Author Topic: Caught in a Warp Field  (Read 1285 times)

Offline MajorD

  • Fleet Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2553
  • Cookies: 7
  • Look Behind You
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #20 on: July 28, 2010, 05:47:11 AM »
That's not true, we've seen ships align warp fields before, like Enterprise and Columbia, they aligned their warp fields to allow Columbia to transfer Trip, then they used Columbia's engines to sustain Enterprise whilst Trip fixed the warp core. I'm not sure why it was necessary for Columbia to sustain them though, shutting down the warp core would have simply cut power to the warp engines, and the ship should have just slowed down to impulse. I suppose there could have been a design flaw in the NX class, since it wasn't actually designed to go at the speeds that Enterprise was, so perhaps the nacelles wouldn't have been able to handle the sudden loss of power, and they couldn't ramp it down because of the Klingon virus.
I think that's very unique due to the ships being the same mass and volume. I remember wondering why the other ship didn't shut the drive off completely too, maybe the sabotage were preventing that, but did allow lowering power, combined with a movie Speed like thing where if they slow down something worse happens. So, they did the sustainer thing to keep speed steady while lowering power to trick the sabotage. The episode is "Divergence" and the below link as a picture of the two ship's fields touching. They have about as much extra volume as I thought they would as based on the escape pods, a little more actually.
http://www.ditl.org/index.php?daymain=/pagimage.php?scitechimages&16&10&1

Quote
I prefer to interpret that as they were able to detect the warp signature of the ship from that distance, not as the actual sensors could scan that far. That lends some evidence to the idea that long range sensors are passive, with large restrictions on both the range and accuracy of active sensors, not to mention the fact that it'd increase the sensor profile of the scanning ship. The best analogy would be submarines, if they use their active sonar then they can detect other ships within a certain range, however the ping from their sonar can be detected far beyond the range that they can pick up the echos. But they can also pickup loud engine noise from great distances, that's why they have to travel relatively slowly to remain undetected. In the same vein if the warp engines were barely being used, such as when maintaining a warp field, then that would give the ship a very small sensor profile, which would blend into the background radiation of the universe at a distance. If the ship had to change direction though I would assume that doing so would increase their warp output, which in turn makes them more detectable.
I think that's generally the case. When tracking ships who are long gone they generally look for the telltale signs of warp passage and weapon usage. The only problem here is the high energy field should leave a powerful trail that the small vessel can't compensate. The difference would be you would need to find the trail. The other issue I have is, just how active does the ship's warp core need to be to lead to long range detection? The warp core constantly create exotic emissions while running not just when running the engines.

I agree, a lot of long range sensing is probably passive. The major reason I believe this to be the case is Voyager's astrometrics lab. They sent a signal to the Federation on their first day and it was supposed to take years to arrive, but then they scanned their entire expected trip several seasons later, which would still be tens of thousands of light years, and took 1,000 light years off the trip. The only way they could get improved data is if they collected it passively, when signal propagation is considered, otherwise the data collection should have taken over a decade.

I think their short range sensor range is the practical limit of active scanning. Here's the interesting thing, sometimes the ships are so far away from anything they don't have real time communication, but as long as they are near a relay they can have real time communication. Logically, with versatile enough relays, the short range sensors should be able to use the relays to bounce their signal both ways. Same for any ships in the area.

Quote
Well there really isn't any evidence one way or the other, though I do recall impulse engines being off at warp, but that might have been my imagination, or an FX error.
The Enterprise in TOS used to run that way.

Quote
If I had to guess I'd say that the warp engines modify the geometry of the field momentarily
It seems simpler to just turn the ship and have the field follow. Since the field is constantly renewed, the field will be created with the new heading as the ship turns. Consider this, what is the field turning again? In space there is nothing to turn against, so an uneven field should actually go off in the direction of the imbalance, rather than turn. Although, it's reasonable that it may be pushing against either nacelle unevenly. But, that doesn't explain how single nacelle ships can turn and I don't like the idea of creating turn forces along its length.

Quote
Stealth armor, designed to absorb energy emissions, much like the acoustic paint and rubber tiles on submarines.

Is it just me or do the posts in tech related subjects just get longer and longer...
The episode TNG:"Gambit, pt 1" has a pirate ship that has an anti-subspace coating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHoQnJxtIEo#t=0m52s

This baffles the short and then long range sensors. Interestingly, it also completely dismisses the claim of no phasers at warp, since Data orders the ship to warp to pursue the at-warp ship, and the girl says they are almost in phaser range.

Yep. There's lots to be said about Trek. I try to cut down, or I give up at a certain point.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 05:53:13 AM by MajorD »
I'm on a pig.

Now, it's diamonds.

Offline Jon

  • aka Elminster
  • Admiral
  • ****
  • Posts: 1026
  • Cookies: 35
  • Hardpointing and Game Interaction Design
    • StarTrek:Excalibur
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #21 on: July 28, 2010, 07:01:26 PM »
Going back to the shuttle in a bigger ships warp field, I think we've overlook something.
The suttle is not 'attached' to the bigger ship, so when the bigger ship forms a field and moves off, the shuttle will stay in place, until eventually it falls outside the warp field.

This would address the escape pod question mentioned earlier on. The pod moves away from the ship on its own inertia and the relative speed the bigger ship is moving at, when it leaves the warp field, it will drop to sublight (it may have some limited form of warp sustainer)

So if its 'attached' to the host ship, it is essentially part of it, when it detaches it becomes an independant physical body but still moves at the relative speed of the host ship.
Unless stated otherwise, any views expressed are my own and should not be construed as fact with regard to the game..

ASUS M4A79T Deluxe
AMD Phenom II X4 955
8.0GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 668MHz  7-8-8-20
XFX ATI Radeon HD 6970
32GB OCZ-VERTEX SSD
150GB Western Digital WDC Raptor
300GB Western Digital WDC VelociRaptor
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit

Offline Zachstar

  • Lt. Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 190
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #22 on: July 28, 2010, 09:04:25 PM »
You cant just drop to sublight. You have to gradually degrade the field otherwise the shock of exiting it would lead to an incident like the one with the first NX Prototype
Phase Blasters, Rail Torpedoes Full Spread! FIRE!

Offline 11001001

  • Commodore
  • **
  • Posts: 380
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #23 on: July 28, 2010, 09:08:05 PM »
The ship inside the warp field isnt travelling faster then light, otherwise the theory of relativity would apply. Instead, it is "pushing and pulling" itself along space, therefore, since it isnt moving, the shuttle would only need to match the sublight speed of the ship, take it's warp engines offline and piggy back along for the ride. Or, are the warp engines sustainers, which keep the ship travelling faster then the speed of light?
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 09:19:57 PM by 11001001 »

Offline Zachstar

  • Lt. Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 190
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #24 on: July 28, 2010, 10:19:58 PM »
Warp sustainers are plasma charged mini warp coils that simply allow the craft to sustain warp as a decreasing rate but not get thrown out of it which would damage or destroy the craft. If you dont have a proper M/AM core onboard there is no way you can sustain high warp on your own.

However, I dont accept that a craft can just stay there shut down. The craft has to put in atleast a small bit of force. The more mass within the warp field the more power the coils need to sustain the same warp speed. The craft has to contribute or slow it all down.
Phase Blasters, Rail Torpedoes Full Spread! FIRE!

Offline 11001001

  • Commodore
  • **
  • Posts: 380
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #25 on: July 28, 2010, 11:37:37 PM »
I didnt say that the shuttle would have to stay there completely shut down. I said that it would have to mantain the same sublight speed once it had gone to warp. If there were two fields trying to propel the ships at the same time it would probably destroy the shuttle.

Offline MajorD

  • Fleet Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2553
  • Cookies: 7
  • Look Behind You
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #26 on: July 29, 2010, 04:28:29 AM »
Water on the grease fire!

Going back to the shuttle in a bigger ships warp field, I think we've overlook something.
The suttle is not 'attached' to the bigger ship, so when the bigger ship forms a field and moves off, the shuttle will stay in place, until eventually it falls outside the warp field.

So if its 'attached' to the host ship, it is essentially part of it, when it detaches it becomes an independant physical body but still moves at the relative speed of the host ship.
I need clarification. Are you proposing conduction of the warp effect, rather than it being purely a volume effect.
    I'm fine with the warp field only effecting warp nacelles, but I don't like the idea of it being a conducted effect, it would only make sense with a Newtonian system.  I admit, the Star Trek warp drive is not the Alcubierre warp drive, but I feel they to have at least some vague similarity.

You cant just drop to sublight. You have to gradually degrade the field otherwise the shock of exiting it would lead to an incident like the one with the first NX Prototype
I thought the NX test vehicle's problem was only with instability at high warp velocity, which killed the pilot. When Archer tested one of the vehicles, he ejected in a minuscule capsule from warp velocity. And, in the episode with the spatial anomolys where the Enterprise-D had to drift at warp, it didn't run its engines at all to stop, it simply drifted to a halt from warp. Field degradation is something that seems to just happen on its own. It's when you force a faster stop but running the engines counter to the current field that things can get dangerous.

Warp sustainers are plasma charged mini warp coils that simply allow the craft to sustain warp as a decreasing rate but not get thrown out of it which would damage or destroy the craft. If you dont have a proper M/AM core onboard there is no way you can sustain high warp on your own.

However, I dont accept that a craft can just stay there shut down. The craft has to put in atleast a small bit of force. The more mass within the warp field the more power the coils need to sustain the same warp speed. The craft has to contribute or slow it all down.

There was a fusion powered ship in TNG once, it's the one with the huge glowy ball reactor, also the famous "impulse only" Romulan ship from TOS.

I find the idea that the shuttle has to contribute based on mass ridiculous. The Intrepid, Defiant, Galaxy, even Nova (probably) all carry shuttles internally without any problem. Carrying them externally, still within the warp field, does not change the mass at all.

I didnt say that the shuttle would have to stay there completely shut down. I said that it would have to mantain the same sublight speed once it had gone to warp. If there were two fields trying to propel the ships at the same time it would probably destroy the shuttle.
I've always had issue with the warp drive imparting real space velocity. If it's really a matter of moving a volume of space, then the shuttle should not need to run anything. It's why I try to explain the shaking and stuff by way of stresses on the nacelles going through the hull.
I'm on a pig.

Now, it's diamonds.

Offline 11001001

  • Commodore
  • **
  • Posts: 380
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #27 on: July 29, 2010, 04:39:56 AM »
This is the best warp field picture I've seen. Imagine the shuttle, parked just infront of the galaxy classes saucer. Also imagine what the shuttles warp field would look like if it were positioned there, the warp fields would overlap. The back end of the warp field from the shuttle would be about in the middle of the engineering section of the galaxy. Since the warp field is expanding space behind the shuttle, and the galaxy class is part of the space-time continium (emphasis on space) then it would destroy the engineering section, the warp core and both the ships in the process. Now as everyone can see, the lines representing space inside the field are unnafected while they are distorted at the front and rear end of the galaxy. This means that space-time (emphasis on time) are unnafected since the ship is simply pushing and pulling itself along. Therefore, since space-time (emphasis now on both words) are unaffected while in the warp bubble, so should the shuttle be unaffected, as long as it is not creating a warp field of it's own.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 05:36:10 AM by 11001001 »

Offline Zachstar

  • Lt. Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 190
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #28 on: July 29, 2010, 07:19:57 AM »
Dont be silly Major if all you had to move was volume you would not need the giant warp cores of the galaxy and notice the difference in core size between it and the intrepid. Mass is a factor and you cant just hang in a warp field scot free.


The NX prototype diddnt kill the pilot the sudden loss of warp caused a huge force to act on the capsule he noted "Ever dropped out of warp in one of these? It isnt fun"

Fusion can give you up to warp 2 but that is all. You cant break the power barrier for warp 3 and above without M/AM
Phase Blasters, Rail Torpedoes Full Spread! FIRE!

Offline 11001001

  • Commodore
  • **
  • Posts: 380
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2010, 07:57:47 AM »
Yes, mass is a factor, but all because you have a bigger car, doesnt mean you have a bigger engine to move it. An object can be moved however big or small, with the tiniest flick of a finger, so long as the friction, air resistance, upthrust etc, is minimal. I've never understood the mass part of the equation, "inertial mass", which I suspect is the one we are talking about is the "mass of an object measuered by it's resistance to acceleration". Since there is no air in space, or any dense particulates, then I can't understand why accelerating to such a velocity would be such a problem, the only problem I see is that we have not yet found a sustainable power source to propel an object faster than the speed of light.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 08:09:39 AM by 11001001 »

Offline Zachstar

  • Lt. Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 190
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #30 on: July 29, 2010, 10:50:24 AM »
Warp requires energy. You dont warp for free. You could consider subspace to be resistance but the resistance in the way I see it is the use of energy by the coils.

To go from warp numbers requires a great deal more energy (A jump) until you get to warp 9 then the speed is simply determined by mass efficiency and how much power the coils are able to get and withstand. Now I think such things are outside game scope because such things are mods work anyway. I think it is far more important for say advanced hardpointing than worrying about how ships mass affects warp. Or things riding in the warp field.
Phase Blasters, Rail Torpedoes Full Spread! FIRE!

Online Black Patriot

  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 978
  • Cookies: 2
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #31 on: July 29, 2010, 12:40:46 PM »
I think the warp core's size is directly linked to the power requirements for the ship, so the size of the nacelles needed to move the ship determines how powerful the warp reactor needs to be. Thus it becomes about mass and size, since a larger ship needs a larger field. As for two warp fields interacting I think they would repel each other, as Enterprise and Columbia experienced some turbulence when their warp fields merged, it'd make sense that the spacial distortions (which is what warp fields are) wouldn't interact that well, if at all. That's where the precise measurements for interacting with warp fields are needed, since the field would work with a certain frequency and shape you'd need to know both to merge with the warp fields of another ship.

In any case the ships aren't accelerating, they're generating a warp field that changes the way that space interacts with their ship, with a decrease in what is essentially mass in front of the ship and an increase behind, thus creating a constant falling sort of motion. It'd be the same as generating a hill behind an object and a hole in front of it, it's going to roll down, in simplistic terms. Because the ships aren't actually moving, there's no resistance, the increases in energy for each consecutive warp factor are related to the degree of warping of space you want to achieve, so it takes more energy to create a warp field for warp 6 than warp 5 because, metaphorically, the hole in front of the ship is deeper and the hill behind it is taller.

Quote
I think that's very unique due to the ships being the same mass and volume. I remember wondering why the other ship didn't shut the drive off completely too, maybe the sabotage were preventing that, but did allow lowering power, combined with a movie Speed like thing where if they slow down something worse happens. So, they did the sustainer thing to keep speed steady while lowering power to trick the sabotage. The episode is "Divergence" and the below link as a picture of the two ship's fields touching. They have about as much extra volume as I thought they would as based on the escape pods, a little more actually.

Whilst that could be the case I think it'd be possible to have 2 different ships match warp fields, it'd just be difficult, with significant communication and computational power needed. Take the Equinox and Voyager, when they were together Voyager had to extend her shields around the Equinox, so they were flying in close formation. It'd be reasonable that to maintain the shields they'd also have to stay close enough that they'd have to merge warp fields. Now we don't know if they warped anywhere together in that formation, but if they had needed to, like if they couldn't get the aliens to stop attacking and had to travel back to the Alpha quadrant like that, then they would have had to go to warp in that formation, or they'd risk losing the shields. Thus it'd be reasonable that they'd be able to merge warp fields, even though Voyager is at least twice the size of the Equinox. Now it's possible that it wasn't mentioned in the show because none of the writers thought of it (that'd be my bet), but I still maintain that it's possible to merge warp fields, but like shields you have to have both ships do it, and they have to share information to do it.

Quote
I think that's generally the case. When tracking ships who are long gone they generally look for the telltale signs of warp passage and weapon usage. The only problem here is the high energy field should leave a powerful trail that the small vessel can't compensate. The difference would be you would need to find the trail. The other issue I have is, just how active does the ship's warp core need to be to lead to long range detection? The warp core constantly create exotic emissions while running not just when running the engines.

I agree, a lot of long range sensing is probably passive. The major reason I believe this to be the case is Voyager's astrometrics lab. They sent a signal to the Federation on their first day and it was supposed to take years to arrive, but then they scanned their entire expected trip several seasons later, which would still be tens of thousands of light years, and took 1,000 light years off the trip. The only way they could get improved data is if they collected it passively, when signal propagation is considered, otherwise the data collection should have taken over a decade.

I think their short range sensor range is the practical limit of active scanning. Here's the interesting thing, sometimes the ships are so far away from anything they don't have real time communication, but as long as they are near a relay they can have real time communication. Logically, with versatile enough relays, the short range sensors should be able to use the relays to bounce their signal both ways. Same for any ships in the area.

A high energy field certainly, but once the shuttle leaves the influence of the parent ship the field would degrade to the point that the shuttle could maintain it, at whatever power level they have chosen. On top of that in all the cases we've seen that have general purpose ships trying to hide their warp trail they haven't been able to do it for powerful fields, but there have been cases where specialized ships have been able to hide their warp trail, perhaps the shuttle could be fitted with some equipment to do a better job. Hiding the warp trail also only really applies if the enemy had already discovered that the shuttle had been there, in which case the shuttles mission would likely be compromised. The long range sensors on ships only seem to be good at detecting the power form ships, not warp fields, certainly not on the scale of a shuttle at more than a few light years. When there are large groups of ships traveling together, even if they're cloaked, then you'd probably be able to pick up the distortions from the warp fields, but it's mainly the power from the warp core that the sensors would detect.

As for the relay stations, I'd guess that much like modern communications equipment they're designed for specific frequencies, ones with minimal interference and high penetration. Not to mention the huge bandwidth needed to transmit the raw search information, since the relay station wouldn't have the processing requirements or specialized hardware for sensor analysis. They'd probably be given short range sensors, mainly to detect something like a meteorite, but they'd be nowhere near a starship grade sensor array.

Quote
It seems simpler to just turn the ship and have the field follow. Since the field is constantly renewed, the field will be created with the new heading as the ship turns. Consider this, what is the field turning again? In space there is nothing to turn against, so an uneven field should actually go off in the direction of the imbalance, rather than turn. Although, it's reasonable that it may be pushing against either nacelle unevenly. But, that doesn't explain how single nacelle ships can turn and I don't like the idea of creating turn forces along its length.

That depends on how long it'd take space to adjust to the rotation, the warp field is, as I stated earlier, digging a hole in front of the ship, so moving the whole relative to the ship would take time, slowing down the turn. It also depends on whether a ship can turn with it's sublight engines at warp, if they would even have an effect, and I'm not sure whether they would. If my idea about warp fields holds then I'd suspect that trying to turn with the sublight engines would either turn the ship, but would have to be done slowly, or would collapse the field because of the sudden change in the warp field geometry relative to the spacial distortions. That'd be why they can't turn quickly, otherwise the field would collapse.
Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
Intel Core i7-950
12GiB G.Skill RAM
Gigabyte GTX 570 OC 1280MB SLI
64GB Kingston SSD (OS Drive)
2 x 160GB 7200rpm HDD (RAID 0)
8.2TiB Storage (on File Server)
875W Thermaltake ToughPower XT PSU
46" Samsung Series 6 LED @ 1080p
Logitech Z-5500 THX
Windows 7 Professional x64
Windows 8 Developer Preview x64

Offline MajorD

  • Fleet Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2553
  • Cookies: 7
  • Look Behind You
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #32 on: July 29, 2010, 03:58:11 PM »
Dont be silly Major if all you had to move was volume you would not need the giant warp cores of the galaxy and notice the difference in core size between it and the intrepid. Mass is a factor and you cant just hang in a warp field scot free.
Mass is not a factor in the specific example you gave, because a shuttle inside the hull or outside the hull all equals the same mass. Introducing a new shuttle isn't even a issue either since we've seen starships take on new vehicles internally without any performance issues ever mentioned. That makes the only difference with a shuttle inside or out being the physical dimensions and balance of the system. 


Quote
The NX prototype didnt kill the pilot the sudden loss of warp caused a huge force to act on the capsule he noted "Ever dropped out of warp in one of these? It isnt fun"
       It wasn't the sudden loss, it was the mounting instability. The instability was causing the ship to shake uncontrollably, then turned the ship as the field collapses, which the pilot reports just before the ship drops from warp and immediately detonates. The rapidness of the explosion, and localized nature of the explosion indicate it was the core's failure that caused all the problem.  That fits with the Vulcans blaming the engine design, and Trip saying they just need to rebalance the intermix ratio.  What we really have is a specific example of dropping from warp with an unstable field, while TNG: "Force of Nature" shows us what happens with a drop from a stable field. The escape pods, including the NX-Alpha's escape pod, shows us the effects of dropping out of a field, regardless of stability. Dropping out from the unstable field was no doubt rough, but it was obviously survivable. 
       Even more telling, Trip, at round 30:00 says he routed the intermix controls to manual so that if it becomes unstable the pilot can adjust it. In other words, the there was an instability in the engines. This also isn't the only example of a ship being forced from warp. I recall something about Voyager being knocked from warp by a gravity spike but immediately going back to warp, the field was dissipated and they just stopped and picked themselves back up, nothing bad happened. I wish I could recall the episode. I believe in ENT: "Fallen Hero" Enterprise is has its nacelle shot and the ship falls from warp, it would hardly be a controlled procedure. The same thing happened to the Enterprise-E when its warp core was shot, suddenly cutting the warp field and making it fall from warp.

Actually, he says:
Archer: You all right?
Pilot: A little shaky. Trust me... you don't want to pass through the warp barrier in one of those.
http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/25rjGnYbtQQ/

His statement implies he ejected before the ship dropped from warp, which fits well since we don't seen an ejection when the ship explodes. I wouldn't want to drop from warp in that escape pod either, it's claustrophobic small and it would mean I'm getting my ship blown up, too.

The interesting thing is, the field instability resulting the NX-Alpha turning uncontrollably indicates it is possible for at-warp turning to be warp field based, and not thruster based. It might also shows the field drifting sideways. When the ship suddenly changed heading, the direction of the star field streaks didn't change.
Quote
Fusion can give you up to warp 2 but that is all. You cant break the power barrier for warp 3 and above without M/AM.
Where did you get that?

You also stated it is impossible to maintain high warp without a anti-matter fueled warp core, except in the episode TNG: "Emissary" K'Ehleyr arrives by way of converted probe capable of warp 9. It's nothing more than a redress torpedo casing, which leaves no space for a warp core, since the passenger takes up most of the internal space.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/gallery/starfleet-equipment1.htm <-- Sixth image.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 04:23:23 PM by MajorD »
I'm on a pig.

Now, it's diamonds.

Offline Zachstar

  • Lt. Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 190
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #33 on: July 29, 2010, 06:17:11 PM »
The super speed probe was junk trek. If it were possible for a probe to do that every shuttle in starfleet would be a warp 9 beast.

It matters not anyway. It has nothing to do with game. Would not it be better to worry about damage mechanics or better yet battles at warp than worrying about giggling with glee at towing a shuttle in a warp field?
Phase Blasters, Rail Torpedoes Full Spread! FIRE!

Offline 11001001

  • Commodore
  • **
  • Posts: 380
  • Cookies: 0
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #34 on: July 29, 2010, 06:46:10 PM »
Theres no point getting irate about it. No-one is forcing anyone to put anything in any game. It's a discussion and a discussion is based upon people airing thier views, and while it might not be the most important scenario, someone might say something really useful that someone else overlooked.

Online Black Patriot

  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 978
  • Cookies: 2
  • Member
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #35 on: July 29, 2010, 08:21:35 PM »
It's unlikely that a proper simulation of the warp system would be included in the game, it'd be far easier just to script any missions that might use any exotic warp effects than it would to actually get the system to simulate them. But that doesn't mean we can't discuss the possibility, I guarantee that some modder will have a look and decide it's worth a shot to try to add to the game, hell I might even have a go, if I remember by the time the game's released.
Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
Intel Core i7-950
12GiB G.Skill RAM
Gigabyte GTX 570 OC 1280MB SLI
64GB Kingston SSD (OS Drive)
2 x 160GB 7200rpm HDD (RAID 0)
8.2TiB Storage (on File Server)
875W Thermaltake ToughPower XT PSU
46" Samsung Series 6 LED @ 1080p
Logitech Z-5500 THX
Windows 7 Professional x64
Windows 8 Developer Preview x64

Offline MajorD

  • Fleet Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2553
  • Cookies: 7
  • Look Behind You
Re: Caught in a Warp Field
« Reply #36 on: July 30, 2010, 09:47:56 AM »
The super speed probe was junk trek. If it were possible for a probe to do that every shuttle in starfleet would be a warp 9 beast.
You're dismissing canon relevant to the discussion simply because it doesn't fit your preconception. The modified probe worked, all that is left is to explain it, and warp sustainers used from a moving ship does that. As does the soliton wave, which would also make a really nice long range weapon.

Quote
It matters not anyway. It has nothing to do with game. Would not it be better to worry about damage mechanics or better yet battles at warp than worrying about giggling with glee at towing a shuttle in a warp field?
Nope. If you want to do one of those topics again, go ahead.

It's unlikely that a proper simulation of the warp system would be included in the game, it'd be far easier just to script any missions that might use any exotic warp effects than it would to actually get the system to simulate them. But that doesn't mean we can't discuss the possibility, I guarantee that some modder will have a look and decide it's worth a shot to try to add to the game, hell I might even have a go, if I remember by the time the game's released.

Indeed, that's why I made this a topic of discussion, since it's relevant but possibly complex, and a rare issue.
I'm on a pig.

Now, it's diamonds.