Author Topic: Space Engineers (Bug Fixing Period)  (Read 168052 times)

The bridge is open because cannons are a thing
what?
Cameras and water is a bad idea
you're kidding

The bridge is open because cannons are a thing
yes, to fulfill the bridge crew's DEATH WISH

My game crashes when mining.
loving hell

Fix :D
But I have to fly 15K kilometers to get some iron and I just established my base not there
I am not a smart man
« Last Edit: December 24, 2015, 10:31:28 AM by espio100 »

They have bridges because human sense still Annoying Oranges technology. It's just not practical. If i want to know where the forget im going, i'm going to be seeing with my eyes. Not hiding behind a screen and hoping the calculations are right.

Interestingly enough, space combat would be stalemate.

There would primarily be three main components.
The obvious parts is your back engines. These are vital for thrust. It's only necessary that the engines be cased behind armor and vented properly.

The ships themselves wouldn't be all that flashy either. Like early tanks of world war 1, they would be similar in shape and have a consistency about them. Why? Well it's to prevent the costs from being extremely high. It's also easier to build and maintain. I don't think these ships are ever leaving space if they're combat vessels, so atmospheric properties wouldn't be applied here.

Now for weaponry, i imagine a simple warhead strapped to a guided rocket. A slow one at that. A space torcreep. There are more reasons for this than one. Firstly, it's hard to judge your distance in space. If the enemy can't see you, but you can see them, then it's the optimal time to strike. You don't want an exposed cannon giving your position away, nor do you want the flash to trigger sensors on the enemy ship and alert them. So the best way combat one another, from a far at least, is with the use of slow moving ballistic devices strong enough to punch a hole in the hull and effectively gut the ship.

But what if the enemy sees your missile? Well that's where things can get complicated. You see these ships might be equipped with an IR laser of a sort that triggers the detonation mechanism of the warhead. I imagine these warheads might be pretty damn expensive too. Since it's effectively a mini Saturn IV with a huge ass bomb on the tip. Well, ammunitions out. What do you do? This is where a spearhead design can come in handy. A quarter mile long rod that can penetrate the hull of the enemy by excessive force.

Or, you both blow your ammunition and turn around to go to a station and the cycle begins anew. Just my thought.

in fact I don't even understand why modern ships have big exposed bridges and windows.
They are designed as a platform for RADAR and radio communications, as they need to be high up to be effective; if we were to have no tower, we would either need to get rid of communication and RADAR (or at least have them operate inefficiently), or we would need a stable platform for them. Note that the tower on the ship generally houses a lot of electronics and equipment that you couldn't store without it, space is already at a premium on a ship. If we used cameras instead of windows, in the event that an EMP, or any other form of electronic warfare was enacted, there would be literally no way to navigate the ship. This is also the reason that ships still employ flag communication, if there is no ability to communicate with other ships, the fleet will be vulnerable. Modern naval ships are designed to operate in the event that there could be electronic warfare, as that appears to be the future of naval warfare. (see the AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare Suite)

I hope you all know that going for an ultimate idea of realism in space combat will eventually end in a most likely boring, instantaneous execution. Should try and stop being realistic and just enjoy broadside ship cannons, gorgeous views from exposed bridges, and technology that looks like it was made in the 80's

I hope you all know that going for an ultimate idea of realism in space combat will eventually end in a most likely boring, instantaneous execution. Should try and stop being realistic and just enjoy broadside ship cannons, gorgeous views from exposed bridges, and technology that looks like it was made in the 80's
arma 4: space

arma 4: space
arma 4: shooting dudes in space but you still can't switch weapons while moving or walk over rocks without breaking your legs

They have bridges because human sense still Annoying Oranges technology. It's just not practical. If i want to know where the forget im going, i'm going to be seeing with my eyes. Not hiding behind a screen and hoping the calculations are right.
the computer would not be navigating. you would be looking at a screen that is showing you what the camera sees
Firstly, it's hard to judge your distance in space.
uh
maybe if you're eyeballing it. but we know exactly how fast light moves, and we would definitely be using some kind of radar
They are designed as a platform for RADAR and radio communications, as they need to be high up to be effective; if we were to have no tower, we would either need to get rid of communication and RADAR (or at least have them operate inefficiently), or we would need a stable platform for them. Note that the tower on the ship generally houses a lot of electronics and equipment that you couldn't store without it, space is already at a premium on a ship. If we used cameras instead of windows, in the event that an EMP, or any other form of electronic warfare was enacted, there would be literally no way to navigate the ship. This is also the reason that ships still employ flag communication, if there is no ability to communicate with other ships, the fleet will be vulnerable. Modern naval ships are designed to operate in the event that there could be electronic warfare, as that appears to be the future of naval warfare. (see the AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare Suite)
people don't need to be up there though
an EMP is also not as bad as you think. there's a whole field that focuses on protecting against the effects of an EMP, and other things like that. probably everything in a modern ship is already protected against this stuff

-stuff-
People do need to be up there; if they weren't the bridge would be a waste of space, and the crew would not be prepared in the event of the ship's incapacitation. I agree; an EMP is not that big of a threat, but I was more so referencing an event of electronic loss which can occur because of numerous reasons (taking fire, on-board accidents, etc.)

That being said, perhaps in the future we may see in-line bridges as the space requirement for the bridges, communications, and electronic warfare decreases and our RADAR and other devices become more reliable closer to sea level (There was a prototype for a stealth ship which did not feature a tower, but it was scrapped), who knows?

People do need to be up there; if they weren't the bridge would be a waste of space
yeah let's risk people's lives because otherwise we would be wasting space
and the crew would not be prepared in the event of the ship's incapacitation
so make it accessible to people. they still don't need to be up there constantly
it's also worth noting that submarines don't have bridges

edit: after looking up the definition of "bridge" the word is more broad than I thought. so submarines do have bridges. but I'm sure you get the point
« Last Edit: December 24, 2015, 07:20:22 PM by Foxscotch »


itt: we're all nasa engineers.

priceless.

yeah let's risk people's lives because otherwise we would be wasting spaceso make it accessible to people. they still don't need to be up there constantly
it's also worth noting that submarines don't have bridges

edit: after looking up the definition of "bridge" the word is more broad than I thought. so submarines do have bridges. but I'm sure you get the point
It's hardly any more of a risk than being anywhere else on the ship. (I think I already stated this but) the tower on a ship is one of the safest parts of the ship, its the most armored section, and the least important (if a ship takes out the bridge no problem, they wasted a shot they could have used to destroy a gun, missile rack, or explode the magazine) While it may be the least important, it still carries some significance, as it houses communications and all the navigation, but it isn't exactly a priority for an opposing ship to take out. Back before missiles, the bridge was most certainly a very dangerous place, but since smart missiles, they generally target the body of the ship to exploit the explosives generally stored below deck. I will also point out that it's not like ship bridges are constantly blown off and people die, it's still dangerous to be anywhere on a ship when a battle occurs.

UPDATE RELEASED BOIS.

>Goes to mining site so I can mine at night because stuffs too dark to do anything
>Sunrise
>Goes back to base
>Base is 15K Km away
>5Km left
>"Low fuel"
>SHEEEEIIIIIIT
>Emergency landing 3K km from base

Right now im building solar panels to recharge batteries

Okay so I got my solar panels and the constructor made like 90 more loving solar cells I needed (Keen please fix) so I had to find my chips, 3K km away from my loving base (I found it :^) and now I have to wait for sunrise

my stuff isnt recharging
help
« Last Edit: December 25, 2015, 02:20:09 PM by espio100 »