Cancel the game. FTL is impossible. Einstein.
Tritium needs replacing
- Thread starter Chrystoph
- Start date
Last edited:
A game where a large part of its appeal to many is that it's putting you in a futuristic space ship in a simulation of a real galaxy.
Are you familiar with the phrase "willing suspension of disbelief", often used when discussion fiction, and equally applicable to games?
Ah, so if it doesn't bother the people who know the least that's OK?
Who said we don't enjoy it despite things like this?Haven't seen one of these threads in awhile, Armchair physicists bickering/debating over theories that can and cannot be proven.
It's a game based on realism and fantasy.
Just enjoy it for what it is.
Why suggest it unless you think people weren't?
Why you ask?
FSD doesn't violate relativity.
signed, Miguel Alcubierre
You might get into trouble with causality, though - depending on how the chronology protection conjecture turns out. But CPT also isn't set in stone yet.
That's no moon
Signed, George Lucas.
Signed, George Lucas.
I wasn't thinking anything when I suggested it.
Why you do think you can read my mind based on a bit of harmless advice?
I assume it is up to the individual to decide if they enjoy their own game or not, not me.
That makes no sense.
They stated in an interview post carriers that the use of tritium was science fiction. So not based on reality. That's how it is I guess.
The point I was originally trying to make, and obviously failed at, is that Tritium as a fuel would make more sense if you were mining something more common.
I don't even have a carrier, but I see at least three threads most of the time about Tritium being too uncommon.
From an economics standpoint, you don't use something that is not a viable resource unless it is the only choice.
In this case, why would you mine Tritium when you can get it much more efficiently from other more readily available sources or processes.
I don't even have a carrier, but I see at least three threads most of the time about Tritium being too uncommon.
From an economics standpoint, you don't use something that is not a viable resource unless it is the only choice.
In this case, why would you mine Tritium when you can get it much more efficiently from other more readily available sources or processes.
Not me, I couldn't give a f......
How do you know you're not though ..
In other words, if I recall correctly nowhere does it say how pure the tritium is in cargo cannisters or in the carrier depot? And though the tritium solution is stored by the ton in commodity market, there's no reason your breeder or fuel conditioning system couldn't be downstream of the tritium depot. The carrier plant could be isolating tritium molecules itself, from whatever comes with it ex-refinery (tritium + water/ice ... hydrogen!) for injection - by the hydrogen ton with tritium milligrams included - into the main engines?
.
Last edited:
Because otherwise carriers would be fun rather than a burden requiring hours of 'playtime' to fuel. Not the ED way at all.