Submit Feedback

braking thrust seems more effective than acceleration thrust.

Wilhelm shared this bug ago

Submitted

Acceleration and deceleration with the same number of thrusters has different results. Built a large ship, it has 8 large ion thrusters pointed both forward and backwards. It takes the forward thrusters about 3 times longer to get the ship moving than it does for the backwards thrust to stop it.

i.e. about 3 seconds for the ship to get to 20m/s and about 1 second to return to 0m/s

I have the same bug

Replies (3)

Jordi Cunillera ●

Same here, idk if its a bug or a feature, but i dont like it.

Reply URL

Tristan Sullivan ●

its an intended ship losing prevention method it was in the old game, kind of. Still completely unnecessary and feels weird Realism for the win!!

Reply URL

Wilhelm ●

I've got ~4300 hours on SE1, I don't remember anything like this. You have ''x' newtons in a direction, it speeds/slows based on the ship mass. Maybe it's in one of the scenarios, I always played survival open world so <shrug>.

Reply URL

Keri Corscaria ●

Nope, it's definitely in survival. It's something I had to train myself to use. My instinct is to reverse thrust to stop, but making sure inertial dampeners are on and just not actively thrusting, stops the ship much faster.

URL

Wilhelm ●

Hate to disagree, I just went into a fairly new survival, built a ship with equal thrust (two small ions forward and back). Inertial dampeners on. Acceleration forward for 10 seconds, then let inertial dampeners stop the ship which also took 10 seconds. Balanced.

Doing the same thing on SE2, the intertial dempeners slow the ship about 3x faster than the acceleration with the same setup.

Always possible we're talking about two separate things, which is why I added the test setup above.

URL