Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 435
# 1 Turn Rates
09-26-2012, 05:54 AM
With the latest patch on tribble the Saber class and the Aquarius got the same turn rate the Defiant has:

1.) I like it that the 17 in not anymore exclusive to the Defiant.

2.) What I don't like is that there is no consistency in the turn rates.

The Defiant is 120M long and has a turn rate of 17 how can a ship that is 223M long have the same turn rate? https://dl.dropbox.com/u/46248799/fleet-chart.jpg

The Saber class is 103M longer than the Defiant, I hope you will give the Defiant a turn rate of 19 so she is more in line with what we have seen in DS9 and please also update the shield modifier of the Defiant to 0.99

Thanks
T6 Miranda and T6 Oberth FTW!

Last edited by bridgern; 09-26-2012 at 06:12 AM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 23
# 2
09-26-2012, 05:59 AM
I completely agree with you there. The ships in this game are not very accurate, but things like this would increase fun in game play.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 154
# 3
09-26-2012, 09:14 AM
Turn rates seem to be based on stats not size. The Akira is twice the size of the Nova, but the Nova because its a science vessel not escort, is 2 turn rates lower.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,416
# 4
09-26-2012, 07:48 PM
The Saber has larger engines as the Defiant, so in means of Thrust to Weight Ratio, they are relatively the same.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 116
# 5
09-26-2012, 08:50 PM
Thrust to weight isn't what defines ability to turn, moment of inertia is. An object that is long and thin turns worse than an object that is short and squat. A spaceship that is long and tubular, therefore, has considerably worse turning than one that is spherical. So realistically, the Sovereign, which is long and thin, should have worse turning than the Galaxy, which despite its larger bulk, is comparatively squat.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,620
# 6
09-26-2012, 10:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkname View Post
Thrust to weight isn't what defines ability to turn, moment of inertia is. An object that is long and thin turns worse than an object that is short and squat. A spaceship that is long and tubular, therefore, has considerably worse turning than one that is spherical. So realistically, the Sovereign, which is long and thin, should have worse turning than the Galaxy, which despite its larger bulk, is comparatively squat.
Actualy inertia would more affect your ability to change heading since a high inertia would mean it takes more power to alter your direction of travel. It would have little to do with how quickly you could change your orientation. Engine placement would affect this more in space since the closer to your center of gravity your engine in the better it can re-orient you. this is probably why we see impulse engined mounted near the center points of the ship and not at the far aft.

On a side note, it has bees said the impulse engines are not reaction based so technicaly there is no thrust. The only reaction based engines are the reaction controll thrusters but those seem to be more of a stability system then an actual motive force.
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 116
# 7
09-26-2012, 10:41 PM
Since "turning" on a ship is about changing which way you are facing, inertia has nothing to do with this. You'll just make an awesome powerslide in the process, and this? This is good. I like powersliding on my ships, it helps me swing by while staying on target.
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,691
# 8
09-26-2012, 10:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkname View Post
Since "turning" on a ship is about changing which way you are facing, inertia has nothing to do with this. You'll just make an awesome powerslide in the process, and this? This is good. I like powersliding on my ships, it helps me swing by while staying on target.
YUP

on another note the Atrox could use a +1 or +2 bump on the base turn rate....i know its a carrier but come on...even with 3 mk 11 blue rcs consoles it still turns like a behemoth....oh wait it IS a behemoth lol (cannons and turrets FTW.

I know its large and all, but all the other ships ive seen have a visible speed in turning compared to the Atrox (which has a HUGE engine that i think would help with turning just a bit more), hell my mirror assault cruiser turns faster than the atrox...

however, that being said, isn't there other ships that have the same base turn rate?

Quote:
Originally Posted by borticuscryptic View Post
I find this line of replies sadly hilarious. We put a lot of work into the massive list of fixes/changes above, and ya'll are hung up on the ability to skip our content. =p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 116
# 9
09-27-2012, 12:14 AM
Yes, well, that's what you get for driving a massive barge. MUAC is way smaller than that gargantuan carrier.

And no, a huge engine wouldn't help at all in turning, alas. Main engines are generally mounted along your center line, so that you can thrust without going into a spin. Being located close to your center, they provide little to no torque, and therefore, have basically no effect on turning, which is performed either by maneuvering jets or internal gyros.

And I imagine "being able to turn rapidly" was not high on the list of design priorities for a carrier. It certainly isn't in real life...
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:15 PM.