POLL: Basic goods

[Hawkwings]

But, is a "unit" of cargo capacity volume, or is it mass? Or maybe both? Perhaps if mass weren't an issue, then an Advanced Train could hold 10,000 units of gold? But the mass becomes the limiting factor at 5000 units. Conversely, perhaps the advanced train can hold 10,000 mass units of oxygen, but only has the volume for 5000 of them?

Taking that logic, why would the GMG use the gas transport? It has less cargo capacity than other ships, so in-RP, why wouldn't they just use big freight haulers? The only way it makes sense in-RP is that if it were more efficient to use a ship designed for hauling gas around, to haul gas around.

The "units" system of cargo capacity are a game mechanic. If we're going to talk about changing game mechanics, then don't use a game mechanic for your argument.

---

|| Join the Kusari State Police || KSP Internal Affairs || KSP Message Dump || KSP Feedback ||
||Kusari Criminal Database || Kusari Legal Codex || Kusari Bounty Board ||

[BaconSoda]

But why would anyone ever measure the amount of cargo possible of being carried in mass while traveling through space? Mass isn't a limiting factor in space. In a plane which lacks normal force, mass doesn't matter nearly as much as it would on a plane which does have normal force. Mass is negligible in any situation in space except those regarding close proximity to planets (within the atmosphere) when gravity comes into play due to the small radii between the two objects.

Volume, however, does matter in space. Whether or not normal force exists, a liter of water is still a liter of water. If you can carry any weight of any material because of a lack of normal force, then the only limiting factor becomes volume, which makes it the most logical choice for cargo measurement.

---

[8:32:45 PM] Dusty Lens: Oh no, let me get that. Hello? Oh it's my grandma. She says to be roleplay.
[12:49:19 AM] Elgatodiablo: You know its nice that you have all that proof and all, Bacon... but I just don't believe you.

[Hawkwings]

Mass is definitely not negligible in space. Mass matters for acceleration, and therefore, movement. A ship might not have enough engine power to accelerate a full load of cargo at a decent or safe rate. And the ships that we fly do come in close proximity to planets, stations, other ships, etc, all cases where accelerations is important.

I'll admit that volume would be a bigger consideration for deep-space ships (like the barge) but mass is also a big concern for ships that interact with other objects.

---

|| Join the Kusari State Police || KSP Internal Affairs || KSP Message Dump || KSP Feedback ||
||Kusari Criminal Database || Kusari Legal Codex || Kusari Bounty Board ||

[BaconSoda]

But when a ship doesn't have to overcome any significant force (gravity, friction), the force which one needs to apply is to overcome that lack of force is, well, negligible. As such, one can accelerate very slowly and still apply a large enough force to move at an adequate speed. Because there is no limiting factors in space as well, one never has to accelerate very sparsely in comparison to on a plane which exerts a normal force, and thus friction, or any other limiting factor.

Think about driving a car. Every so often one has to tap the gas to maintain his speed. In space, where there is no friction to oppose motion, one never really has to reapply that acceleration. You can just continually drift at 80mph on I75 all the way up to Sault Sainte Marie before you have to apply any force to yourself, negative or otherwise, so to speak.

Furthermore, with things like Trade Lanes and Jump Gates, do ships really need to accelerate that far without being catapulted like they are in lanes and gates? Those machines can almost instantly apply such a large force to you that accelerate, well, crazy fast. Most large ships can make good use of these machines, the ones which can carry loads of cargo at any rate, so why would they take mass into consideration if they can bypass Physics so easily?

---

[8:32:45 PM] Dusty Lens: Oh no, let me get that. Hello? Oh it's my grandma. She says to be roleplay.
[12:49:19 AM] Elgatodiablo: You know its nice that you have all that proof and all, Bacon... but I just don't believe you.

[Hawkwings]

If you really want to use "bypass physics" as an argument, then I really have no counter for that besides saying "we should at least try to keep Freelancer within some boundaries of known physics". Besides, trade lanes are superluminal, and simply "applying force" will not get you to that speed.

Anyways, what you're saying is true. In deep space, with no forces acting on the ship, you can go with as little acceleration as you'd like, and you would eventually get to your destination. Keyword is eventually though. Who would fly a ship that takes 3 times as long to get to the destination (besides the barge)?

Anyways, we've gotten off-topic here. My only argument is that I think all commodities should have decently profitable trade routes. Any mechanism that does that will be fine by me.

---

|| Join the Kusari State Police || KSP Internal Affairs || KSP Message Dump || KSP Feedback ||
||Kusari Criminal Database || Kusari Legal Codex || Kusari Bounty Board ||

[pragun]

Ok, about the physics, check this. Each unite of plutonium by volume has 19.2 times the mass of a similar unit of water, so a ship that can carry a 1000 units of plutonium already packs enough power to propel 19200 units of water without breaking a sweat.
So technically, this does make sense. Even if you bring the physics into play.

---

Retired

[Elsdragon]

I haz physics argument!

---

No longer a slave to the man!

[Elsdragon]

Im going to double ost and ask for admin feedback

---

No longer a slave to the man!