Utopian Enforcer Cannon is a multi-cannon ?

So it's a multi-cannon that does more damage than a normal multi-cannon and is limited to class 1 fixed. You're kidding me right?

What are you enforcing with this weapon; your ineptitude at loadout decisions?

I thought the idea with this was it was a cannon that did more damage similar to the damage a plasma cannon does but with the power usage of a normal cannon (along with slower refire rate like plasma). And as a normal cannon, it would be available in all class ranges.

This multi-cannon is garbage. If FD had issues with balancing a multi-cannon in the higher classes due to damage and such, what in the simulated galaxy would make them choose that weapon to augment for power play?

and while i'm ranting. When are projectile weapon damage going to go up as distance increases similar to how energy weapon damage goes down with distance? Cannon/plasma/rail fire increases in kinetic energy the more distance to target. If we're going to simulate energy weapon fall-off, we should do the same for projectile pick-up. Instead it seems FD treats decreased damage due to distance the same regardless of weapon. Not asking for 100% accurate kinematics, but it would be trivial to inverse energy weapon's dropoff for projectile weapons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do you think that the kinetic energy should increase the longer it travels? That... doesn't make sense.

I'm a little bit confused about the power-specific weapons. Are they supposed to be superior to ordinary weapons? Are they supposed to be good but with some drawbacks, or are they just to be considered pure sidegrades?
 
...
and while i'm ranting. When are projectile weapon damage going to go up as distance increases similar to how energy weapon damage goes down with distance? Cannon/plasma/rail fire increases in kinetic energy the more distance to target. If we're going to simulate energy weapon fall-off, we should do the same for projectile pick-up. Instead it seems FD treats decreased damage due to distance the same regardless of weapon. Not asking for 100% accurate kinematics, but it would be trivial to inverse energy weapon's dropoff for projectile weapons.
Why do you think so? Projectile will move at exactly the same speed all the way to target and will have the same impact speed at any range in space. Unless projectile has its own engine of cource...
 
So it's a multi-cannon that does more damage than a normal multi-cannon and is limited to class 1 fixed. You're kidding me right?

What are you enforcing with this weapon; your ineptitude at loadout decisions?

I thought the idea with this was it was a cannon that did more damage similar to the damage a plasma cannon does but with the power usage of a normal cannon (along with slower refire rate like plasma). And as a normal cannon, it would be available in all class ranges.

This multi-cannon is garbage. If FD had issues with balancing a multi-cannon in the higher classes due to damage and such, what in the simulated galaxy would make them choose that weapon to augment for power play?

and while i'm ranting. When are projectile weapon damage going to go up as distance increases similar to how energy weapon damage goes down with distance? Cannon/plasma/rail fire increases in kinetic energy the more distance to target. If we're going to simulate energy weapon fall-off, we should do the same for projectile pick-up. Instead it seems FD treats decreased damage due to distance the same regardless of weapon. Not asking for 100% accurate kinematics, but it would be trivial to inverse energy weapon's dropoff for projectile weapons.

Your idea as described would be an obvious upgrade weapon; the damage of a Plasma Accelerator with the power usage of a Cannon? There's no drawback. PP weapons aren't supposed to be just better than other weapons, they're just different.

Also, projectiles in space would deal the same damage at 5 yards as it would at 5 light years if it hits you. Velocity is constant barring outside influence.
 
nobody here understands Newton's Second law. This makes me sad for humanity.


edit: i'll break it down for you.

kinetic energy is mass * velocity. (.5mv^2 to be exact)
Velocity is the differential of acceleration to time.

Acceleration to an object in the vacuum of space is constant unless a force acts upon it (this would be gravity, thrusters, another object colliding etc). Unlike the previous post, velocity is not constant, acceleration is.

So the longer my projectile is in space the higher the velocity is. Since the velocity is going to increase at the same acceleration for as long as it doesn't collide with something, the kinetic energy will increase.

A projectile weapon like a cannon should have it's weakest damage at point blank range. It's highest damage at whatever the furthest distance the game will register an impact (4km seems to be the upper limit). While it may be unreasonable to ask the game engine to render correct kinematic physics like ever increasing velocity of projectiles, it would be trivial to modify the damage the same way (but inversely) as it's done for energy weapons.
 
Last edited:
they all kind of fit since you can't have one without the other but seriously. If FD is going to reduce energy damage at distance due to energy dispersion without increasing beam widths then they can easily increase damage at distance for projectile weapons due to higher kinetic energy without rendering the objects at increasing velocities.
 
nobody here understands Newton's Second law. This makes me sad for humanity.


edit: i'll break it down for you.

kinetic energy is mass * velocity. (.5mv^2 to be exact)
Velocity is the differential of acceleration to time.

Acceleration to an object in the vacuum of space is constant unless a force acts upon it (this would be gravity, thrusters, another object colliding etc). Unlike the previous post, velocity is not constant, acceleration is.

So the longer my projectile is in space the higher the velocity is. Since the velocity is going to increase at the same acceleration for as long as it doesn't collide with something, the kinetic energy will increase.

A projectile weapon like a cannon should have it's weakest damage at point blank range. It's highest damage at whatever the furthest distance the game will register an impact (4km seems to be the upper limit). While it may be unreasonable to ask the game engine to render correct kinematic physics like ever increasing velocity of projectiles, it would be trivial to modify the damage the same way (but inversely) as it's done for energy weapons.

You may want to check some video's of the ISS. If they let go of an object in a direction it does not appear to continue accelerating, this could prove very problematic with heavy objects gaining near infinite energy if left long enough..

Force = Mass x acceleration

If there is no force (positive or negative) then mass or acceleration must equal 0 since the bullet does have mass.
http://www.livescience.com/18588-shoot-gun-space.html

Also on a side note why aren't all the satellites and debris in space travelling at escape velocity and leaving the universe?
Further note here: http://www.quora.com/In-a-vacuum-wi...-stop-accelerating-or-reach-terminal-velocity
 
Last edited:
You may want to check some video's of the ISS. If they drop an object it does not appear to continue accelerating, this could prove very problematic with heavy objects gaining near infinite energy if left long enough..

Force = Mass x acceleration

If there is no force (positive or negative) then mass or acceleration must equal 0 and the bullet does have mass.
http://www.livescience.com/18588-shoot-gun-space.html

i'd use picard's face palm but i dont do that in forum.

This is a space game. You should have your geek card revoked.

I'm not going to try and debate why physics is right and you're wrong. Acceleration is constant unless a force acts to change it and in space that leaves gravity, EM radiation, or colliding with another object. The initial acceleration i give a projectile remains with it as there is nothing to counter it. This is why kinetic energy increases.
 
I get that a projectile will continue to increase its speed if it has a constant force acting on it. IE: As long as a missile's engine continues to burn/fire it will continue to accelerate. But once the engine stops, so does the acceleration, no?

So,,,,,

If an object's force of motion is generated by a singular force (IE: rifle shot, canon, etc.) does the rate of travel "peak" once the energy from the "launch" is used up?
 
Last edited:
Velocity is constant unless a force is applied to it, not acceleration.

As Kitfox says above as soon as the Projectile leaves the muzzle the force of the propellant expanding ceases to be applied to the projectile.
As there is no longer a forced being applied, the velocity cannot change.
 
i'd use picard's face palm but i dont do that in forum.

This is a space game. You should have your geek card revoked.

I'm not going to try and debate why physics is right and you're wrong. Acceleration is constant unless a force acts to change it and in space that leaves gravity, EM radiation, or colliding with another object. The initial acceleration i give a projectile remains with it as there is nothing to counter it. This is why kinetic energy increases.

Please cite any proof for acceleration of the projectile reminding constant remains with it as there is nothing to counter it.
It is velocity not acceleration as per the First Law of Motion

When viewed in an inertial reference frame, an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by an external force
 
nobody here understands Newton's Second law. This makes me sad for humanity.


edit: i'll break it down for you.

kinetic energy is mass * velocity. (.5mv^2 to be exact)
Velocity is the differential of acceleration to time.

Acceleration to an object in the vacuum of space is constant unless a force acts upon it (this would be gravity, thrusters, another object colliding etc). Unlike the previous post, velocity is not constant, acceleration is.

So the longer my projectile is in space the higher the velocity is. Since the velocity is going to increase at the same acceleration for as long as it doesn't collide with something, the kinetic energy will increase.

A projectile weapon like a cannon should have it's weakest damage at point blank range. It's highest damage at whatever the furthest distance the game will register an impact (4km seems to be the upper limit). While it may be unreasonable to ask the game engine to render correct kinematic physics like ever increasing velocity of projectiles, it would be trivial to modify the damage the same way (but inversely) as it's done for energy weapons.


Is there a rocket engine on the back of this hypothetical projectile?

Because, if not, your "explanation" of Newton's Second Law in this situation is utterly ridiculous and wrong.


"So the longer my projectile is in space the higher the velocity is."

No. Not unless it is being accelerated by a force. If it is a kinetic projectile... a blob of stuff... it just flies along in space.


"A projectile weapon like a cannon should have it's weakest damage at point blank range."

No.

In Earth's atmosphere, shells and bullets slow down, due to friction from the medium through which they are moving (air).

In space, with no resistance/friction slowing it down, it will move at exactly the same speed one metre from its launch tube as it will 4km away.

That's a shell/bullet - no force acting on it, so it carries on doing what it's doing. It does NOT accelerate.

If it's a missile, sure, its engine accelerates it.



"This makes me sad for humanity."

Hmm.
 
nobody here understands Newton's Second law. This makes me sad for humanity.


edit: i'll break it down for you.

kinetic energy is mass * velocity. (.5mv^2 to be exact)
Velocity is the differential of acceleration to time.

Acceleration to an object in the vacuum of space is constant unless a force acts upon it (this would be gravity, thrusters, another object colliding etc). Unlike the previous post, velocity is not constant, acceleration is.

So the longer my projectile is in space the higher the velocity is. Since the velocity is going to increase at the same acceleration for as long as it doesn't collide with something, the kinetic energy will increase.

A projectile weapon like a cannon should have it's weakest damage at point blank range. It's highest damage at whatever the furthest distance the game will register an impact (4km seems to be the upper limit). While it may be unreasonable to ask the game engine to render correct kinematic physics like ever increasing velocity of projectiles, it would be trivial to modify the damage the same way (but inversely) as it's done for energy weapons.

I don't think that's how it works. By your interpretation here, if I was to fire a pistol in space, the bullet would continuously go faster and faster forever barring hitting something, eventually hitting light speed and beyond?
 
no. thrust is acceleration of acceleration (unlike our game that puts limits on such things). As long as you provide thrust, you are increasing your acceleration (until you get into relativistic speeds)

F=ma, so a = F/m. The force i initially give an object of 2kg is say 1 newton. so a = 1newton / 2kg. This a is always 0.5m/s^2 unless a force changes it. Forever. a doesn't magically go to 0. It can only go to 0 if something changes it and that's impacting my target in the game. a projectile's kinetic energy is lowest at the beginning of it's journey and highest at the end (in space with no messy gravity or EM forces to interfere).
 
a bullet wouldnt continue to accelerate in space but it would do the same damage at 500m, 10k, 100k or even 100 million years into the future when you headshot some unfortunate alien that was just minding his own business
 
Last edited:
no. thrust is acceleration of acceleration (unlike our game that puts limits on such things). As long as you provide thrust, you are increasing your acceleration (until you get into relativistic speeds)

F=ma, so a = F/m. The force i initially give an object of 2kg is say 1 newton. so a = 1newton / 2kg. This a is always 0.5m/s^2 unless a force changes it. Forever. a doesn't magically go to 0. It can only go to 0 if something changes it and that's impacting my target in the game. a projectile's kinetic energy is lowest at the beginning of it's journey and highest at the end (in space with no messy gravity or EM forces to interfere).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E43-CfukEgs

Vacuum chamber. Gravity is the only force. Acceleration is still constant -9.81 regardless of vacuum or not. I believe you are mixing your math.
Trust me I am an Aerospace Engineer. I don't deal with space much but seriously. Play Kerbal Space Program.

http://cosmoquest.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-13282.html
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom