Newtonian physics

[Indicable]

Most discourse I have on forums is perceived as flame-war-material. Actually, it is. People are just lame.

[diegzumillo]

You’re a pretentious fuck

Well, maybe try not to call other people “pretentious fuck”. That’s quite a big flag for flame.

[hrobertson]

In my original post I was merely asking whether orbital maneuvers would be there, like a space flight simulator.

I remember talking about this on the old forum and IA said nope. I guess this means that above a certain altitude ships won’t even fall.
Hopefully things have changed since then. Would be good to get word from IA or Keith regarding this.

[Kichae]

You’re a pretentious fuck.

Eh. I calls em as I sees em.

There’s “no such thing as” Newtonian physics as well. Even “Newtonian mechanics” is entirely inspecific to how a simulation will really work.

“Newtonian mechanics” is actually rather explicit. Does it follow Newton’s laws, using Newton’s formulation? If yes, it’s Newtonian mechanics. If no, it’s something else (e.g. Hamiltonian mechanics, Legrangian mechanics, etc).

Nevertheless, Newtonian mechanics are more principle (alike “Galilean relativity”) than they are descriptive about how physics will function (in a virtual context) or be integrated with gameplay.

Also not true. If gameplay physics works on an action/reaction standard, it’s Newtonian. This is why fluid space physics is non-Newtonian – there’s drag or friction without anything physically causing it. I point specifically to Freelancer, where ships were quite literally governed by the basic equations of fluid dynamics. If Freelancer had been a submarine combat game, it would have been a perfectly Newtonian one. As it was a spaceship combat game, it wasn’t, as the drag wasn’t produced by an outside force.

With any interactive simulation, there will always be an extent to which the principles must (really, they must) be ignored for the user input to be translated into gameplay. There is a massive variety to which the principles can be implemented.

Physics is a funny thing, though. Unless we’re studying the fine details of a system, physicists use more shortcuts, and ignore more principles, than would even be considered desirable in a game development setting. We don’t start saying that a model is non-Newtonian just because we simulate a galaxy using 10,000 points. We don’t even say it’s non-Newtonian if it includes things like dark matter, neutron stars, or black holes. So long as everything’s obeying F = ma, it’s a Newtonian system.

[ThornEel]

I had always understood it as that engines are fuel-less and so powerful (tens of g) than you won’t really care about orbital mechanics, unless you are immobile. For example, a space station would be in orbit, so would be a stopped ship, but when going from A to B, things like slingshot or Hohmann transfer would not be used.

[mattk50]

I want Galileon physics! (to be serious – I hate people denoting physics as “Newtonian” in particular, but it’s hard to explain why if you don’t have a game-physics background)

You’re a pretentious fuck.

???

[Pendrokar]

Whatever form of physics is implemented for Infinity: Battlescape will be Newtonian. If they are implemented by Keith Newton that is.

Jokes over… carry on…

[INovaeKeith]

Would be good to get word from IA or Keith regarding this.

At the end of the day the exact flight mechanics we choose will be determined by play testing. Our baseline flight model is likely going to be the same/similar to what was in the ICP and we’ll iterate on it from there. We actually do have a rough orbital physics implementation for modelling the influence of large celestial bodies such as planets however it’s actually surprisingly powerful (or at least I was surprised) and play testing will probably determine if/how it is included in the final game.

To summarize - play testing will contribute heavily to determining our final, shipping controls and physics. Those of you who sign up for alpha and beta testing through our Kickstarter will get to be a big part of that.

[Kreydis]

who sign up for alpha and beta testing through our Kickstarter will get to be a big part of that.

Is it time to start the HYPE train?

[gutza1]

My 2cents for newtonian physics are these: Ships, without any outside force, follow newton’s laws. Ships at rest stay at rest(they are still orbiting, so there is some movement. If they were not orbiting they would fall to the planet’s surface), and ships that are coasting will keep coasting and not slow down. However, in a battle a ships can turn on inertial dampening. This basically tells the computer to fire the RCS in a way as to simulate star wars physics for dogfighting. However, the player could also keep dampening of and perform hit-and-run strikes(the player a theoretically infinite top speed without dampening).