Jump to content


Member Since 07 Nov 2007
Offline Last Active Jan 16 2014 12:41 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Long feedback

07 May 2012 - 11:53 PM

In regards to artillery and T-47 airspeeders, artillery are currently starting forces only and can't be researched at the moment, while the T-47 airspeeder not being available is a known issue.

I think PR gave advanced variants of the K-wing a hyperdrive.

This wasn't an advanced variant, in fact, it was the variant that appears just after you research the K-wing.

In Topic: Newtonian Space Physics

24 April 2012 - 09:12 PM

What are you thinking to do? Increase inaccuracy, decrease inaccuracy...

In Topic: Newtonian Space Physics

24 April 2012 - 12:48 AM

If I went with Newton, it'd have to be done in conjunction with changes to inaccuracy...

Don't try to think in those terms. It will just make you have endless headaches, believe me. The assumption that in GFFA they have a much deeper knowledge of physics than us really does not solve the physical inconsistencies in SW.

In Topic: The Essential Guide to Warfare

21 April 2012 - 04:43 AM

I see you did get into the forums. That's great.

Yes, I am now on theforce.net, even though I refuse to accept things like TCW and the Legacy novel series.

May I ask why you don't accept the Legacy novel series? I understand about TCW, and I am also conscious about the far from perfect quality of the Legacy novels, but I have much more trouble accepting TCW and the Legacy comics than the Legacy of the Force series. I don't find them that bad to refuse to accept them. I believe there are really, really worse things in SW canon than that series (Jedi Prince series comes to mind instantly :thumbsupxd: ).

In Topic: Newtonian Space Physics

21 April 2012 - 04:09 AM

i think the velocity limit may be due more to practicality than science.
the engines may have some form of governor to limit their maximum speed. i can think of a number of sound reasons for this
while yes there is no inertia in space these ships are still very massive, and there are still stresses acting on the ship

There is no inertia in space? Huh? And if there is no inertia (which is a property inherent to all matter that has mass, and is defined as the resistance to acceleration) there would be no stresses whatsoever acting on the ship. I believe you should review your physics.

I voted no, and I remember making a thread a couple of years ago proposing this change. However, I'm kind of reconsidering my vote because Star Wars is bad physics from any point of view, and if ships do not have top speeds because of physics, then we would start addressing issues like how the hell do ships reduce their speeds or stop if they only have one set of engines, or how they turn and roll and stuff like that. There is so much wrong with Star Wars physics that perhaps its best to accept we are talking about a parallel universe with different laws of physics and such (that really isn't possible either, because the laws seem to apply in some places but not in others, but anyway, in our minds it is :p). We can even start talking about relativistic effects or as to why the Empire constructed a Death Star if they could simply smash a ship traveling close to the speed of light into a planet and destroy it... So the argument for eliminating top speeds because of the physics is really not consistent. However, I would test the idea to see how it affects gameplay, perhaps it has a positive effect, I don't know. What I think is most important, having said all that, is to examine closely which of the interpretations is the most canonical, as I believe that in the strictest sense, they are not compatible with each other. The most canonical interpretation is the one that should be used, in any case.