test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Atmospheric Flight

azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
I want to get people's input.

We all know famously that the Bird of Prey and the Intrepid are ships that can land on surfaces of worlds and fly in their atmospheres, the Defiant and Nova classes were said to have a landing capability as well). Even the NX and the Consitution could fly in atmospheres (people might think of JJ Trek, but the original Enterprise did it as well in TOS). So why are we buying these abilities when Starfleet Officers already should be skilled at such a thing?


And if the Dev Team want us to learn it, why have it as a Fleet Holding? Why not make it a new DOFF that increases your performance? Or why not add it to the Dyson Reputation system, so that everyone who plays can get access without feeling like they are penalized for not being in fleets or their fleets not rich enough to unlock this ability?

There are small fleets who have stalled that won't be able even able to have access to the new fleet holding. (The KDF side's Fleet Mark Queues are dead, so some fleets won't be able to even earn Fleet Marks).



So please Devs, move it to the Reputation system and not penalize players.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • clusterfoxclusterfox Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    "Trained in" doesn't mean "skilled at". Most of our conn officers have likely never landed a ship outside of a holodeck, so the idea of them getting better at atmospheric operations is fine. If training isn't the issue, it could be learning the best configuration for the shield geometry, or getting a feel for the wind currents inside the sphere (because when you've got that much air, land, and water, you're going to have some major wind currents).

    Now, tying it to fleet progression I would agree seems a little unfair for members of smaller fleets. With any luck, it'll be like a lot of fleet things and be a purchasable item, so friendly larger fleets can do invites and let others get it that way.
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    clusterfox wrote: »
    "Trained in" doesn't mean "skilled at". Most of our conn officers have likely never landed a ship outside of a holodeck, so the idea of them getting better at atmospheric operations is fine. If training isn't the issue, it could be learning the best configuration for the shield geometry, or getting a feel for the wind currents inside the sphere (because when you've got that much air, land, and water, you're going to have some major wind currents)..

    Dyson's sphere technically shouldn't have a thicker atmosphere than the Earth's.

    And yes trained in is the same as skilled at, since they have to be knowledgeable to fly shuttlecraft in atmospheres. Where even Starfleet officers who never was trained in the Conn position has to fly in them as well.

    clusterfox wrote: »
    Now, tying it to fleet progression I would agree seems a little unfair for members of smaller fleets. With any luck, it'll be like a lot of fleet things and be a purchasable item, so friendly larger fleets can do invites and let others get it that way.

    Personally, as a member of a small fleet, I'm tried of begging to get invites just to get content.

    And it ultimately defeats the purpose of progressing if you depend on other fleets who do all the work.
  • clusterfoxclusterfox Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Dyson's sphere technically shouldn't have a thicker atmosphere than the Earth's.

    And yes trained in is the same as skilled at, since they have to be knowledgeable to fly shuttlecraft in atmospheres. Where even Starfleet officers who never was trained in the Conn position has to fly in them as well.

    It's not the thickness of the atmosphere, it's the volume. On Earth we have jet-streams that can significantly affect how fast planes fly. Can you imagine the wind patterns that would develop with a surface area of 550 million Earths?

    As for shuttles, a valid point. But comparing a shuttle to something like a Scimitar is like comparing a Mini to a Challenger tank or a big rig; the basic principle is the same, but the mechanics are entirely different. And I'm guessing most Starfleet officers just set the shuttle's autopilot. Even Tom Paris (who was acknowledged as a superior pilot) was nervous about taking Voyager into atmosphere.
    Personally, as a member of a small fleet, I'm tried of begging to get invites just to get content.

    And it ultimately defeats the purpose of progressing if you depend on other fleets who do all the work.

    I'm in complete agreement with you here. I wish Cryptic could find some un-game-able way to reduce requirements for small fleets, or otherwise front-load the benefits.
  • mandoknight89mandoknight89 Member Posts: 1,687 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    clusterfox wrote: »
    I'm in complete agreement with you here. I wish Cryptic could find some un-game-able way to reduce requirements for small fleets, or otherwise front-load the benefits.

    Not using quadratic or exponential costs would be a start.
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    clusterfox wrote: »
    It's not the thickness of the atmosphere, it's the volume. On Earth we have jet-streams that can significantly affect how fast planes fly. Can you imagine the wind patterns that would develop with a surface area of 550 million Earths?

    But volume in atmospheres are not uniform. The density increases depending on altitude. And given the massive size of a Dyson Sphere, it's doubtful it would have the same thickness as the Earth.

    And winds on Earth is caused due to seasonal variations due to the pitch of the planetary axis along with the Coriolis effect that is due to the spinning of the planet. Given the fictional nature of a Dyson Sphere, this isn't possible due to the uniform distribution of the sun. So there would be some kind of artificial means to create it.

    Then as I said above, it would be closer to the surface than 1 or 2 km above the surface. Where Starships would be operating.
    clusterfox wrote: »
    As for shuttles, a valid point. But comparing a shuttle to something like a Scimitar is like comparing a Mini to a Challenger tank or a big rig; the basic principle is the same, but the mechanics are entirely different. And I'm guessing most Starfleet officers just set the shuttle's autopilot. Even Tom Paris (who was acknowledged as a superior pilot) was nervous about taking Voyager into atmosphere.

    True and not true.

    There hardly is any basic difference between flying a Piper Cub and flying a B-52 Stratofortress or a 747-400. The principle of flying an aircraft is all the same, it's just the operations of the different aircraft is what sets them apart. So flying a shuttle would be the same as piloting a starship. (Hell, they let Wesley Crusher fly the Enterprise-D for cry'n out loud and he really wasn't really trained!) :P

    Furthemore, we are talking about Advanced starships that have computer assist that goes far beyond current era Fly-By-Wire and Autopilot technology (and modern airliners can fly by themselves without pilot input). So having an atmospheric skill makes even less sense.
  • neoakiraiineoakiraii Member Posts: 7,468 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Voyager couldn't land without blowing something u on the bridge, can't be that easy all the time.
    GwaoHAD.png
  • clusterfoxclusterfox Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    But volume in atmospheres are not uniform. The density increases depending on altitude. And given the massive size of a Dyson Sphere, it's doubtful it would have the same thickness as the Earth.
    But atmospheric density is due to gravity. Assuming the sphere has gravity - likely artificial - similar to Earth, and similar pressure at sea level, the thickness of the atmosphere should be the same
    And winds on Earth is caused due to seasonal variations due to the pitch of the planetary axis along with the Coriolis effect that is due to the spinning of the planet. Given the fictional nature of a Dyson Sphere, this isn't possible due to the uniform distribution of the sun. So there would be some kind of artificial means to create it.
    But there will also be the different energy absorption and release rates of the seas. Even with an artificial day-night cycle, that would be a small effect, but this thing has likely been around long enough for some patterns to build up.
    ...flying a shuttle would be the same as piloting a starship. (Hell, they let Wesley Crusher fly the Enterprise-D for cry'n out loud and he really wasn't really trained!) :P
    They also let Deanna Troi - a Commander in Starfleet - fly the ship, and look how that ended! :P
    neoakiraii wrote: »
    Voyager couldn't land without blowing something up on the bridge, can't be that easy all the time.
    Basically, this!
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    clusterfox wrote: »
    But atmospheric density is due to gravity. Assuming the sphere has gravity - likely artificial - similar to Earth, and similar pressure at sea level, the thickness of the atmosphere should be the same

    True, but you're not accounting for the entire surface area of the Dyson Sphere. It's doubtful it would be that thick due to distribution.
    clusterfox wrote: »
    But there will also be the different energy absorption and release rates of the seas. Even with an artificial day-night cycle, that would be a small effect, but this thing has likely been around long enough for some patterns to build up.

    Again at the surface, not thousands of kilometers above, where the Starships would be.
    clusterfox wrote: »
    They also let Deanna Troi - a Commander in Starfleet - fly the ship, and look how that ended! :P

    Well, on her behalf the first time she crashed, it was something she didn't see. And the second time, well the saucer was basically blown out of control. :P
  • clusterfoxclusterfox Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    True, but you're not accounting for the entire surface area of the Dyson Sphere. It's doubtful it would be that thick due to distribution.
    Possibly. The sheer scale of this thing means there's going to be some weird gravity-related stuff going on, but in general the pull will be towards the ground, same as it is on Earth.
    Again at the surface, not thousands of kilometers above, where the Starships would be.
    This doesn't look like thousands of kilometers, unless those buildings are waaaay larger than they look.
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Yeah, Cryptic taking an artistic license. Those towers to me are higher than Skyscrapers. I would say those background ones would be like 1-2km tall buildings while the big spires are 50km.




    EDIT: Found out that the Atmospheric flight buff is a waste of time, so when this goes live, nobody needs to waste their fleet credits.
  • phemkenphemken Member Posts: 7 Arc User
    edited November 2013
    `I have an honest question here. What purpose does the atmosphere mechanic serve other than being annoying for anyone who isn't in a fleet that has the this perk?
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited November 2013
    A way for them to make us spend fleet credits? :P
Sign In or Register to comment.