Free Allegiance Forums

I have to say that girly explanation is just.....stupid, physically speaking. That, and saying that the mighty FSM created the alleg environment is just the same. Yes, it's good from the point that it "explains" (gives a reason) to the alleg environment, but it's stupid from the point that it tries to make it like if it was reality while it has nothing to do with it.

I think there's a difference between sci-fi and imagination, and if you think the latest Star-Trek movie is pure sci-fi...you don't agree with me (that time-travelling-through-black-hole stuff hurt badly....).

I'd rather put the other thing: your computer simulates sounds and ships, and the rest is for gameplay. Also, we should say alleg does not have newtonian physics, but only newtonian dynamics (the latest is included in the first, but the first implies lots of other things).

The whole point of this thread is to how explain sound and drag in Allegiance in terms of "real life" and you complain my explanation is stupid because it tries to explain Allegiance as if it was real life... I'm aware it's not exactly realistic, but this is a game, with obviously unrealistic bits like wormholes, densely packed asteroids, aerodynamic space-ships, etc., and if you're gonna try and explain it as "real life" (which I took as the main point here), I think my explanation strikes a great balance between realism and explaining all the obviously not-real stuff we see when we play Alleg.

As for Science Fiction, there's hard sci-fi and soft sci-fi. Obviously Star Trek is soft sci-fi (and the new movie is downright gooey), but claiming it is not sci-fi at all is, um, "physically stupid," or whatever. (Well, for the 2009 movie I might agree, but dammit, my explanation is harder than that! Almost anything would be!) I tried to explain Allegiance in soft, but self-consistent sci-fi terms. I think it's a pretty good explanation because it requires one break from reality (that wormholes can create "bubbles" of space-time) to explain a lot of stuff in Allegiance, including stuff that the "it's all computer simulation" explanation does not explain (why there's an arbitrary edge to "sectors" that damages and kills your ship) or that saying everything is simulated by computer does explain, but in a more clunky way (simulated sound? Okay! But... simulated distance? Simulated drag? Simulated everything? Wow, Allegiance isn't virtual space combat, it's virtual virtual space combat! "Allegiance is great! I could swear I was really sitting in front of a different computer that was simulating space combat! How exciting!") I tried to have an explanation that did not rely on "everything is simulated!" The difference between this and the Flying Spaghetti Monster is that my explanation has a sci-fi theme, and is more or less self-consistent which really, is enough for me. If you're looking for a sci-fi explanation for the game's obviously unrealistic environment, I think wormholes and negative space wedgies is a bit more appealing than magic, even if both are functionally equivalent. If you don't understand that there can be a difference between them even if both are about equally unrealistic... then, um. Can't help you. But you must have a hell of a time reading or watching *any* fiction in the world, eh, stopping every three seconds to complain that every break from reality might as well have been caused by the FSM?

QUOTE I'm aware it's not exactly realistic, but this is a game[/quote]

Then why invent a fabulous explanation when you the reason for that explanation is that this is a game?? Why not say directly "dude, this is a game not the apollo program"??. The final reason to all your stuff is that we are playing a game, so that's the reason to everything you are trying to explain and so your explanation has no use . We're basically saying the same, but you are using a whole long post to say what i can say in 4 words: it is a game

Btw, what hurts me is not sci-fi, nor soft sci-fi, is ideas like "bubbles" of space-time that have no real sense . I think really that the word "science" should not be in sci-fi (so the genre should be only "fiction" ).

Pfft, bubbles of space-time make perfect sense. Space-time does bend - that's how gravity works, after all! - And even wormholes have a solid basis in real science! (If only it weren't for that pesky exotic matter...) This is just a step beyond that! And it's one big break from reality that makes a whole bunch of other breaks from reality make sense! I think it lands squarely in the Minovsky Particle division of Moh's Scale of Science Fiction Hardness.

When saying it's a game, I meant to point out it's impossible to explain it without some breaks from reality, so if explaining it is what I want to do (and I do! ) I have to get away with some applied phlebotinum.

But yeah, "it is a game." But sometimes it's fun to come up with explanations, and a good explanation can also help with the suspension of disbelief! It doesn't hurt anyone, does it? And some people might like to have one, even if the majority don't care either way.

Goddamn necroposters, for one moment I'd thought Kite came back!

Space-time bends, but from that to a bubble...there's a long freaking way!! However, there's someone out there with a theory that says that black holes form new universes and stuff like that....this is somehow not that bad . Now you need to explain me how do you fit all those ships in these small bases, specially capships (sometimes as big as the whole SY....). I've got more questions for you!!

Btw, i don't mind about having an explanation, i just pointed that out cause i saw people too happy with it :lP

Koln wrote:QUOTE (Koln @ Jul 3 2009, 01:00 PM) Btw, i don't mind about having an explanation, i just pointed that out cause i saw people too happy with it :lP

Figures, I finally write something people seem to like...

Eh, actually, I'm often surprised by how huge the bases are compared to the small (non-cap) ships. Because I'm almost always in F2, they seem pretty small, but in F9 or another external view, those hangars seem pretty perfectly in proportion with the ships!

For cap ships, I think we're obviously looking at auto-factories using nanobots (we already know nano-technology exists in Allegiance cuz of the nan gun, of course), which assemble and deploy the ships as-needed. In other words, the shipyard doesn't need to store large numbers of gigantic ships - that would be inefficient with the assembly technology we have. It only contains highly compressed raw materials, and the technology to rapidly assemble ships out of them. Once a ship type has been "researched," the shipyard's robots and nano-bots can use the blueprints to assemble a completed ship very rapidly! In fact, the same technology could be present for small ships as well, to explain why you never see them in the hangars, and why there isn't ever a shortage of them!

This is also related to how "research" works: Obviously, when you're buying research, you aren't actually discovering new science and technology or something. That'd be ridiculous, and that technology would have to be available from the start in every subsequent game for it to make any sense. What "research" actually is, is the process of developing more complex assembly technology and nano-bots, and making them capable of following more complex blueprints to assemble better ships and devices. It's called "research" because the computers and robots on the base are "figuring out" how to build the new ships, using adaptive quantum computing algorithms that allow simpler nanobots to manufacture more complex ones as needed. This process requires quite a bit of energy, which is why you need to buy that research! This is also related to why the most advanced tech can't be sent into the aleph chain fro the very start: the quantum computing processes required to maintain it, the energy required, and the extra mass all interact poorly with the alephs leading out into "normal" space. (See also Dr. Andon's ongoing research on mass-limited alephs! )

Dude, you have a lot of imagination .

Ok, so now, other facts: how can those bases, small as they are, support any kind of human life during a long period? That kinda requires some space, since you need food and water and those stuff to be stored safety.

Well, given that teams seldom exceed 20-30 pilots max per side, and these people will usually have a few bases to share between them (Garr + a tech base + an outpost or two, especially since this'd be the team that *won* the Allegiance battle), they don't really seem all *that* small (even given that quite a bit of space inside bases must be taken up by machinery, computers, etc.) Presumably the bases can also be re-supplied. If the alephs that lead to normal space open up on a more or less regular basis, that may be enough to send some food and water through (in freighters, of course! That's what they're for. ) Plus, nanotech and other advances should make recycling air and water and producing food in compact hydroponic bays easier. Living quarters may be cramped, but then, these are military installations, they don't need to be luxurious...

Edit: Just for a rough idea of scale: Here's an IC Garrison with a miner and an interceptor (the small grey triangle below the miner) docking:

So, the bases really aren't all that small... Not big enough to be self-sustaining, perhaps, but they do not have to be!

Heh... This is fun... But really, I just wanted some justification for the basic setting of Allegiance, i.e. the sectors with edges, the way physics work, and sound, mostly (and without just saying computers simulate all of it). Not that it's not fun to come up with justifications for everything else as well, though.

If you are going to put an explanation to alleg besides "it's a game", you should explain everything .

Well, i think i don't have any more questions "unexplained". Most of the other stuff derived from what you said, except the turrets that can turn as if they weren't attached to the ship . But I'm sure you'll come up with some "nano-explanation"

Now, who's got time enough to put that all together in the wiki??