Friday Facts #411 - All about asteroids

[mmmPI]

So the background star movement speed would still have to be some inverse-function depending on the distance from Planet 1 & Planet 2, where it feels like the stars almost don't move at all when you are exactly half-way between Planet 1 & Planet 2, and slowly accelerating the closer you get to a planet.

So the initial issue still stands, the stars move too fast when further away from the planet. xD

Maybe we were just shown an accelerated clip that demonstrate the capabilities of the engine with the new additions ...

Maybe something else in the factorio universe can explain this, like some massive body curving so much space time that everything orbits around it making it impossible for the space platform to travel from one planet to another without having a very curvy trajectory around it.

( a black hole 5 stars orbiting around it in the same plane separatated by some egal angle, if the spaceplatform wanted to take a straighter path, it would make it go too close to the black hole.... ? ).


Maybe the game isn't a 100% accurate simulation of interstellar travel... That would be a shame though, that's my number 3 option.

[MeduSalem]

[...]

As said; don't interpret so much into it. xD

They just thought the additional layer of parallax movement looked cool even though it makes not much sense from a realistic point of view; it is as easy as that.

[mmmPI]

I'm 100% sure that if the stars weren't moving, we'd have THE SAME people commenting that they should, it would give a better intuition even if it's not realistic.

[FuryoftheStars]

I'm 100% sure that if the stars weren't moving, we'd have THE SAME people commenting that they should, it would give a better intuition even if it's not realistic.

Nope, I wouldn't. In fact, it'd be a first in any of the games I've played and I'd comment on how finally someone did it right (even if the quantity of dust and asteroids is still overboard).

[mrudat]

Do we know if we get a day/night cycle in space or if we always get (some) sunlight all the time?

Given the solar panel design, the sun would ideally always be ~45 degrees west/up from the platform.


If it's always sunny, that means the platform is always oriented sunwards, and we're in a sun-synchronous orbit, which is on a plane that's perpendicular to the sun and follows the dawn/dusk line on the ground.

If we're always facing the direction of travel, the planet would always be west/down relative to the platform, and never in view.


If we get the same day/night cycle as the planet, we're in geosynchronous orbit.

The orbit would be roughly the same shape as before, but rotated by 90 degrees; the stars we see would be different, but how they move would be the same.

We can't keep the solar panels pointed directly at the sun, but they'd have the same relative orientation as they do on the ground.

[JD00]

Anybody else having trouble having motivation to start a new run until the updates?
There's just so much coming it feels like designing for a last gen console knowing the next one is on the way and will be 4 times as powerful
I just stare at my factory and think something like "this would be better with the new rails"
Even if it turns out to be like 2 years off at this point I still feel compelled to just wait until we get the new stuff

[MeduSalem]

Anybody else having trouble having motivation to start a new run until the updates?
There's just so much coming it feels like designing for a last gen console knowing the next one is on the way and will be 4 times as powerful
I just stare at my factory and think something like "this would be better with the new rails"
Even if it turns out to be like 2 years off at this point I still feel compelled to just wait until we get the new stuff

Yes, me.

But it is not just Factorio for me but I feel the same about all games when there are new updates/expansions around the corner.

[Koub]

Anybody else having trouble having motivation to start a new run until the updates?

Me .
I've had the itch for a new Factorio game since around mid-March, but have been reluctant to start one, knowing I likely wouldn't have been done with it by this summer, when the expansion is planned so far. If the expansion had been announced with an ETA next year, things would have been different.

[Tertius]

I started a new game anyway. Not intended as long-lived map, just to improve my early game skills to automate earlier and start a mall with the first assembling machine. I'm good with carefully designing in map editor, but my early game skills on a real map are terrible.

[EvanT]

This is untrue.
What is quite similar is the axis of rotation of the body around the star. But the axis of rotation (and rotation speed) of any body around its center of gravity is usually very different.
Example on the planets of our solar system : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhJrpzsKEXo

According to the video the angle of the axis is either ~3° (including reverse rotation) or ~26°. There is only one exemption which is a planet at the other end of the system without any nearby neighbors. But planets in "close" proximity align more or less. So where exactly is "quite similar" wrong? Mons even tent to get tidal looked rotation.

[Grob]

This is untrue.
What is quite similar is the axis of rotation of the body around the star. But the axis of rotation (and rotation speed) of any body around its center of gravity is usually very different.
Example on the planets of our solar system : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhJrpzsKEXo

According to the video the angle of the axis is either ~3° (including reverse rotation) or ~26°. There is only one exemption which is a planet at the other end of the system without any nearby neighbors. But planets in "close" proximity align more or less. So where exactly is "quite similar" wrong? Mons even tent to get tidal looked rotation.

"There are 2 behavior that are clearly different. Also the precision of being in such behavior is less than 90%. We observe one behavior in 3 cases, the other one in 4 cases, and a completely different of them in a 8th case, but I throw of this case because I like to do so. The claim « There is only one behavior » was then clearly right"

BTW, you are arguing about planets, that I was only giving as an example. The initial topic was about asteroids, that are way less massive, so for example mass influence didn't even bring their orbit in the ecliptic plane (from 10° to 30° in the main belt). You really think that the axial tilt of the asteroids are aligned ?

I mean, yes, when a body is close to a bigger body, its orbit inclination and axial tilting have the tendancy to align in the long run. But it's very slow and only for close orbits. Nothing compared to what we see it the animations of the FFF...