Star Trek Online Inertia and Turn Rate
 Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 1 Inertia and Turn Rate
02-15-2010, 01:42 AM
Hey, what's the difference between inertia and turn rate? What I have looked up shows says that the higher the inertia, the slower the turn rate; but this doesn't make any sense because the escorts have a higher inertia and turn rate then the cruisers. Can someone explain the difference between the two terms? Thanks.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
02-15-2010, 03:33 AM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by tuckers02 Hey, what's the difference between inertia and turn rate? What I have looked up shows says that the higher the inertia, the slower the turn rate; but this doesn't make any sense because the escorts have a higher inertia and turn rate then the cruisers. Can someone explain the difference between the two terms? Thanks.
The exact mechanics of turn rates and inertia are currently unclear.

My suspicion is that inertia isn't directly related to turn rate at all, but instead affects the rate at which a ship accelerates and decelerates. Although this may well have an affect on the 'shape' and radius of a turn, especially when turning while changing speed, I don't think it affects the actual turn rate - or at least it doesn't appear to from the testing I've been able to do so far.

I'm working on an article covering turn rates for The Engines Cannae Take It!, but it's something of a long-term project, as it'll require me to level several test characters to check different skills and ships.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
02-15-2010, 08:14 AM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by tuckers02 Hey, what's the difference between inertia and turn rate? What I have looked up shows says that the higher the inertia, the slower the turn rate; but this doesn't make any sense because the escorts have a higher inertia and turn rate then the cruisers. Can someone explain the difference between the two terms? Thanks.
Inertia is the resistance of a physical object to a change in its state of motion. In other words the amount of force required to stop a moving object, alter the course of a moving object, or move a stationary object in the first place.

The only reason I can think of as to why a cruiser (slow to turn/accellerate) would have less inertia than an Escort, (nippy and responsive) is that cryptics scale is backwards, so instead of showing actual inertia, they are showing a multiplier for the ratio of Energy to Inertial change.

e.g. (numbers made up for demo purposes!)

At 100 Engine/Aux power:
- a Cruiser with an inertial multiplier of 2 can move/turn at a rate of 200 (100x2)
- an Excort with an inertial multiplier of 10 can move/turn at a rate of 1000 (100x10)

Bare in mind (though as the poster above says, they may be unrelated in "cryptic world") Inertia itself doesn't care whether you are talking about straight line accelleration, or turn rate, both are changes in the state of motion of the object. Inertia would effect any change in the velocity or your ship (velocity being a speed with a given direction) In "crytpic world" acceleration is based on engine power, turn rate is based on Aux power. The distance (and time) taken to turn your ship right around would be a combination of these 2 elements (which is why you turn in a tighter angle when you slow down, but not necessarily "faster").

In Star Trek, the reason you don't get flattened like a bug on a windshield when you go to warp is due to the often abused for science purposes "Inertial Dampeners", systems which essentially remove the laws of inertia from your ship and everything in it, resulting in there being no inertial force to fight against when you accelerate. If STO was to wrap it up in pseudo science babble then the mystery inertia value stated in game could be thought of as the power of your inertial dampeners. A cruiser (which has more inertia in physics terms because it has more mass) only has "2" inertial damener units left once it's dealt with it's own bulk to remove the inertial effect. An escort with the same ability to dampen its inertial has 10 left as it's mass is much smaller, so there is less inertia to overcome.)

Worth remembering that Star trek physics in not real physics anyway. So cryptic can essentially do what they want with inertia!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
02-15-2010, 10:02 AM
No one really knows for sure how or whether turn rate and inertia interact. It clearly isn't based on real world physics as inertia is mass, yet in STO larger, more massive ships have lower inertia, and ships with the same inertia have completely different turning rates.

What I do know for sure, however, is that if you put some turn rate consoles on a Klingon battle cruiser, you sliiiiiide when you turn. Its funny, but most likely it is showing that inertia affects forward motion inversely but doesn't affect turn rate at all. So lower inertia means you can't stop on a dime as it were, and keep your forward momentum for a while, but it doesn't seem to impede turning. That seems to be the sole domain of the turn rate statistic.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5 oh you can bet on it
09-24-2010, 10:25 PM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Perdition Inertia is the resistance of a physical object to a change in its state of motion. In other words the amount of force required to stop a moving object, alter the course of a moving object, or move a stationary object in the first place. The only reason I can think of as to why a cruiser (slow to turn/accellerate) would have less inertia than an Escort, (nippy and responsive) is that cryptics scale is backwards, so instead of showing actual inertia, they are showing a multiplier for the ratio of Energy to Inertial change. e.g. (numbers made up for demo purposes!) At 100 Engine/Aux power: - a Cruiser with an inertial multiplier of 2 can move/turn at a rate of 200 (100x2) - an Excort with an inertial multiplier of 10 can move/turn at a rate of 1000 (100x10) Bare in mind (though as the poster above says, they may be unrelated in "cryptic world") Inertia itself doesn't care whether you are talking about straight line accelleration, or turn rate, both are changes in the state of motion of the object. Inertia would effect any change in the velocity or your ship (velocity being a speed with a given direction) In "crytpic world" acceleration is based on engine power, turn rate is based on Aux power. The distance (and time) taken to turn your ship right around would be a combination of these 2 elements (which is why you turn in a tighter angle when you slow down, but not necessarily "faster"). In Star Trek, the reason you don't get flattened like a bug on a windshield when you go to warp is due to the often abused for science purposes "Inertial Dampeners", systems which essentially remove the laws of inertia from your ship and everything in it, resulting in there being no inertial force to fight against when you accelerate. If STO was to wrap it up in pseudo science babble then the mystery inertia value stated in game could be thought of as the power of your inertial dampeners. A cruiser (which has more inertia in physics terms because it has more mass) only has "2" inertial damener units left once it's dealt with it's own bulk to remove the inertial effect. An escort with the same ability to dampen its inertial has 10 left as it's mass is much smaller, so there is less inertia to overcome.) Worth remembering that Star trek physics in not real physics anyway. So cryptic can essentially do what they want with inertia!

You hit it square on the head. Cryptic IS backwards in so many ways, too many to list here.

The game doesn't conform to any real world physics and it shows ! A few tweaks to make things go faster, but not what they have done. Beside that Cryptic does not understand what Cannon means, i.e., NOT screwing up names, ship class, appearance, history and just about every other thing. They have locked out full 3D operation for us starship fliers. The UI is absolutely awful in design - it ought be as well made as the character engine they have given us so the player can make the UI as they would like, instead of conforming to Cryptic's near useless UI. (Some games developers spend hundreds of thousands of dollars for public opinion - to make their game better)
Moreover, the interiors they handed out to us all look alike and further, are not proportionally sized (not realistic) in that the same size and style interior is being used for large and small ships, alike. Lastly, why can't our character simply sit down on a chair (particularly on the bridge) and stay there until summoned? I for one, would enjoy flying from the bridge but Cryptic will not allow it.

Cryptic really needs to pay attention to realism, instead of throwing at us THEIR OWN RIDICULOUS CONCEPT of Star Trek It's like they never heard of Gene Roddenberry, wish he was still around to tell off Cryptic - no, he wouldn't do that - he would have his own ways of setting them straight.

This may all be moot as I am of the understanding that new people are working on STO (got rid of the incompetents - mostly) and it's being redone the right way. Maybe they are listening. That in about two years, it will be completely different - it will have a new game engine - it will be cannon (finally) - maybe full 3D - AND none of these freaking consoles to make the ship fly, a ship will be equipped with all the accouterments normally on the different types of star ships and you LEARN how to operate the equipment. And no switching technology with few exceptions, if the engineer can match up the technology - We know Feds can do a cloak and have a phasing/cloak (locked away due to treaty), but everything else is unknown because different species use different technology.

Anyway, Good Post, it's right on.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6 Popa is a clown Troll
09-27-2010, 08:18 AM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by popa REPLY: You hit it square on the head. Cryptic IS backwards in so many ways, too many to list here. The game doesn't conform to any real world physics and it shows ! A few tweaks to make things go faster, but not what they have done. Beside that Cryptic does not understand what Cannon means, i.e., NOT screwing up names, ship class, appearance, history and just about every other thing. They have locked out full 3D operation for us starship fliers. The UI is absolutely awful in design - it ought be as well made as the character engine they have given us so the player can make the UI as they would like, instead of conforming to Cryptic's near useless UI. (Some games developers spend hundreds of thousands of dollars for public opinion - to make their game better) Moreover, the interiors they handed out to us all look alike and further, are not proportionally sized (not realistic) in that the same size and style interior is being used for large and small ships, alike. Lastly, why can't our character simply sit down on a chair (particularly on the bridge) and stay there until summoned? I for one, would enjoy flying from the bridge but Cryptic will not allow it. Cryptic really needs to pay attention to realism, instead of throwing at us THEIR OWN RIDICULOUS CONCEPT of Star Trek It's like they never heard of Gene Roddenberry, wish he was still around to tell off Cryptic - no, he wouldn't do that - he would have his own ways of setting them straight. This may all be moot as I am of the understanding that new people are working on STO (got rid of the incompetents - mostly) and it's being redone the right way. Maybe they are listening. That in about two years, it will be completely different - it will have a new game engine - it will be cannon (finally) - maybe full 3D - AND none of these freaking consoles to make the ship fly, a ship will be equipped with all the accouterments normally on the different types of star ships and you LEARN how to operate the equipment. And no switching technology with few exceptions, if the engineer can match up the technology - We know Feds can do a cloak and have a phasing/cloak (locked away due to treaty), but everything else is unknown because different species use different technology. Anyway, Good Post, it's right on.
Muwhahahaa rediculous it's a game ... and a space one ofcourse it doesn't complains to the real world physic.
Popa you that is so clever can you explain to us in few words what should be the real world physics of a light speed science fiction (fantasy) spaceship ? HAve you palyed any other video game space based ?
The physic is the same...

The whole fake gravity generator and light speed warp engine is a complete fantasy in Star Trek universe you know that ? in real wold there is no sutch things.... Eisntein stated it was impossible to go further the light speed for a body with a mass but in Star Trek they do it instantly and achieve warp 9.9. In reallity the inertia accumulated by a near to light speed travel is so massive that to stop it if would take you 10 000 times the energy amount use to arrive to the close to light speed state.. This is reallity.. Star Trek is a Science Fiction... And STO is a game based on yet not realistic thing so why they should be realistic ?

If we take your claim for realism serriously so this means traveling from Earth Space dock to Vulcan should take us 16 years to travel to it at light speed (warp 1) ? Do you find this exploitable as a game ?

This is an example of what fitting to the "physics realistic" of the Star Trek univers means. All the Ships class can't achieve Warp 9.9 speed. For instant if Warp speed means going at light speed warp 9.9 means going a light speed exponential speed 9.9 times not only going 9.9 times faster than the light speed this is a fantasy wake up Popa!

...only few prototype can like the U.S.S. Voyager (Warp 9.975) can achieve that speed. And even at this speed of Warp 9.975 going to Vulvain take 1 week... You have to realise that most of the time of a Star Trek space traveler is spent in waiting to arrive at destination...
And when you see the series even the first one they cover hudge distance from one episode to another without aging according to the supposed time spent travelling ... Plus they are not effected by time distortion that traveling after the light speed means. If you want to be realistic you can too notice that most of the time it take like 1 torpedo well placed to end the ennemies ships. For example in Star Trek : Generation the enterprise B (class Exelsior) is severly damage by a single plasma lightning comming from the ribbon nexus. the Enterprise D (a class galaxy) commanded by picard is destroyed after receiving 3 plasma torpedoes synchronised on the enterprise Shields. Is that the kind of realist physic that makes a game fun ???

After all STO is a mmorpg so yes they have to sort the ship class and give them a role. Since in the series you have Cruiser escort and scientific class of starship that's ok to take that as a base to make them fit with the class requierement of a MMORPG...

If you are realistic in STO you should go to the Starfleet academy for 5 years before being promoted Enseign and affected to your first starship... LOL more we think of a realistic Role playing game around Star Trek less it looks like a game ....

Their main contract is to feet to the Star Trek univers and make a game out of it. Nothing more. Do you know that Star Trek is not a brand that belongs to Cryptic and if Cryptic doesn't fullfill the brand requierement they loose their right of exploitation?

Eve online for example when you get close to a planet you are not sucked by it's gravity and you don't crash on the planet. Massive stars doesn't influence you cruise. So why EVE Online should be a physic fantasy based space game and not STO ?

Popa once again you complain but you don't come with precise solution... You claim being a retired senior programer you then should know as a senior guy tthat saying "I don't like this I dont" like tha"t isn't enough to be called a constructive suggestion.

If you want cryptic to listen to you start by defining with a precise list of changes what you call a realistic physic system. I'm sure once you do it most paople around here would find your concrete proposition completly retarded. And utimately you still can ask to work with Cryptic even for free since you are retired...
But with sutch a Troll as you I'm not sure even for free they would like to have anything to do with you.

The awfull UI is based on the L-CAR design as a hudge fan you should know what it is... And compared to many other MMORPG the UI of STO is one of the best looking.

Cryptic should pay attention to be realistic about a science fiction movie/series? oooooooooh ???
MUWHAHAHAHAHAHAH since when a vulcan or a klingon or a borg or a tribble are based on reality ?

You have to understand Popa new features, more choice, more realistic, much cooler UI means more data, means more work, means more people to work, means more time to do so, means more monney spent, means more clients to pay the abonements, means a bigger size of the Client game. It's actually at a size double than the initial 4.5Go of the dvd you got when you bought your game box. This means already for a guy buying the same box as you do to be updated a 3 hours of extra download on first login to STO. If we follow you Cryptic should even enhance this already long time on first update?

Popa one last ask as you don't reply to the flame topic you started about Gene Roddenberry why are you such a troll ? You know Cryptic have nothing to do with the fact you brainlessly spent 300 bucks for your game box and your life time abonement. This decision is due to you only and as an adult you should learn to live with your own mistakes instead of puting the blame on others.

Oh Popa if you want the truth about why Cryptic doesn't listen to what you say... well they probably just don't care their game is making monney thanks to troll like you so if the conterpart for is is being criticised I humbly think that's a price they are ready to pay.

As for the inertia and turn rate the idea is to gie you a little advantage over the other class but it's not supposed to completly unbalance the game like you claim in a realistic physic way. The game would be less fun if the topedoes and the beams or torpedos were not magnetised by the target you are targeting. Aiming at a target would be a true pain and then you would post another flame saying that's stupid to have those ships moving high speed all around you and your unable to target them and damage them...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
09-27-2010, 10:09 AM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by tuckers02 Hey, what's the difference between inertia and turn rate? What I have looked up shows says that the higher the inertia, the slower the turn rate; but this doesn't make any sense because the escorts have a higher inertia and turn rate then the cruisers. Can someone explain the difference between the two terms? Thanks.
There's a good break down on how the game mechanics work here ( note that since the time of the article the aux power value no longer affects turn rate, as that modifier was moved to the engine power value) :

The Engines Cannae Take It : Starship mechanics ( Turn Rate)

So basically, from the article, the Cryptic inertia value only affects straight line acceleration and deceleration in this game. (as mentioned already the Cryptic numbers for inertia are backwards compared to real life, greater inertia should be larger number)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
09-28-2010, 09:14 AM
but greater inertia to fit the reality is not reasonable... First you evolve in space in space their is a vacum so the deceleration due to some outside frictions are negligeable. So once you build up inertia force in a direction you then have to build the same force on the oposite direction to make you ship decelerated. This means I bigger reaction time to stop you ship and change direction. This systeme kills the fun.

In the 80's i played video game using that principle of applyinh an equivlent force to the oposite direction to fight the inertia and makes the ship stop. The reaction time and the overall manoeuvrability were trully awfull.

As we talk about inertia in startrek they invented a lot of fantasy based device to get ride off those reallistic physics problems. They have inertia filed generatiors that act like a de break to make the ship decelerate etc... So blame cryptic all you want but the one comming with those artifact fantasy based are
the author of star trek in first place.

For you people in the serie it's perfectly natural to have a ship that jumps instantaneously at a speed many times over the light speed and that loose this velocity in an instant without following the rules of inertia.
Warp propulsion works in star trek like a switch you turn it on you are in WArp speed you turn it off you are back to impulsion speed where did go all the inertia built at warp speed ? Noone knows... Then you come with realistic physics claims. That's funby

If turn rate from escorts would reflect reality the PVP fight of the PVE fight would be almost impossible to manage. You would experience pretty fast mouving ennemies that doesn't allow you to target them properly most of the time.

But claiming realistic physic from a video game which is by definition moking the reality is very surprising...

But i know Popa when he can find an argument to say 'Cryptic is the worst' he jump on the occasion. Popa is following a personal vandetta against Cryptic.
Captain
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 718
# 9
06-28-2014, 06:56 PM
I believe inertia and turn rate are all relative. Inertia is nothing more than stored energy (energy as in Physics, not power levels). Turn rate is, just that, the rate at which your ship turns unaffected by mass since you are in space. But you still have Inertia which gives a boost to turn rate. That's why with your escort example, the high inertia was bonus energy that increased the turn rate. The base turn rate listed is a hypothetical number conceived around the idea that the ship has no inertia, or stored energy as all matter does. This is a physics blunder on the developer's part but the programming has been designed to counter that. The developers added Inertia to fill the X value of the programming's logic. Otherwise, the game was forced to assume that matter does not have energy which defy's the laws of physics. You are probably thinking, "doesn't the whole game defy the laws of physics?". The answer is no, in most cases, since nothing has to be proven in a fantasy...the game can assume that all theories are true. I hope this answers your question.

Hey hey now!

Seriously folks, if a thread hasn't been responded to in 30 days please don't bring it back up If you feel you need to continue the thread by all means make a new one!

/Closed