(05-31-2014, 04:21 PM)Corundum Wrote: [ -> ]Weapons, regardless of where on the ship they are, still contribute to the total ship mass.
Makes perfect sense to me.
Cargo space =/= total mass.
We're talking about how much volume you have on the inside of the ship, not how much mass the entirety of the ship is.
(06-01-2014, 10:09 AM)SMGSterlin Wrote: [ -> ] (05-31-2014, 04:21 PM)Corundum Wrote: [ -> ]Weapons, regardless of where on the ship they are, still contribute to the total ship mass.
Makes perfect sense to me.
Cargo space =/= total mass.
We're talking about how much volume you have on the inside of the ship, not how much mass the entirety of the ship is.
In aerospace engineering mass matters way more than the volume. Otherwise your spacecraft won't take off. That's why our space vehicles have their payload measured in kilograms and not in cubic meters.
Are people that naive to think 5000 units of Gold take the same volume as 5000 units of Water?
It's pretty much obvious that if you attach more stuff on the outside of the ship you are limiting the amount of stuff you can put in the cargo hold before reaching the maximum allowed mass of the ship.
Also, you conveniently skipped the part when turrets are just the visible parts of the installed weapon systems with more components inside the ship. I suggest you read more than 1-2 posts.
I wonder why people aren't whining that armor occupies cargo space too. After all it's just additional hull plating, not something you put in the cargo hold, right?
Still in doubt? Just apply Disco logic where ships fly slower than airplanes and planets are several kilometers in diameter.
P.S: WAAAAAHHH!! MUHHHH CARGUH SPAAAACEEEE!!!1!
Reinforcing the ship can include additional inside plating inside of the cargo bay, as well as structural support that takes up space.
Guns taking up cargo really has no explanation unless you're so inept at designing weapons systems, you have to dump all of the wires and computers into the cargobay.
(06-01-2014, 10:36 AM)Corundum Wrote: [ -> ]In aerospace engineering mass matters way more than the volume.
NOT IN DISCO it doesn't. SImply otherwise I should be able to go faster and more maneuverable with an empty hold than a full hold should I not?
In terms of cargo capacity, sometimes volume matters. Take the Iarbus beluga (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_Beluga) for instance, it has a volume capacity of an entire aircraft cross section but not the load capacity of some aircraft smaller than it, such as a regular A330.
The volume of a ship afaik is not adaptive.
Also as for the weapons systems, as I mentioned the internal infrastructure is already there, all you buy is the gun you put on the outside.
(06-01-2014, 12:12 PM)lIceColon Wrote: [ -> ]Also as for the weapons systems, as I mentioned the internal infrastructure is already there, all you buy is the gun you put on the outside.
Proof, please.
Currently, weapons take up cargo space. That proves the internal infrastructure is not there already.
(06-01-2014, 12:40 PM)Corundum Wrote: [ -> ] (06-01-2014, 12:12 PM)lIceColon Wrote: [ -> ]Also as for the weapons systems, as I mentioned the internal infrastructure is already there, all you buy is the gun you put on the outside.
Proof, please.
Currently, weapons take up cargo space. That proves the internal infrastructure is not there already.
Weapons didn't take cargo space back in 4.85.
Guys, stop arguing on trivial matters. The maximum number of cargo lost due to equipped weapons is 60 on tradeships. That is absolutely small number compared to overall volume of cargo space.
And as I said, unmounting a 900 cargo space jd on a 1800 cargo space bs is an absolutely horrific experience.
(06-01-2014, 12:42 PM)Snak3 Wrote: [ -> ]The maximum number of cargo lost due to equipped weapons is 60 on tradeships. That is absolutely small number compared to overall volume of cargo space.
Woot, I would have to make 85 trips rather than 84.
(06-01-2014, 12:47 PM)lIceColon Wrote: [ -> ]And as I said, unmounting a 900 cargo space jd on a 1800 cargo space bs is an absolutely horrific experience.
Even if weapons/shield/CM didn't take cargo space, wouldn't your armor still prevent you from unmounting the JD?
Anyway, this issue sounds more like a bug. Even if equipment doesn't use cargo, you still won't be able to unmount you 900 cargo JD on a ship with 1750 cargo, right?