54 replies to this topic

[Mawai]

Grek Green, on 20 January 2016 - 09:05 PM, said:

Who remembers this?


Almost seven years... where are our collapsible buildings and exploding mech cores?

That was a trailer that PGI produced to try to get funding for a Mechwarrior 5 PVE game. It actually has nothing to do with MWO and it might be better if PGI had not used it in promotional materials.

The following are all easy to do in PVE
1) destructible terrain
2) functional cockpit controls
3) exploding mechs

In a multiplayer PVP environment you have the following problems
1) Coordination and synchronization of falling buildings across 24 clients.
... what happens if one of those players is under a falling building?
... what happens if the fall of the building permits a line of sight for one player that another player has not even had rendered on their client yet ... can they be shot through the building?
2) They are working on adding functional cockpit controls but any UI overhead that either slows the game or makes it more complicated to control can be problematic in a multiplayer shooting game
3) Exploding mechs ... in a multi-player situation this opens up abuses like suicide charges and griefing .. beside the fact that mech's fusion engines can't explode ... Battletech fiction notwithstanding. Very few folks actually want to see mech explosions.

So ... all your points are moot ... trailer for a different game containing features that are mostly irrelevant or not wanted in a multiplayer online PVP game.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Grek Green, on 20 January 2016 - 09:05 PM, said:

Who remembers this?


Almost seven years... where are our collapsible buildings and exploding mech cores?

better yet, look at screenshots from CB. The game actually looks worse now

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Mawai, on 21 January 2016 - 09:30 AM, said:

That was a trailer that PGI produced to try to get funding for a Mechwarrior 5 PVE game. It actually has nothing to do with MWO and it might be better if PGI had not used it in promotional materials.

The following are all easy to do in PVE
1) destructible terrain
2) functional cockpit controls
3) exploding mechs

In a multiplayer PVP environment you have the following problems
1) Coordination and synchronization of falling buildings across 24 clients.
... what happens if one of those players is under a falling building?
... what happens if the fall of the building permits a line of sight for one player that another player has not even had rendered on their client yet ... can they be shot through the building?
2) They are working on adding functional cockpit controls but any UI overhead that either slows the game or makes it more complicated to control can be problematic in a multiplayer shooting game
3) Exploding mechs ... in a multi-player situation this opens up abuses like suicide charges and griefing .. beside the fact that mech's fusion engines can't explode ... Battletech fiction notwithstanding. Very few folks actually want to see mech explosions.

So ... all your points are moot ... trailer for a different game containing features that are mostly irrelevant or not wanted in a multiplayer online PVP game.

Actually a good number of us would like most of what's in this trailer.

I do agree on the stackpoling though... stackpoling is lame.

[Lily from animove]

Yeonne Greene, on 21 January 2016 - 09:20 AM, said:

What do you think is accelerating the projectile in a PPC (yes, it is a projectile)?

Electromagnets.

source? beause this is claimed yet not even true, th PPC is some kind of ion particle cannon by lore. now read a bit about this theory, It basically si closer to a lser type wepaon than being related to electro magnets.

[Y E O N N E]

Lily from animove, on 21 January 2016 - 09:48 AM, said:

source? beause this is claimed yet not even true, th PPC is some kind of ion particle cannon by lore. now read a bit about this theory, It basically si closer to a lser type wepaon than being related to electro magnets.

Projectiles are made up of atoms.

An ion is an atom with a charge (because it has more or less electrons than is normal).

How do you accelerate a charged particle like an ion? With electromagnets. What, you thought we just magicked it up to speed?


Both the PPC and a ballistic cannon deal damage primarily via transfer of kinetic energy from a fast-moving, massive (as in, has mass, not that it necessarily has a lot of it) into a point on the target. Remember that old equation from Physics 101, KE = 0.5m(v^2)? Yeah, it applies here. You can take a heavy object like a cannon shell and accelerate it to some velocity to obtain a given energy...OR...you can take a very, very light object like an ion and accelerate it to close to the speed of light to obtain the same energy. The particle is actually more lethal for two reasons: 1.) same energy in a smaller cross-section means better penetration and 2.) radiation from Bremsstrahlung can kill the soft organics inside without necessarily damaging the 'Mech significantly.

There is very, very little relationship between how a laser works and how a particle accelerator works. You could say "but a laser accelerates photons" and you would be wrong because A.) photons are not accelerated, they are emitted, and they are not even particles, they are wave-particles, and B.) photons have no mass and do all of their damage purely through exposure to electromagnetic flux.

The only similarity is in the power support infrastructure, which is what we were talking about with regard to capacitors.

[1Grimbane]

since a ppc in an open ended particle accelerator:



par·ti·cle ac·cel·er·a·tor

noun

• 
  
  an apparatus for accelerating subatomic particles to high velocities by means of electric or electromagnetic fields. The accelerated particles are generally made to collide with other particles, either as a research technique or for the generation of high-energy X-rays and gamma rays.
  
• 
  
  
  
  source.... dictionary

Edited by 1Grimbane, 21 January 2016 - 10:04 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 21 January 2016 - 09:33 AM, said:

better yet, look at screenshots from CB. The game actually looks worse now

Of course it does. As players added more and more Potatoes and Toasters to PGI's servers, they were forced to accommodate them. The CB had way fewer Users and likely way fewer Potatoes and Toasters involved.

[Y E O N N E]

1Grimbane, on 21 January 2016 - 10:04 AM, said:

since a ppc in an open ended particle accelerator:



par·ti·cle ac·cel·er·a·tor

noun

• 
  
  
  
  an apparatus for accelerating subatomic particles to high velocities by means of electric or electromagnetic fields. The accelerated particles are generally made to collide with other particles, either as a research technique or for the generation of high-energy X-rays and gamma rays.
  
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  source.... dictionary

Plot-twist:

CRT monitors/TVs are particle accelerators.

True story.

[Satan n stuff]

Yeonne Greene, on 21 January 2016 - 10:41 AM, said:

Plot-twist:

CRT monitors/TVs are particle accelerators.

True story.

It's right there in the name if you know what CRT actually means.
https://en.wikipedia...#In_electronics

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Almond Brown, on 21 January 2016 - 10:30 AM, said:

Of course it does. As players added more and more Potatoes and Toasters to PGI's servers, they were forced to accommodate them. The CB had way fewer Users and likely way fewer Potatoes and Toasters involved.

you have it VERY backwards.

There were millions of players in CB. There arent millions now, even with Steam

[1Grimbane]

the type of electrical energy used in the cathode ray lacks the kinetic energy for any damage potential lol but i'll throw my old 19in at an atlas and see what happens lol but yeah i get what your saying

[Lily from animove]

Yeonne Greene, on 21 January 2016 - 10:02 AM, said:

Projectiles are made up of atoms.

An ion is an atom with a charge (because it has more or less electrons than is normal).

How do you accelerate a charged particle like an ion? With electromagnets. What, you thought we just magicked it up to speed?


Both the PPC and a ballistic cannon deal damage primarily via transfer of kinetic energy from a fast-moving, massive (as in, has mass, not that it necessarily has a lot of it) into a point on the target. Remember that old equation from Physics 101, KE = 0.5m(v^2)? Yeah, it applies here. You can take a heavy object like a cannon shell and accelerate it to some velocity to obtain a given energy...OR...you can take a very, very light object like an ion and accelerate it to close to the speed of light to obtain the same energy. The particle is actually more lethal for two reasons: 1.) same energy in a smaller cross-section means better penetration and 2.) radiation from Bremsstrahlung can kill the soft organics inside without necessarily damaging the 'Mech significantly.

There is very, very little relationship between how a laser works and how a particle accelerator works. You could say "but a laser accelerates photons" and you would be wrong because A.) photons are not accelerated, they are emitted, and they are not even particles, they are wave-particles, and B.) photons have no mass and do all of their damage purely through exposure to electromagnetic flux.

The only similarity is in the power support infrastructure, which is what we were talking about with regard to capacitors.

please read something about how a gauss cannon works and how an ion accelerator works. The causs would trigger its coils to do some random stuff which will affect the projectile, The ion cannon not os much, it would more or less just collapse.

I just can't exlain this in english at all. It's too complicated and I may use some technical terms incrrectly..

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 21 January 2016 - 11:12 PM, said:

you have it VERY backwards.

There were millions of players in CB. There arent millions now, even with Steam

source.

[mogs01gt]

Grek Green, on 20 January 2016 - 09:05 PM, said:

Who remembers this?


Almost seven years... where are our collapsible buildings and exploding mech cores?

The lack of torso twisting is disheartening!

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Lily from animove, on 22 January 2016 - 05:25 AM, said:

source.

http://www.gamasutra...r_milestone.php

http://www.engadget....unders-program/

[Y E O N N E]

Lily from animove, on 22 January 2016 - 05:25 AM, said:

please read something about how a gauss cannon works and how an ion accelerator works. The causs would trigger its coils to do some random stuff which will affect the projectile, The ion cannon not os much, it would more or less just collapse.

I just can't exlain this in english at all. It's too complicated and I may use some technical terms incrrectly..

You have nothing to lose by trying to explain, and everything to lose by continuing to let me think you still have no idea what you are talking about. You are talking about beam scattering, right?



First, general operating principle:

Spoiler

A Gauss round is a ferromagnetic projectile accelerated by a series of pushes from coiled electromagnets activated in sequence. None of the coils are energized at any time until it is time for them to provide their pull and, unlike a rail-gun, these coils are not trying to fly apart. The forces acting are along the axis of projectile travel, whereas in a rail-gun they are orthogonal to it.

Now, electromagnet might be a little bit of misnomer for a particle accelerator since we're actually using electric fields and not magnetic fields, but it's the essentially same principle and even using the same theories on electromagnetism. We have a source of ions being pulled through a series of electrically charged tubes.

Both machines operate by taking advantage of electromagnetic properties, namely charge and polarity, to provide a means of acceleration and both are using a series of fast-switching fields to provide the force necessary to move the projectile. The electrode tubes are directly analogous to the magnetic coils in a Gauss rifle. Even if we go with your flawed volatile-coils theory, the analogous electrodes in our PPC are going to be similarly volatile because they have to juice that ion to go fast enough to deal damage similar to the Gauss rifle. In fact, before accounting for losses they have to be operating with the same total system energies if you have the same kinetic energy from the muzzle due to the law of the conservation of energy.

That said, you are still trying to argue that an ion is not a projectile, which is flat-out un-true. If I shoot a 1200 kg shell at you from my battleship's main 16-inch (406 mm) battery, and each shot moves at 770 m/s, then the muzzle energy is 355.7 MJ. If I want to get the same energy out of a 5-inch Gauss Rifle with a projectile of 64 kg, I will need a muzzle velocity of 3,334 m/s. If I want to get the same energy out of a single hydrogen ion (read: a proton), then I need to swap to the relativistic equations and I get a velocity that is some significant fraction of the speed of light; in this case, that velocity is 99.9999997% the speed of light. But...it's still a projectile and it still contains the same energy as our 1200 kg shell or 64 kg Gauss slug. That said, it's also not going to travel very far, since it's so insufficiently massive that it will ricochet off of other particles in the air, releasing new particles and radiation in the process. That's why current particle accelerators operate in a vacuum. That's also why it would just "collapse" on a breach, as you so put it. Since this is weapons-grade, though, we can conclude that our particle stream is tailored to propagate through an atmosphere using a charged, high-density, extremely high-energy particle stream. As such, it's going to have the potential to blow a hole through or melt the weapon if misaligned nearer the exit point, just like a Gauss rifle, or fizzle if misaligned nearer the breach...again, like a Gauss rifle.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 22 January 2016 - 09:04 AM.