So, about that rocket...

baronvonsatanbaronvonsatan TX, USA Join Date: 2016-12-01 Member: 224415Members
As I understand it, the fuel for the rocket is going to be one solid hunk of green stuff, but the rocket is going to have three stages. If it isn't jettisoning empty fuel tanks, why does the rocket need more than one stage?
«1

Comments

  • elfcrisiselfcrisis Join Date: 2017-05-13 Member: 230466Members
    I suppose we'll find out once 1.0 is released. :3
  • adel_50adel_50 Join Date: 2016-09-01 Member: 221973Members
    Each stage is a different part of the rocket

    Stage 1: boosters

    Stage 2: engine

    Stage3: cockpit

    Now as for powering it you will need ion crystals to make ion crystal maitricies then make power cores to put it in the engine

    The fuel is only needed once you complete all stages you in the engine and then put thise cores in there (not to mention what you'll need to activate the rocket systems)

    And also it's pretty early to talk about this the rocket is still two months away
  • baronvonsatanbaronvonsatan TX, USA Join Date: 2016-12-01 Member: 224415Members
    edited August 2017
    adel_50 wrote: »
    Each stage is a different part of the rocket

    Stage 1: boosters

    Stage 2: engine

    Stage3: cockpit

    These are just different parts. If there's no staging, this is all one stage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multistage_rocket
  • adel_50adel_50 Join Date: 2016-09-01 Member: 221973Members
    adel_50 wrote: »
    Each stage is a different part of the rocket

    Stage 1: boosters

    Stage 2: engine

    Stage3: cockpit

    These are just different parts. If there's no staging, this is all one stage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multistage_rocket

    Well that's how the devs named it so unless they change it they will be called stages
  • baronvonsatanbaronvonsatan TX, USA Join Date: 2016-12-01 Member: 224415Members
    edited August 2017
    They can call them stages, sure. They can call them consolidated unicorn poop structures if they feel like it-- it's their game. But since a multi-stage rocket is a specific, real-world thing, they'll still just be sections-- not stages.
  • elfcrisiselfcrisis Join Date: 2017-05-13 Member: 230466Members
    They can call them stages, sure. They can call them consolidated unicorn poop structures if they feel like it-- it's their game. But since a multi-stage rocket is a specific, real-world thing, they'll still just be sections-- not stages.

    Well, this is set in The Future, and language changes over time. Could be that the term, in this context, doesn't mean then what it means now. Some word that stuck around even though it doesn't apply anymore.

    I can come up with a million excuses but it probably just made sense to the devs to describe the three parts of your rocket as "stages" since that's what people can relate to.
  • jeodjeod Stuck in Aperture Join Date: 2017-04-12 Member: 229591Members
    I love this place.

    One minute we're talking about the rocket and it's stages, then next, the cultural significance of the word stage.
    These always crack me up
  • Kouji_SanKouji_San Sr. Hινε Uρкεερεг - EUPT Deputy The Netherlands Join Date: 2003-05-13 Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
    jeod wrote: »
    I love this place.

    One minute we're talking about the rocket and it's stages, then next, the cultural significance of the word stage.
    These always crack me up

    Hey @jeod, I'm really happy for your happiness, Imma let you finish, but Megaman had one of the best stage select screens of all time!
  • zetachronzetachron Germany Join Date: 2014-11-14 Member: 199655Members
    You forgot Stage 4:
    When you leave the planet the Precursor minds stored into databanks will upload themselves into the Rocket AI databanks while they activate some of their relics to blow up the planet behind and then create a new Precursor empire in the galaxy. Which will be seen in:

    Natural Selection 3 - Precursor dominion

    Then we need a follow up:

    Return to Subnautica
    (Travel back in time to Subnautica to stop the galactic Precursors before it happens)
  • jamintheinfinite_1jamintheinfinite_1 Jupiter Join Date: 2016-12-03 Member: 224524Members
    zetachron wrote: »
    You forgot Stage 4:
    When you leave the planet the Precursor minds stored into databanks will upload themselves into the Rocket AI databanks while they activate some of their relics to blow up the planet behind and then create a new Precursor empire in the galaxy. Which will be seen in:

    Natural Selection 3 - Precursor dominion

    Then we need a follow up:

    Return to Subnautica
    (Travel back in time to Subnautica to stop the galactic Precursors before it happens)

    Seems legit
  • DaveyNYDaveyNY Schenectady, NY Join Date: 2016-08-30 Member: 221903Members
    edited August 2017
    Is Consolidated Unicorn Poop more powerful than Precursor Fuel?
    B)
  • Kouji_SanKouji_San Sr. Hινε Uρкεερεг - EUPT Deputy The Netherlands Join Date: 2003-05-13 Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
    DaveyNY wrote: »
    Is Consolidated Unicorn Poop more powerful than Precursor Fuel?
    B)

    Unicorns are made of awesome rainbow sprinkles, so... We could assume, yes?
  • baronvonsatanbaronvonsatan TX, USA Join Date: 2016-12-01 Member: 224415Members
    adel_50 wrote: »
    Each stage is a different part of the rocket

    Stage 1: boosters

    Stage 2: engine

    Stage3: cockpit

    Now as for powering it you will need ion crystals to make ion crystal maitricies then make power cores to put it in the engine

    The fuel is only needed once you complete all stages you in the engine and then put thise cores in there (not to mention what you'll need to activate the rocket systems)

    And also it's pretty early to talk about this the rocket is still two months away

    I can't believe I missed this. Boosters? You mean those things that come with their own fuel supply and engine and then get jettisoned?

    That would make this a two-stage rocket instead of an SSTO (single-stage to orbit) rocket. Which, once again, raises the question of why jettisoning them would be necessary if the fuel is all one solid piece.
  • baronvonsatanbaronvonsatan TX, USA Join Date: 2016-12-01 Member: 224415Members
    elfcrisis wrote: »
    They can call them stages, sure. They can call them consolidated unicorn poop structures if they feel like it-- it's their game. But since a multi-stage rocket is a specific, real-world thing, they'll still just be sections-- not stages.

    Well, this is set in The Future, and language changes over time. Could be that the term, in this context, doesn't mean then what it means now. Some word that stuck around even though it doesn't apply anymore.

    Really trying not to be a jerk but if you tried this in a first-semester English course at a university, you would get an F. Your hypothesis is not supported by the text (i.e., Subnautica). "The text," in fact, directly contradicts your hypothesis by using the same English we speak in the present.

    Basically, we aren't getting more than one stage because the individual parts of the rocket are mislabeled as "stages." Got it.
  • baronvonsatanbaronvonsatan TX, USA Join Date: 2016-12-01 Member: 224415Members
    Kouji_San wrote: »
    DaveyNY wrote: »
    Is Consolidated Unicorn Poop more powerful than Precursor Fuel?
    B)

    Unicorns are made of awesome rainbow sprinkles, so... We could assume, yes?

    You'd have to find a pooping unicorn, and I don't think the game came with those. CUP (ha) is probably just Nutrient Blocks.
  • Mr_EndarMr_Endar Join Date: 2016-03-05 Member: 213859Members
    elfcrisis wrote: »
    They can call them stages, sure. They can call them consolidated unicorn poop structures if they feel like it-- it's their game. But since a multi-stage rocket is a specific, real-world thing, they'll still just be sections-- not stages.

    Well, this is set in The Future, and language changes over time. Could be that the term, in this context, doesn't mean then what it means now. Some word that stuck around even though it doesn't apply anymore.

    I can come up with a million excuses but it probably just made sense to the devs to describe the three parts of your rocket as "stages" since that's what people can relate to.

    With that logic, would Earth be flat in the future? You know, language changes over time
  • EnglishInfidelEnglishInfidel Canada Join Date: 2016-07-04 Member: 219533Members
    They can't even make an original, competent story or plot, and you expect them to implement realistic rocket science?
  • garathgarath Texas Join Date: 2017-02-08 Member: 227730Members
    elfcrisis wrote: »
    They can call them stages, sure. They can call them consolidated unicorn poop structures if they feel like it-- it's their game. But since a multi-stage rocket is a specific, real-world thing, they'll still just be sections-- not stages.

    Well, this is set in The Future, and language changes over time. Could be that the term, in this context, doesn't mean then what it means now. Some word that stuck around even though it doesn't apply anymore.

    Really trying not to be a jerk but if you tried this in a first-semester English course at a university, you would get an F. Your hypothesis is not supported by the text (i.e., Subnautica). "The text," in fact, directly contradicts your hypothesis by using the same English we speak in the present.

    Basically, we aren't getting more than one stage because the individual parts of the rocket are mislabeled as "stages." Got it.

    I very much doubt your credentials for making a plausible argument along these lines. Please provide proof you are qualified to speak on the subject of the evolution of language over time. Without that proof, I'm going to put my support behind @elfcrisis and say the words can mean anything they want.

    Most likely, the developers wanted to allow the player to construct the rocket in pieces rather than all at once. They probably heard the word 'stages' used in rockets and decided, "What the heck?!?", why don't we call these individual portions of the rocket "stages" even though we have no intention of actually separating them as in "old world" vernacular. For all we know, in the future, they have such high technology that they don't need to separate the "stages" of rockets but still use that word.

    Your argument earns an A. Oh, by the way, in the future, A is one-one thousandth the value of an F in today's scoring system. You see, in the future, we have raised the standards quite a bit. :)

  • EnglishInfidelEnglishInfidel Canada Join Date: 2016-07-04 Member: 219533Members
    edited August 2017
    elfcrisis wrote: »
    I can come up with a million excuses but it probably just made sense to the devs to describe the three parts of your rocket as "stages" since that's what people can relate to.

    What kind of imbecile would see the word "stage" and think it means "part"? What "stage" is the engine in my car? What "stage" are the tyres? That's not how the word works and you can't just redefine it because "it's the future"... English is an established language with rules that must be followed if it's to mean anything.
    garath wrote: »
    and say the words can mean anything they want.

    You can't just redefine established language because you want to. You're not allowed to get offended when I call you an idiot because I've redefined idiot to mean " a lovely person"? No, that's not how it works. You'd be offended because "idiot" means "idiot"... just like "stage" means "stage"... not "part".
    garath wrote: »
    Please provide proof you are qualified to speak on the subject of the evolution of language over time.

    What qualification would satisfy you? Should I email you my resume with appropriate references? I'm a historian with a massive passion for language and have spent literally years of my life immersed in how the Old English of the Anglo-Saxons became the English we know now, with all it's multitudes of influences and nuances.
    You don't have to be an English language historian to know that's not how it works. Just someone with a modicum of passion for language or perhaps history, and some common sense. The evidence of how language evolved is there in text, and we can extrapolate from the past how it will work in the future.
    elfcrisis wrote: »
    They probably heard the word 'stages' used in rockets and decided, "What the heck?!?", why don't we call these individual portions of the rocket "stages" even though we have no intention of actually separating them as in "old world" vernacular. For all we know, in the future, they have such high technology that they don't need to separate the "stages" of rockets but still use that word.

    I think that's exactly what happened, and it's incredibly lazy. They heard the word "stages" and threw it in there without knowing what the hell it means. It's confusing to anyone with any very basic knowledge of rocketry. I'd assume that part of developing a game (especially one which wants to be taken seriously) involves research, and if I were making a rocket in a game I'd probably learn some basic freaking terminology so as not to confuse the hell out of people. Even if they'd played KSP for 30 minutes they'd know how utterly and completely wrong it is to use the word "stage" in that context.

    The argument about it being the future so the misuse of the word is justified is completely ridiculous. There's no evidence to back it up, but ample evidence that English remains exactly the same in the future as it does today.
  • garathgarath Texas Join Date: 2017-02-08 Member: 227730Members
    The argument about it being the future so the misuse of the word is completely ridiculous. There's no evidence to back it up, but ample evidence that English remains exactly the same in the future as it does today.

    Words very often do change meaning over time and sometimes quite radically. For example, consider these words from this source:

    http://ideas.ted.com/20-words-that-once-meant-something-very-different/



    Nice: This word used to mean “silly, foolish, simple.” Far from the compliment it is today!
    Silly: Meanwhile, silly went in the opposite direction: in its earliest uses, it referred to things worthy or blessed; from there it came to refer to the weak and vulnerable, and more recently to those who are foolish.
    Awful: Awful things used to be “worthy of awe” for a variety of reasons, which is how we get expressions like “the awful majesty of God.”
    Fizzle: The verb fizzle once referred to the act of producing quiet flatulence (think “SBD”); American college slang flipped the word’s meaning to refer to failing at things.
    Wench: A shortened form of the Old English word wenchel (which referred to children of either sex), the word wench used to mean “female child” before it came to be used to refer to female servants — and more pejoratively to wanton women.
    Fathom: It can be hard to fathom how this verb moved from meaning “to encircle with one’s arms” to meaning “to understand after much thought.” Here’s the scoop: One’s outstretched arms can be used as a measurement (a fathom), and once you have fathoms, you can use a fathom line to measure the depth of water. Think metaphorically and fathoming becomes about getting to the bottom of things.
    Clue: Centuries ago, a clue (or clew) was a ball of yarn. Think about threading your way through a maze and you’ll see how we got from yarn to key bits of evidence that help us solve things.
    Myriad: If you had a myriad of things 600 years ago, it meant that you specifically had 10,000 of them — not just a lot.
    Naughty: Long ago, if you were naughty, you had naught or nothing. Then it came to mean evil or immoral, and now you are just badly behaved.
    Eerie: Before the word eerie described things that inspire fear, it used to describe people feeling fear — as in one could feel faint and eerie.
    Spinster: As it sounds, spinsters used to be women who spun. It referred to a legal occupation before it came to mean “unmarried woman” — and often not in the most positive ways, as opposed to a bachelor …
    Bachelor: A bachelor was a young knight before the word came to refer to someone who had achieved the lowest rank at a university — and it lives on in that meaning in today’s B.A. and B.S degrees. It’s been used for unmarried men since Chaucer’s day.
    Flirt: Some 500 years ago, flirting was flicking something away or flicking open a fan or otherwise making a brisk or jerky motion. Now it involves playing with people’s emotions (sometimes it may feel like your heart is getting jerked around in the process).
    Guy: This word is an eponym. It comes from the name of Guy Fawkes, who was part of a failed attempt to blow up Parliament in 1605. Folks used to burn his effigy, a “Guy Fawkes” or a “guy,” and from there it came to refer to a frightful figure. In the U.S., it has come to refer to men in general.
    Hussy: Believe it or not, hussy comes from the word housewife (with several sound changes, clearly) and used to refer to the mistress of a household, not the disreputable woman it refers to today.
    Egregious: It used to be possible for it to be a good thing to be egregious: it meant you were distinguished or eminent. But in the end, the negative meaning of the word won out, and now it means that someone or something is conspicuously bad — not conspicuously good.
    Quell: Quelling something or someone used to mean killing it, not just subduing it.
    Divest: 300 years ago, divesting could involve undressing as well as depriving others of their rights or possessions. It has only recently come to refer to selling off investments.
    Senile: Senile used to refer simply to anything related to old age, so you could have senile maturity. Now it refers specifically to those suffering from senile dementia.
    Meat: Have you ever wondered about the expression “meat and drink”? It comes from an older meaning of the word meat that refers to food in general — solid food of a variety of kinds (not just animal flesh), as opposed to drink.

  • EnglishInfidelEnglishInfidel Canada Join Date: 2016-07-04 Member: 219533Members
    edited August 2017
    I don't think you understand. None of that has any bearing on the conversation. Nobody is claiming words don't change meaning over time, of course they do. The point is that the English used in Subnautica is very clearly the same English we use today in 2017, all evidence points to it being such. The PDA entries, radio logs, subtitles etc. are all written in our English, not a future English. Therefore, the definition of "stage" especially in the context of rocketry must be the same as it is today, in 2017. There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary, so we must assume the misuse of the word "stage" is just that; a misuse, and not in fact some alternate, future definition.
  • Mr_EndarMr_Endar Join Date: 2016-03-05 Member: 213859Members
    edited August 2017
    technical terms don't tend to change over time
    for some things we actually use words invented by ancient Greeks

    Newton was farer in the past that Subnautica world is in the future
  • jeodjeod Stuck in Aperture Join Date: 2017-04-12 Member: 229591Members
    I was going to read all of this, but as soon as I saw the paragraph responses my brain shut down.
  • TelrosTelros Maine Join Date: 2016-05-11 Member: 216614Members
    It's big but if you take the time, it's not too bad.
  • FathomFathom Earth Join Date: 2016-07-01 Member: 219405Members
    zetachron wrote: »
    You forgot Stage 4:
    When you leave the planet the Precursor minds stored into databanks will upload themselves into the Rocket AI databanks while they activate some of their relics to blow up the planet behind and then create a new Precursor empire in the galaxy. Which will be seen in:

    Natural Selection 3 - Precursor dominion

    Then we need a follow up:

    Return to Subnautica
    (Travel back in time to Subnautica to stop the galactic Precursors before it happens)
    Plot twist:
    Whoever travels back in time unleashes the Carar in an attempt to eliminate the Precursor threat before it can happen.
  • elfcrisiselfcrisis Join Date: 2017-05-13 Member: 230466Members
    I don't think you understand. None of that has any bearing on the conversation. Nobody is claiming words don't change meaning over time, of course they do. The point is that the English used in Subnautica is very clearly the same English we use today in 2017, all evidence points to it being such. The PDA entries, radio logs, subtitles etc. are all written in our English, not a future English. Therefore, the definition of "stage" especially in the context of rocketry must be the same as it is today, in 2017. There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary, so we must assume the misuse of the word "stage" is just that; a misuse, and not in fact some alternate, future definition.

    @EnglishInfidel
    For a minute there I was flabbergasted that someone with such a deep knowledge of the history of the English language seemed be arguing for and against language drift at the same time, but now I see what you're talking about. It's a totally relevant point and a fine one to make, and could indicate a couple of things about why the writers on the team chose to use the term. They could have chosen to use it inaccurately on purpose, to make it more accessible for people without the science, and science fiction, literacy that a lot of us have here. (Do you like all my commas olol). Or they could simply mean that the rocket is /built in stages/, a much more generic use of the word but confusing in this particular case. Or maybe they just didn't think it through. It doesn't matter that much, IMO.

    However, I feel the need to call you out about something else, though it does tie in to my point about science literacy. Frankly, your statement about "what kind of imbecile" really irritates me*. Just because someone doesn't have the same context as you doesn't make them stupid, it just means they don't know what you know. Period. This is what I meant by accessibility, and it might behoove you to have a little empathy for people who, by choice or circumstance, were not exposed to the wonderful world of space exploration.

    *Took me a while and a lot of backspacing to put that politely, but I did it for you, man.
  • garathgarath Texas Join Date: 2017-02-08 Member: 227730Members
    I don't think you understand. None of that has any bearing on the conversation. Nobody is claiming words don't change meaning over time, of course they do. The point is that the English used in Subnautica is very clearly the same English we use today in 2017, all evidence points to it being such. The PDA entries, radio logs, subtitles etc. are all written in our English, not a future English. Therefore, the definition of "stage" especially in the context of rocketry must be the same as it is today, in 2017. There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary, so we must assume the misuse of the word "stage" is just that; a misuse, and not in fact some alternate, future definition.

    Thanks for clarifying your position. Upon first read just of what you wrote, it sounded like you were saying words don't change meaning. Now, though, it sounds like you are going too far to the other extreme. By that, I mean that you seem to be saying ALL words have to change meaning for you to believe that *any* words have changed meaning. As for me, I look at this long list of futuristic sounding words, and that's enough for me to think this is the future and thus believe that perhaps some other word has changed meaning:

    Cyclops
    Seamoth
    PRAWN
    Laser Cutter
    Mobile Vehicle Bay
    Prawn Suit Torpedo Arm
    Stasis Rifle
    Propulsion Cannon
    Stillsuit
    Bioreactor
    Grav Trap
    Cerebral Implant
    steller economics
    phasegate

    After 150-200 years of technological advancement, personally, I have no problem believing maybe the use of the word "stage" may have shifted so that it has nothing to do with a separately engined/fueled part of a rocket ship. If sounds like you either want "in-game" explanations of at least a handful of words that have radically changed meanings. Or, perhaps you want the entire game vocabulary to be radically different for you to believe this is really "Future English".

    I think I see and understand your position. Thanks for the clarification.
  • EnglishInfidelEnglishInfidel Canada Join Date: 2016-07-04 Member: 219533Members
    elfcrisis wrote: »
    However, I feel the need to call you out about something else, though it does tie in to my point about science literacy. Frankly, your statement about "what kind of imbecile" really irritates me*

    Haha, it's a valid complaint and well made. I'm not calling anyone a genuine imbecile, I'm merely a brash, abusive piece of sh*t with very little tolerance, and I'm the first to admit it.
  • elfcrisiselfcrisis Join Date: 2017-05-13 Member: 230466Members
    I just wonder what the writers/devs think of where this thread went...
  • EnglishInfidelEnglishInfidel Canada Join Date: 2016-07-04 Member: 219533Members
    garath wrote: »
    After 150-200 years of technological advancement, personally, I have no problem believing maybe the use of the word "stage" may have shifted so that it has nothing to do with a separately engined/fueled part of a rocket ship. If sounds like you either want "in-game" explanations of at least a handful of words that have radically changed meanings. Or, perhaps you want the entire game vocabulary to be radically different for you to believe this is really "Future English".

    I think I see and understand your position. Thanks for the clarification.

    I don't think all the proper nouns you listed should really be taken into consideration, but that's okay.
Sign In or Register to comment.