The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 28, 2022, 11:14:12 am
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  General UQM Discussion (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  SC myths...
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Print
Author Topic: SC myths...  (Read 12447 times)
Holocat
Frungy champion
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 84



View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #45 on: August 26, 2006, 04:30:04 am »

Good point, I hadn't considered it might be a shaped-charge.  That would allow it to have an enormous charge and yet not harm a planet so long as it wasn't directed towards it.

Still, a blast radius on the order of astronomical units seems excessive for a moon buster.
Logged
Mugz the Sane
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 159


need coffee...


View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #46 on: August 26, 2006, 12:35:07 pm »

shaped charge actually makes more sense than a unidirectional blast.

If the blast is unidirectional AND that extensive, it can/will cause massive ecological damage - at the very least! - to the planet whose excess moon is being pruned. If the blast is focused, i.e. shaped charge, it could either move the moon away or destroy it completely - without causing too much damage to the host world.

That blast going off in upper orbit could strip away layers of atmosphere, burn the facing side, potentially rip off upper layers of the crust or even completely destroy the planet. Why remove a moon though?

Don't moons have a noticeable effect on weather patterns, tide movements and biological rhythms?
Logged

I'm seriously considering going to Bali to paint nude women.
Orzy-man!
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17


*Bloody campers* are the best


View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #47 on: August 28, 2006, 03:31:36 am »

Finding the secret of groombridge...


You know, according to star control the Rainbow Worlds pointed to where the Precursors went. Myth has it that they created an ultimate cloaking device so no creature can find them. Ever notice that that one rainbow world in Groombridge is the ONLY planet there? (So i remember).....
Logged

Culture20
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 917


Thraddash Flower Child


View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #48 on: August 29, 2006, 05:33:45 am »

I just read this in the chmmr text:
Quote
the device you speak of is a huge matter-antimatter bomb
if you had activated it, the weapon would have annihilated your ship and everything else within five hundred kilometers
I guess there was a specified blast radius after all.
Logged
Icemage_999
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16



View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #49 on: August 29, 2006, 06:33:35 am »

Regarding the Precursors and their weaponry, let's not forget that all of the military powerups you can locate in SC1 are "precursor artifacts".  Seems to me like they were fairly heavily leaning towards militantism.

One myth I think I've seen bandied about is that it is possible to earn enough credits by trading Bio data to the Melnorme, etc. to find out why the bridge turns purple.  I'm fairly certain it isn't possible.

Regarding Arilou vs. Chmmr myth, as I recall, it is theoretically possible, with perfect flying skills against the CPU (not a human) to win a fight against the Chmmr Avatar with an Ariloulalay Skiff, but it would take forever.   I'm fairly sure the Arilou laser has just a fraction more range than the satellites do, so if you can stay out of danger range of the Chmmr (not too terribly difficult since the Arilou's reactionless drive makes it the only ship in the game that is immune to the Chmmr tractor beam effect), you could plink away at the satellites... very very slowly... then find a way to close in by forcing the computer to gravity whip around a planet.  Actually doing this would be virtually impossible, however, since your margin for error is basically zero.
Logged
Mugz the Sane
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 159


need coffee...


View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #50 on: August 30, 2006, 11:27:53 am »

the precursors also strike me as being incredibly heavily armed. they had just too much destructive power at their command to be able to call it anything other than weaponry. A spathi once told me that peaceful missions through the cosmos rarely require weapons large enough to punch holes in a small moon. I'm somehow not sure that the precursors - who had devices capable of demolishing ENTIRE moons - were so peaceful and nonagressive.

arilou vs chmmr myth - I did this once. Successfully. After a few hours. By accident. With 2(TWO!) crew left. damn zapsats.

This might make the claim a bit more credible. the bloody idiot computer hit the planet TWICE! THEN, when I was actually close enough to be obliterated with the laser, the poor floon had no battery to do so - thanks to overenthusiastic use of the tractor beam.
Even under these conditions, though, picking off the zapsats was an arduous, time-consuming process - and if the idiot hadn't hit the planet twice, I would not have made it.
The chmmr ship came up in a rotation and in supermelee one does not have the option of escaping.

In conclusion, all an arilou needs to destroy a chmmr is an incredible combination of courage, hair-trigger reflexes and sheer dumb luck. Every time I tried it since then, though, one of the three factors - usually the reflexes or the luck, sometimes both - inexplicably went elsewhere. Within 5 seconds.

Under normal circumstances, though, arilou vs chmmr is VERY predictable.
Logged

I'm seriously considering going to Bali to paint nude women.
AnotherW
Frungy champion
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 72



View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #51 on: September 02, 2006, 01:48:49 pm »

wow, has this discussion gone off topic or what  Smiley
just for the record i think that the sizes in BOTH the melee and practice (SC1) sizes are inaccurate and i think that logic should dictate the ship sizes. therefore, what with the ur-quan being nomadic and all it seems logical (to me at least) to have a dreadnought a 1 km long and a much smaller scout - i should think that a 3-5 m sounds logical.
Logged
Adunaphel
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10



View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #52 on: September 02, 2006, 04:33:50 pm »

I dunno....three to five meters is *tiny* for a ship with multiple crew.  Hell, single pilot fighter jets are a lot bigger than that.  I always thought of a scout more along the lines of a Star Wars Assault Shuttle, whereas a Dreadnought would be around Star Destroyer size. 
Logged
Mugz the Sane
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 159


need coffee...


View Profile
Re: SC myths...
« Reply #53 on: September 04, 2006, 09:57:23 am »

check the earthling cruiser thread in general discussion for a size argument.
Logged

I'm seriously considering going to Bali to paint nude women.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!