old Duck]

IMO, the most glaringly obvious violation of physics in the game is the astonishing fact that cargo in space stops moving, and spinning, very quickly. Bumb into a cargo canister while trying to scoop it, and you set it spinning and careening away. Wait a few seconds, and it just stops. What is up with that? Friction in space?

In the early days of the game, it didn't stop. I remember chasing cargo as it tumbled and fell towards a planet. It was a great challenge! I'm not sure when Frontier changed this.

Though even then the cargo all traveled together. If it followed a true physical model, it would likely spread out in a cone-like dispersion pattern, like pellets from a shotgun.