Properly Define "Hovers"

Should Hover technology be properly defined, and if yes, how?

  • Yes - They should only work if they repel against something

    Votes: 5 55.6%
  • Yes - They need to be removed

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes - Other (Please explain in a comment)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Maybe - I'm not sure

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No - It should stay as it is

    Votes: 2 22.2%
  • I don't mind either way.

    Votes: 2 22.2%

  • Total voters
    9

ilikegoodfood

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2014
461
419
475
United Kingdom
Currently the system of Hover parts in TerraTech is functional, however it is also self-contradictory.

Generally speaking a Hover is more properly known as a Repulsor. A Repulsor, as the name implied, repels or pushes away from any physical objects that get too close.
Depending on the power and design of the Repulsor it may be able to repel against, apply a force against, the air thus allowing for stable, non-height limited flight such as in Marvel's Comics, specifically Iron Man.
If a hover is unable to apply sufficient force against low density materials, such as air, then it can only function if the direction it is facing has an object near it. This provides near-to-ground flight and air-bumpers, as a sideways facing hover plate will repel any obstacles that you might otherwise run into. This seems to be the method currently used by TerraTech.
Unfortunately, if I am correct, the Steering Hovers simply wouldn't work unless you were repelling away from a tree, cliff, enemy Tech or any other SOLID or LIQUID.

To solve this issue I suggest two possible ways to properly define hovers:
1) They only work if they are repelling against something.
2) Remove Steering Hovers. They are a direct contradiction to the height limit on hovers and should never have existed in the first place.

No matter which option you choose, Steering Thrusters and Steering Fans should both be added to the game anyway. The easiest thing to do, in my opinion, would be to create Steering Fans, which should actually work as the current Steering Hovers do now, and then phase the Steering hover out or apply the distance check and decimal multiplier.

There are also other methods to solve this conflict that I have not listed here, including doing nothing or removing the hover-height-limit. Please vote and comment why.
 

FightBiscuit

Well-Known Member
May 6, 2016
650
485
470
Germany
The main problem is that thrusters need fuel and fuel tanks are heavy, explode fast and can`t carry much. If Thusters would be better to use we could just go back to steering thusters.
 

Bgrmystr2

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2015
373
295
470
32
Gensokyo
en.touhouwiki.net
There's a lot of holes that can be pointed out in your statement. You're basically stating that Steering hovers =/= floating hovers. The former of which seems to be based on the ability to project force in one direction irrelevant of what is there. The latter of which is more likely based on an anti-gravity technology. I'm inclined to believe they're one in the same.

You're also trying to put all of this comic logic into a game that does not belong in the same universe. That's breaking another rule. TerraTech =/= Marvel. Third thing you've got wrong is that you're trying to apply our current understanding of physics into a game that has technology that we simply cannot make work yet. This is not only wrong on your part, but limits the game in it's ability to define it's own laws and gamespace. That's a bad thing.

If I had to guess, the steering hovers are not actually projecting a force towards an object at all. What they're actually doing is projecting a light negative force of gravity in the direction it wants to move away from. It's quite clear the current blocks in the game don't have a strong enough force to keep themselves airborne, as gravity from the planet will quickly nullify any gravity-defying force eventually. Keep in mind that natural gravity on a planet pulls downward, so any forces not being directly contradictory will be unprecedented. It'd be way easier to move in a direction perpendicular to gravity rather than fighting it head to head if you had another source.

If we, in real life, had the technology to simply lower the pull of gravity on some objects, it could possibly make things act like they have the moon's gravity, which would make them very easy to push around in any direction. The hover blocks in TerraTech may have the technology that combine repulsion and anti-gravity in the hovers that directly counter gravity while putting only anti-gravity emitters as a way to provide "thrust". Steering hovers do not make your tech float if placed against gravity. This would explain why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Olli_DXD

ilikegoodfood

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2014
461
419
475
United Kingdom
While I don't necessarily agree with some of your assumed "holes" in my logic, your counter arguments are not only hole-filled but also make assumptions that were directly contradicted in my initial post, I do agree that TerraTech uses a very different set of technologies to what we usually see.
Unfortunately for what appears to be the primary point in your post, the presence of gravity downwards is somewhat irrelevant. If you can consistently produce a force in any direction that is even fractionally greater than gravity then you will be able to ascend, the higher from the ground you are the faster, without limit, unless you are using a force that itself dissipates proportionally to the source, aka the planet itself, and that dissipates considerably faster than gravity.
I simply feel that they, steering hovers, are something of a contradiction and my post was an attempt to explain why I felt that.
If the Hovers were to be relabeled as something else, such as GeoMagnetic propulsion, then you could achieve the observed result if, in this particular example, the planet we were on had different magnetic properties to earth, which is likely, but this still stops them being "Hovers".
 

fusionwing

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2015
67
18
410
21
i find the hovers all work fine. now granted the weight limit of them is bad they are ok to use a little hard to control but ok imo (i say hard to control cause well your just floating and the slightest dip tends to make you move XD so working against that is the challenge)
 

streak1

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2015
2,291
2,139
570
23
steamcommunity.com
Eh, IDK. I don't see a need for any new kinds of steering stuff, unless it is part of a new corp to make it different. The steering "hovers" we have now work perfectly fine, even if they don't work the same as a hover plate.

If anything, all we would need is a name change. Steering hovers become steering repulsors. Done. Hovers hover over the ground. Repulsors repel the air to push the tech around without using fuel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ilikegoodfood

Bgrmystr2

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2015
373
295
470
32
Gensokyo
en.touhouwiki.net
While I don't necessarily agree with some of your assumed "holes" in my logic, your counter arguments are not only hole-filled but also make assumptions that were directly contradicted in my initial post
See, the problem here is that you're the one attaching logic from another universe that has nothing to do with our own universe, nevermind TerraTech's. I am not. I'm simply stating that it's possible that it's a technology we simply haven't made work within our own understanding of physics. No matter how much you try to apply them, our physics are irrelevant to a technology that is beyond us. I made no such assumptions in my post that directly contradicted your post. I have, however, made statements that insinuate that I believe your post is logically flawed. There is a difference, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't mix them up. :(

I can just as easily disagree with any "holes" you find in my counter-arguments, as two can play at that game, but feel free to point out my holes anytime you like. That being said, even if the blocks in TerraTech used the magnetic field of the planet to defy the very gravity of the planet itself, it can still be called "hover" technology, as it does, technically, hover over the ground. Maybe the planet is just some bigass magnet with one pole. The hovers could just utilize the opposite pole to move around. Who knows? I never claimed to know what the lore says, but it's not like the block itself is somehow wrong simply because it doesn't follow one individual idea of how the technology would work.

You know, my ideas on how the technology works could be wrong too, but it's unfair to say my thoughts are not as relevant as yours. :/

Edit'd cuz accidentally Engrish.
 

cole

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2015
85
26
420
i liked the horn steering boosters better when they were thrusters
 

ilikegoodfood

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2014
461
419
475
United Kingdom
That is the key assumption that you made that I directly contradicted already. Hover technology is generally more properly known as Repulsors, not just in Marvel's Comics and Movies. I used Iron Man as a single example of a reality that uses Hovers/Repulsors that can provide stable flight, nothing more.
It is in fact you who have decided that I am trying to make TerraTech into Marvel which is of course ridiculous and, despite my saying earlier that you had several things wrong about my initial post, becoming repetitive very quickly.

Ultimately, whether you call them Hovers or Repulsors, consider the two interchangeable or different is irrelevant to the fundamental bug that Hover Technology currently exhibits.
  1. Can Hovers match the force of Gravity?
    1. Yes, my tech floats.
  2. Can hover exceed the force of Gravity?
    1. Yes, I can use them to go up a hillside. When I do this the front of my tech rises, thus the Hover is capable of Exceeding Gravity.
This leads to a very simple problem:
Why do Hovers have a height limit while steering hovers simply work?
@streak1 is correct in saying that if the two were named two different things then it would be clear that the technologies differed at least slightly and the problem would disappear, but they are not.

Since they are not one must apply LOGIC to the situation, TerraTech is a Science Fiction not a Science Fantasy, so logic is permitted.
  1. Why do Hovers only work near the ground when they can clearly apply enough force to fly?
    1. They are repelling the ground and therefore only operate near the ground.
    2. They are repelling some other force that tapers off much faster than Gravity but starts off comparable.
    3. They are simply emitting a force downwards and it is the height limit that is wrong.
    4. They can only create a force greater than gravity intermittently, but then an aircraft using hovers would never fall; it would simply hover. Furthermore, if you climbed high enough, your hovers would slightly exceed gravity and you would rise as if on helium balloons. On top of that, a large hill would become impossible to climb as the Hovers would "Overheat" too soon.
  2. Why are steering hovers not limited in a similar way, either by height or proximity to a surface?
    1. For the most part repeat what is under 1.
There are some very simple solutions to this, including simply applying a rename to the Steering Hovers as @streak1 said.

@fusionwing I am not trying to say that they don't work now; in fact I like the options that they provide. I am simply saying that they contradict eachother logically and should at least be renamed in some way so as to remove that conflict in assumed lore.
I say assumed here because it is exactly that. The games lore is neither detailed enough, fleshed out enough or provided to us clearly enough to know how it works, but that simply passes the job to the players, it doesn't actually reduce the amount that can be inferred about the game, its world or technologies as per the standard paradigms.

And yes, while they are packaged differently, everything in TerraTech can be found in and does generally follow the "default" rules of these technologies in Sci-Fi, including the SCU.

EDIT: Typos.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bgrmystr2

fusionwing

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2015
67
18
410
21
well when you talk about the game it is still in early access so there are bound to be screw ups here and there... but a name change i guess since the steering hover essentially repulses you in certain directions. although thats not to major so im sure the devs have plans for a name change but dont plan on doing it anytime soon
 

ilikegoodfood

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2014
461
419
475
United Kingdom
well when you talk about the game it is still in early access so there are bound to be screw ups here and there... but a name change i guess since the steering hover essentially repulses you in certain directions. although thats not to major so im sure the devs have plans for a name change but dont plan on doing it anytime soon
I am entirely aware that a name change, to solve a minor, perceived contradiction in the assumed function of a made-up technology to satisfy a player who is already happy with the game, is of very low priority.
 

Jamie

PAYLOAD STUDIOS
Sep 16, 2014
3,712
4,044
675
29
London, UK
I guess this kind of thing could be fixed with a name change. What would you be more comfortable with the hovers being called?

The object the 'hover' is 'repulsing' against isn't there. It comes from the same place the music you are hearing comes from :p
 

Bgrmystr2

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2015
373
295
470
32
Gensokyo
en.touhouwiki.net
I like your enthusiasm. Good post, mate. I simply make suggestions and infer based on what I see from the statements and actions of others. If your original post hadn't insinuated Marvel physics logic in Terratech, it wouldn't have been brought up. Nonetheless, I stand by my statements. It's the wording, really. I guess that's what I get for having a high English comprehension. Seeing multiple things in statements that may be there but were written unknowingly and completely unintentionally. I seem to have this problem a lot, so no offense intended.

Though.. I'm not sure if I necessarily agree that going up a hillside is exceeding the force of gravity, as gravity itself warps and is not constant even on our own planet. That being said, I don't know everything about gravity. I'm not a physicist. Also, the technology in TerraTech could change those forces at work.

Even including that, your post is solid thought-process. I'll gladly take more time to reconsider the points you've brought up. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ilikegoodfood

ilikegoodfood

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2014
461
419
475
United Kingdom
I guess this kind of thing could be fixed with a name change. What would you be more comfortable with the hovers being called?

The object the 'hover' is 'repulsing' against isn't there. It comes from the same place the music you are hearing comes from :p
I'm not entirely sure what would be the best solution, as all of the ones that I can think of have their own issues. Primarily though, the issue is that Steering Hovers are slightly different to the ground-facing Hovers. Ground facing Hovers being called Hover is perfectly self explanatory, they hover. The issue arises specifically from the Steering Hovers not being the same technology.
Here in reality we do have variations of technologies with the same name but different functional scopes, so I could even admit to nit-picking incorrectly, but in this particular case it seems odd. I do not have a quick fix for you, a name that is still recognizably related to hovers but also distinct enough to warrant the functional difference.

The only thing that works in both cases in my head would be to rename the Hovers to Repulsors, as they Repulse, drive back, matter and to then state the difference directly in the name, thus Steering Hovers would become something like Low-Density Repulsors or Air-Repulsors.
In order to prevent a player from using many Low-Density Repulsors to fly, though, you would still need to ensure that the total LIFT that a Low-Density Repulsor can generate is always less than or equal to its own weight. If the values are identical, then the block is effectively weightless, as it can hold itself up but nothing more.

This would mean that you float over a high-density surface, the ground or water, on a Repulsor and you change your direction against the Air, a low density surface, with a Low-Density Repulsor. That's all I've got right now.

Sorry for rambling so much, this is more of a though process than a precise reply.
 

ilikegoodfood

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2014
461
419
475
United Kingdom
I`m for an Ion Thruster (Works everywhere and no fuel consumtion)
So you would have to remove the rings and replace them with something similiar to the link below
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster#/media/File:Ion_Engine_Test_Firing_-_GPN-2000-000482.jpg
but this shouldn`t be that much work

If you want to do it easier, just name them "Airepulsor" :rolleyes:
Technically incorrect. In fact Ion Engines use very specific, expensive and rare fuels, at current, although new developments include the use of modified Arc Welders to create Tungsten-fueled Ion Engines, which is both much more prevent and cheaper to handle.
Also, depending on the size of the particle accelerator used, Ion Engines create relatively little thrust, which may not be effective at ground level, and certainly isn't an efficient technology in direct opposition to planetary gravity at ground level, thus craft with Ion Engines are still launched on a rocket.
Saying that, there is no reason to assume that the Ion Engines of a TerraTech era wouldn't be up to the task, the issue is that they would definitely still need a fuel.
 

Lost Ninja

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2015
1,213
870
520
45
Yorkshire Dales under a rock.
Why do Hovers have a height limit while steering hovers simply work?
Before you go any further perhaps it would be wise to study real world hovercraft. They beat gravity and can go up hill (albeit poorly) however they don't take off.

This is because while the downward force can beat gravity while it is constrained by the hovercraft's "skirt"' once the downward force is able to expand into the rest of the environment it no longer has enough force to do that.

The in-game hover plates may in fact work on different principles (probably do) but to suggest that the only way that they can work is the way you think they work is clearly wrong. Face it a large proportion of the games technologies are blatantly not real world.

Basically we use a black hole to transport items off world to store them though cannot do the same with resources, for those we use a cannon which produces no appreciable recoil and doesn't fire them fast enough for them to break the sound barrier let alone the planet's gravitational field. We can put wings on a brick and have it fly (with no hover plates). We can build techs that fall apart when an explosive goes off near a single exposed block yet the same vast tech that must weigh in at several thousand tons, can fall from a great height and take practically no damage. And be still able to drive off into the sunset.

And lets not forget shield and regeneration bubbles... no idea how they can work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Django

ilikegoodfood

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2014
461
419
475
United Kingdom
I say assumed here because it is exactly that. The games lore is neither detailed enough, fleshed out enough or provided to us clearly enough to know how it works, but that simply passes the job to the players, it doesn't actually reduce the amount that can be inferred about the game, its world or technologies as per the standard paradigms.

And yes, while they are packaged differently, everything in TerraTech can be found in and does generally follow the "default" rules of these technologies in Sci-Fi, including the SCU.
If you or anyone else can give me a good method that fits with the game's current mechanics then I am very happy to hear it. Also, I suggested above that you could fix the issue of Steering Hovers, which is my only issue, by instead creating Functionally identical Steering Fans, which is what irl "hovercraft" use.

And lets not forget shield and regeneration bubbles... no idea how they can work.
There are a number of ways that they could work very well. My favorite is to assume that construction of complex machines and blocks is done through the use of construction nanites, micro-robots, in a similar but more advanced role to 3D printers. The Repair shield is a wireless energy source that causes these nanites to awaken and continue to create, or in this case fix, the blocks. This would also explain why the field effects enemy techs as they are all using a similar construction nanite.
The Shield is harder to explain, as it is in every Sci-Fi and either requires the creation of a static "wall" of air, or more specifically sound, a sonic barrier, or an entirely different energy field, one which reacts to other energies strongly. However, the way that it functions doesn't need specific explanation as it is per Sci-Fi Paradigms, and entirely none-contradictory.
The SCU is simply an example of a Space-Time Bubble, often represented in Sci-Fi by a naked singularity or some other black-hole-like anomaly. By curving a large volume of space-time into a ball and leaving a tiny opening, you create an internal volume that exceeds it's external one, a space into which we literally throw our blocks.
Of course, what's inside could be anything, including a solar system, or a factory and warehouse, although in this case it is likely a simple warehouse, as having the technological capacity to create large Null-Spaces as I like to refer to them (I find that therm Null-Space is usable in both Sci-Fi and Fantasy terms, whereas Space-Time Bubbles tend to be exclusive to one group of Sci-Fi methods), can have some interesting effects on an empire's logistic and socioeconomics.
 

Lost Ninja

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2015
1,213
870
520
45
Yorkshire Dales under a rock.
My point was less that it needs explaining or that it needs to logically fit within a certain framework but that because it cannot be explained by you (or anyone else) doesn't mean that it cannot work as it appears to.

As for the name it may not be true to how it works so much as a description for what it's for... "Steering for Hover" which is how I read it.

As for the rest having read as much sci-fi as I have I have no doubt that if I chose I could come up with logical explanations for it all that are not even close to those you would come up with. But why bother? I'm not a dev, surely it's up to them to develop the back story as much as they do the coding and art.