razark

Members
  • Content count

    1831
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2275 Excellent

1 Follower

About razark

  • Rank
    Rocket Scientist

Profile Information

  • Location Houston, TX

Recent Profile Visitors

5576 profile views
  1. Except that this idea is exactly that. It warps one object in the universe, while not affecting everything else. And as repeatedly acknowledged, yes, it breaks physics and gives you one magically moving object.
  2. I didn't say you (specifically) were. It's obvious that you are opposed to the idea, and why. The post I quoted specifically referred to different time frames, however.
  3. If the DLC includes a new executable with the needed code to replace the one in the standard game, why not?
  4. No, all objects are still in the same timeframe. This is NOT timewarp. (@Tex, perhaps that's why people are confused about it? Maybe call it something else, but never refer to it as timewarp?) Your ship is moved along it's own rail at a higher rate than it moves by itself. For example, imagine a ship moving in a straight line at 10 km per minute. At 1 minute, it's traveled 10 km. At 2 minutes, 20 km. At 3, 30 km. and so forth. The Mun, Minmus, Jool, Joe's space station, Emily's capsule, and John's mothership are unaffected. They experience 1, 2, or three minutes of time passing. Your ship? It also experiences the exact same three minutes passing. Now, we turn on magicwarp at 2x. At 1 minute, it's traveled 20km. At 2 minutes, 40 km. 3 minutes, 60 km. The Mun, Minmus, Jool, Joe's space station, Emily's capsule, and John's mothership are unaffected. They experience 1, 2, or three minutes of time passing. The same as your ship. Let's up the magicwarp to 10x: At 1 minute, it's traveled 100km. At 2 minutes, 200 km. 3 minutes, 300 km. The Mun, Minmus, Jool, Joe's space station, Emily's capsule, and John's mothership are unaffected. They experience 1, 2, or three minutes of time passing. The same as your ship. To the physics engine, however, it's still moving at 10 km/m. It interacts with the world for all purposes except it's location as though it is moving at 10 km/m. If it impacts a stationary object, it impacts with the force of a 10km/m object. It, and every object in the game, is all contained in a single, shared timeframe. Let's say you're going to the Mun. It's going to take you an 10 minutes to get there, so you turn on magicwarp at 10x. You now travel to the Mun in 1 minute. "But, but, but," I hear you cry, "the Mun won't be there!" Well, yeah. So when you set up your maneuver, you don't aim for where the Mun would be in 10 minutes. Aim for where it will be in the 1 minute you actually spend traveling. And yes, it breaks the physics of the game. Of course, once you stop warping, the physics are back to where they were, and you can get on with playing. Any multiplayer system is going to be a set of tradeoffs.
  5. Of course not. Bogey goes on the top shelf. Box sets are on a different row. But they have met before.
  6. My copy of The Maltese Falcon has never hooked up with my Indiana Jones box set.
  7. Goddard wasn't launching crewed vessels. The barn works if we can start out with small sounding rockets like Goddard, but by the time something on the level of Mercury or Vostok is involved, the barn should be long gone.
  8. Hrm. I'd have to say that this is one of the first unique solutions to the question I've seen in a while. And imagine the new challenges, such as docking to a station that doing twice orbital velocity! However, it doesn't address all the problems timewarp is supposed to solve. As @John FX mentions above, if the time isn't actually moving forward faster, this sort of non-timewarp isn't going to be useful for getting to a transfer window any faster. (But then again, would that matter as much if you've broken the thrust/delta-v/velocity balance?)
  9. There's a difference between two options and two categories of options. Do you understand at least that much? If not, then this whole discussion has been worthless and can end here. However, if you do, I will continue that all the options fall into one of the two categories. Perhaps the problem is that you've been discussing the options, while I have been discussing the categories? I am personally waiting to see what quality the work they release has before I declare the imminent death of the game. Only then will I be able to judge the abilities of the devs currently working for Squad. The fact that they are making a DLC expansion kind of points out that major features are still a possibility.
  10. Just the parts that are completely irrelevant to the point under discussion.
  11. 1 and 2 are "wait". 4 is "sync issues". 3? That's just "wait until the admin decides to warp". (Or "wait until someone actually wants to play with this admin".) Still falls under waiting. Yes, because all "modes" fall under some concept. It's a lot easier to talk about the basic concepts than to describe every possible multiplayer timewarp handling system.
  12. If all players are timewarping at the same time, is there someone that will have to wait at least part of the time to do what they wish to do? Possibly, but the point is that any of the three (or their multiple sub-types) all require either that someone waits or allows sync issues.
  13. I've got a ship in orbit. I want to get to the other side of my orbit to make a Trans-Munar Injection, but I don't want to wait a long time, so I warp. What happens to my orbit?
  14. That falls under the "wait" category. Someone will have to wait until everyone else is ready to timewarp.