EVE Search - Curious Jones asks a question: Is there a counter to bumping?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Curious Jones asks a question: Is there a counter to bumping?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.08.21 16:53:00 - [1] I always cringe when I see people using kinetic energy to describe 'collisions'. It's momentum thatÆs conserved dammit!
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.08.21 17:55:00 - [2] Originally by: SurrenderMonkey Originally by: Gabriel Karade I always cringe when I see people using kinetic energy to describe 'collisions'. It's momentum thatÆs conserved dammit! Which is nice and all, but momentum doesn't tell us a whole lot about the havoc that would be wreaked. Kinetic energy does. :D If we're just talking about the final velocity of two masses colliding with each other, then I guess we could stick with momentum, but a lot of this conversation has been about the fact that an interceptor colliding with a battleship would likely annihilate them both. Er, yes it does: Impulse (J) = Mv - Mu (v = object velocity after, u = object velocity before, J = int{Fdt} ) Once you have the forces involved you can look at the yield strength of the materials involved and.... (sure you get the point)
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.08.21 19:09:00 - [3] Originally by: SurrenderMonkey Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: SurrenderMonkey Originally by: Gabriel Karade I always cringe when I see people using kinetic energy to describe 'collisions'. It's momentum thatÆs conserved dammit! Which is nice and all, but momentum doesn't tell us a whole lot about the havoc that would be wreaked. Kinetic energy does. :D If we're just talking about the final velocity of two masses colliding with each other, then I guess we could stick with momentum, but a lot of this conversation has been about the fact that an interceptor colliding with a battleship would likely annihilate them both. Er, yes it does: Impulse (J) = Mv - Mu (v = object velocity after, u = object velocity before, J = int{Fdt} ) Once you have the forces involved you can look at the yield strength of the materials involved and.... (sure you get the point) That's almost as backwards as using KE for collisions, tbh. KE isn't conserved in collisions, which is where most people go wrong. -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.08.21 19:27:00 - [4] Originally by: SurrenderMonkey Edited by: SurrenderMonkey on 21/08/2008 19:15:51 Originally by: Gabriel Karade KE isn't conserved in collisions, which is where most people go wrong. KE actually is preserved in a perfectly elastic collision. Doesn't exist IRL, of course, but Eve obviously doesn't use RL physics. But of course, in a perfectly elastic collision no-one really cares if you have the KE equivalent to a small Nuke... Anyhow, proper collisions would be cool, but with so many pitfalls re. balance, probably never going to happen... -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.08.21 19:45:00 - [5] Originally by: SurrenderMonkey Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: SurrenderMonkey Edited by: SurrenderMonkey on 21/08/2008 19:15:51 Originally by: Gabriel Karade KE isn't conserved in collisions, which is where most people go wrong. KE actually is preserved in a perfectly elastic collision. Doesn't exist IRL, of course, but Eve obviously doesn't use RL physics. But of course, in a perfectly elastic collision no-one really cares if you have the KE equivalent to a small Nuke... Anyhow, proper collisions would be cool, but with so many pitfalls re. balance, probably never going to happen... An alt in a tech1 frigate with a microwarpdrive would probably be the most frequently used weapon in the game if we had proper collision. For balance reasons you'd probably use some kind of simple logarithmic function of ships mass, so that you see greatly diminishing returns, i.e. you want to cause big damage you need to use something similarly sized. -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.08.21 20:22:00 - [6] You could also argue that, a ship using MWD 'trickery' doesn't have the same 'real' kinetic energy and momentum; the huge speed increase over that attainable with afterburners implies something exotic. Or in a 'fluff' way: "collision causes the field to collapse, causing the ship to revert to its real mass/velocity state" i.e - your 6 km/sec 'manned missile' reverts to a 500 m/sec 'manned missile' and does, to use the phrase, get squashed on the windshield like a bug... But even overcomming that, you'd still have to consider the CONCORD thinking on the matter.... "hmm are we supposed to shoot pilot A, or do we shoot pilot B?" -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.