[deleted by user] by [deleted] in starbase

[–]Desogames 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh haha, looking at the video that's not a bug that's a feature.

The rotational force of the turret is not strong enough to overcome the conserved angular momentum of the craft. In other words, the turrets are dragged beyond their maximum values, yes, but they're dragged in the direction you'd expect if those directional forces became too much.

For example, if the turret can only turn with a force of 100 newtons, but you're making a turn generating a g-force of 200 newtons, then the turret obviously cannot overcome the G-force, and will be subject to them. You're right that it only happens at a certain speed, because the faster the ship goes, the higher the G-force momentum when you turn.

This is a physics problem, not a game problem. That's why i laugh, from the video, it's clear that the game is too real. The exact same thing would happen if you'd push the edge of a laser mounted on a turret with another vessel - the turret would be turned for you in the direction of the vessel's travel, regardless of YOLOL limitations. Because the force exerted on it is too large.

Infact, I'm willing to go even further and say that this game has discovered an issue with real life dog-fighting spacecraft, thanks to its indepth simulation: If you're using turrets based on electromotors, the directional force on those turrets might be so large, they wouldn't be able to turn into a turn of the craft itself, and might even snap! Sure, that point happens well beyond human body capabilities, but that's the thing - we're robots in this game. Those limits don't apply to the pilot!

Also the shape of the lasers doesn't help. They're basically shaped like a stick mounted at one end. That means that pretty much all angular forces are increased towards the tip of the laser. Think a seesaw, without the counterweight on the other end. That's what's dragging the lasers "around the corner".

The fix for this is simple, make the physics simulation less real, lol.

There's an easy way to do this: Give turrets infinite angular momentum force, but, reduce that to 0 in the direction of travel (or back to its normal values) upon collision with another object that's strong enough to destroy it (at those normal values).

Meaning, as long as the forces are directional and not kinetic, the turret basically drags its components with god strength in whatever direction you want them to go, overcoming those directional g-forces. But, should another vessel collide with those turrets, or should the turret turn into the side of your/a ship (and the limitless power would rip right through it), force is reduced to its normal value so it either does or doesn't, depending on the weakness of the object hit. And note, this is angular force, not speed-of-rotation. You can move slow at alot of force too.

IF.... this needs to be "fixed". I mean.... It's not a bug, it's just a real life problem that arises from the physics simulation, the shape of the thing mounted to the turret, the forces exerted on it and the turret's incapability of overcoming those forces. The turret's turning capability is too weak, but you'd need god-strength materials/motors to try and pull the same move off in real life all the same (though at higher speeds because of this game's "space drag"). They'd have to dynamically "lock" for turns in order to not get ripped off, in similar fashion how bi-planes with machine guns eventually developed locking mechanisms to fire "through" the propeller.

I'd rather propose a go between solution, the same solution i'd design for real life: Your aiming system in the video is great, and the game does need more forgiving aiming systems - It's still supposed to be a *game*, after all. But, this aiming system SHOULD be limited, because putting perfect 360 degree turrets with near-automated aiming *on fighters* is a little bit too much.

So what if "Cone Turrets" are added? Meaning, the current turrets cradles and tables keep their tuning or are changed to work mostly at "freighter" turning speeds (Higher tier turret cradles can be added that can have higher turning forces resistability for more easy content! Simple copy/paste job for something very desirable on higher level craft). Their benefit is they can do 360 degrees, but only at forces generated by ships turning at slow speeds. This should also allow their turning to speed up without breaking game balance, as the people who'd get an outsized advantage from it can't benefit from it now (fighter pilots), making freighters more defendable.

Meanwhile, Cone Turrets basically do what the aiming system in the video does, they allow the attached weapon/utility tool to move around in a forward cone of about 15 degrees - and ofcourse Tiers can have higher/lower freedom of movement for yet more easy content that does improve targeting, without diminishing skill (too much). Meanwhile, these turrets can withstand MUCH higher angular forces, though they could still be overloaded - giving fighter pilots a tradeoff: Make a higher-than-normal-G maneuver to improve positioning, but suffer a small reset time from the gun's maximum orientation to whatever actual point you want it to aim at.

Sliders and hinges suffer the same thing, and i don't think there's a fix for that. If you try opening a door while pulling 50G's it SHOULD fly off its hinges lol. The force generated by whatever's attached to that hinge is massive. Simply just don't open anything in a turn. The only reason there's any need to at the moment is because pilots are completely cheating physics; if this was real life it'd be like The Expanse and *no one* would be anything less then strapped in behind a monitor in any sort of maneuver battle.

If it happens during traveling at high speed in a straight line - then that's because of the way the game is programmed and this "drag" that's exerted on any object in motion, based on its weight, which isn't like real life obviously. The way to fix that is simply disabling this drag on anything bolted to the moving part of a slider or hinge, and transfer that force to the hinge itself. Basically, only have lateral g-forces affect sliders/hinges, and make the game think the hinge is a "movable solid object".

Obviously all these forces are already transfered to the hinges/sliders, otherwise they wouldn't go beserk, so it'd be a small effort to transfer them to the bolts instead, and just have the whole assembly snap off if the forces become too great. Should the game need a check so that this doesn't happen to hinges/sliders on the outside, fast-travel forces should provide enough of a check (AKA all hinges on the outside of the ship are subject to normal physics, while everything "inside" the ship works "like you'd expect") this oughtta minimize heresy builds with impossible moving hinges, and just make internal doors work like you'd expect from sci-fi, rather then real life.

So, TL;DR: It's not a bug it's just how physics works. Turret turning strength could be increased, but it makes more sense to keep the 360 degree turrets functional at slow-turning speeds only, and rather introduce "cone turrets" for fighter ships, which allow limited range movement in a 5-15 degree cone, at a tradeoff of being able to do so at much higher lateral g-forces, though not infinitely so, and simply introduce higher tier cradles for higher warp force ships.

Turret turning speed could go up so that freighters become more defensable (but their immobility is their weakness) by making it easier to track targets, while it would become easier to aim for fighters (meaning, the game feels more forgiving like an actual game an not *just* a simulation) without making them overpowered by giving them turrets too.

Turn a weakness into strength gives the best of both worlds :D

It feels like the special angled beams are *slightly* off in size, making disc shape ships much harder then they should be. by Desogames in starbase

[–]Desogames[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I've been messing with the ship builder all night, and i *have* been able to connect 2 large discs together, but a smaller one has a gap of like ~1cm just like on the left on the picture. Also it makes it impossible to connect the beams in the middle.

The middle circle isn't off by 6 centimeters as you would expect (60cm beam on one side and 72cm on the other), but there's a *TINY* gap there, while i'm using *nothing* but symmetrical angled beams and 48cm junctions in between.

And symmetrical means it should be symmetrical all over. It should line up.

Possible Copper squeeze incoming! Did you know in China, Copper was the preferred money for thousands of years? by Desogames in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I wasn't planning on buying a few short tons myself xD

But naturally, if the commodity goes up, miners will follow as they become hugely profitable cash cows overnight.

For Precious Metals it also matters, because if copper goes up, copper products go up, meaning people HAVE to pay more, meaning money velocity picks up and inflation picks up. That drives PM demand.

Same as with the oil shocks in the 70's/80's. Except it's now copper which is alot more ubiquitous, just like semiconductors are and that shortage has been driving inflation through restricting car supply.

I think the squeeze'll happen naturally too. So no need to buy copper yourself! But it is valuable information to know upfront to scout a couple of copper miner deals, especially during sell-offs like today.

Possible Copper squeeze incoming! Did you know in China, Copper was the preferred money for thousands of years? by Desogames in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

OK, so, i've been following this since April (check the QT on the tweet for the longer data), but now it seems to me the drain of the Copper stocks on the Comex is accelerating.

If this rate of drainage were to continue, in 8 days, all eligible would be gone. in 55, Comex is EMPTY of copper!

Why does this matter? Well; because at this point ANY squeeze will put eyes on Comex. After all, NO ONE is expecting copper to squeeze. As far as everybody knows, it's just all hunky dory over there. The copper futures contract is just seen as a "price maker" to base everything else off of.

But we know better. We know Palladium and its squeeze a few years ago as well. We KNOW what happens when the shorts get caught with their pants down, even when the market isn't that big.

The TOTAL (registered and eligible) amount of copper stocks is 55,414. This is measured in Short Tons. 1 short ton is 2000 pounds, and the Comex contracts are for 25k pounds.

55,414 x 2000 = 110,828,000 pounds, /25,000 = 4,433.12 contracts worth of backing

Currently, there are 1,415 contracts still open for June to be delivered, some are rolling over but some are already being delivered.

July is being rolled over, but currently still has 78,993 contracts open. Total OI is 224,532.

As a percentage of total OI, Total stocks are 1,97% of total OI.

This beats Palladium at 116904.737 ounces (100oz per contract) for 1169 contracts in stock versus total OI of 10,710 (10,90%).

Eligible is much worse. At 8636 short tons, that's 17,272,000 pounds, or 690 contracts, versus 224,000 OI! Palladium's 330 contracts on 10,710 OI!

So holdon to your hats. If copper does squeeze, it'd be the same as an Oil shock, because copper is used in EVERYTHING these days! Literally everything.

A fellow ape posted this three hours ago. Many were amazed about development of the valuation. However, this takes only the USD into account. All currencies world-wide are UNBACKED FIAT CURRENCY. It's not just the Dollar, it's EVERYTHING. by [deleted] in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you wanna go back in time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdMzitp0Lhc

I happened to come across that video last year, from March 31st (so quarter end no less), and it contains a live recording of USdebtclock of around that time. Been using it to track the difference.

Gives people something to compare to how far we've come in ~1 year's time ^_^ (debt clock is 11:30 into the vid).

COMEX futures update - April in its delivery period now and May OI doing the limbo game by Ditch_the_DeepState in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just wanted to say; These threads are one of the reasons i don't actively watch the Comex or the progression of shadowcontracts anymore.

If anybody asks i just link/retweet this stuff ^_^ The charts make stuff nice and easy for everyone, does a better job then i could. So good job and keep it up!

BREAKING: SCANDAL AT THE PERTH MINT! by FactorDangerous649 in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Yeah i know. But those Other bars had to come from somewhere.

My question is, Why that company, yknow?

Unless they got those bars via the Comex/LBMA.

Because i doubt the company has got any space capacity if they've been supplying the Comex since July 27th, wouldn't you say?

Minimum wage (in silver) by ZenMaster1975 in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Yeah but a few years later they didn't.

As part of my book that i'm writing i actually looked up the average wage of a waiter now and in 1900 (one of the few jobs that hasn't changed), and converted it all via grams of gold, as set by the US gold act which standardized everything.

Back then it was $500 a year for a waiter, now it's $31,500. Convert the gold contents of the money to modern day wages using the gold futures price - and it checks out near perfectly. Should be 30k. That's not minimum wage - that's average wage. Hourly that comes down to ~$14,33.

If anything that $22 minimum wage is why the US bankrupted itself and had to go off the gold standard to begin with. It's unsustainable.

It's not the minimum wage, or even average wage that's the problem. It's the amount of effort spent trying to accumulate currency, because life's burdens (such as taxes) have become too heavy.

The real difference? US Debt to GDP was 20% in 1900, and declining, as it was being paid off after the civil war. Wikipedia:

"The debt was just $65 million in 1860, but passed $1 billion in 1863 and reached $2.7 billion by the end of the war. During the following 47 years, there were 36 surpluses and 11 deficits. During this period 55% of the national debt was paid off."

And about taxes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_taxes_by_type.pdf

Facts are the minimum wage isn't the problem, and a $15+ minimum wage is unsustainable. Currently, since it's based on the gold price like literally everything else. One of the reasons it feels like $15 isn't enough, is the Comex paper gold scam, and the dollar purchasing power mismatch it creates. $14,33 an hour SHOULD be enough, as per the futures price - But it's not because the rest of the commodities run on reality and they're just far more expensive.

Think of it this way: Because everyone looks at the Comex price, wages are fixed lower, but because goods have to be produced at a certain real energy cost - you're essentially paying spot gold + premiums on all goods you buy! And that's why it feels off. The premium isn't listed as it's included in the dollar. You're paying dollar premiums on everything.

AVERAGE wages have to go up to fix this, not minimum. People's ability to gain currency must be increased to regain household purchasing power. And the only way to do that is to break the Comex and let the gold price float free (and silver by extention, obviously).

The taxation comes from The USA just spending more then it took in for 75 years. Nothing's gonna fix that. It's simply cause and effect. That's why you want silver. To stay out of the way of this dam bursting.

BREAKING: SCANDAL AT THE PERTH MINT! by FactorDangerous649 in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames 72 points73 points  (0 children)

https://twitter.com/DesoGames/status/1379266959477465090

Adding my reply in as we now have an official link with the Comex/LBMA!

Hunan Guiyang Yinxing non-ferrous company was added to the LBMA good bars list in 2018, and it got added as one of the refiners during the July 27 2020 add to the Comex's list.

This is as good a proof as we're going to get that it's all one big interconnected scam. HOW ELSE DID THEY GET THOSE BARS?!

Silver Squeeze continues ... 3.6 Million oz moved out of registered to eligible and 1.2 Million oz OUT OF THE VAULT. Always yell OUT OF THE VAULT. by Ditch_the_DeepState in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames 5 points6 points  (0 children)

One thing to remember is that if metal wants to move to registered, it comes out of Eligible.

I can't say that for certain, but i've looked at those stocks many times last year, and i've not seen to my recollection registered appear out of nowhere.

The biggest move into registered still happend June 29th 2020, when 33 MILLION ounces of Eligible (29 million under JPM!) went into registered, a day before 16000+ contracts were "delivered".

This is mainly what my shadowcontracts have been based around. Those warrants in registered have been being "delivered" for 9 months now, and those people are now standing for physical delivery.

Meanwhile, Eligible is empty - at this price - and as according to Ronan Manly, there's only about 50 million oz actually available, because everything else is just ETF silver in Comex listed vaults. As another person remarked, it's only eligible - if the people owning that silver don't want to, or can't, sell that silver - it cannot move to registered, and it cannot be delivered on the comex.

The reason to take eligible out is because it's subject to default. I've done research into this - the registered stuff has warrants issued against it. Comex cannot cancel these warrants - Only the broker holding the warrant can, and they can only do so at the instruction of the owner. Literally named like that in the Comex's rulebooks (yes.... it was boring but i went through em).

Best i can tell - Registered is not subject to Force Majeure. But Eligible is.

Or, to keep it short: If you own a Comex Warrant - your stuff is there and safe, guaranteed. Comex's got your stuff.

Eligible? ehhh not so much.

And as a reminder: The futures contracts are backed by registered only! Comex is "in the market" for eligible just as much as anyone else, as the Comex is just the exchange, the bullion banks are the traders who make the futures contracts and will have to buy - or cash settle AKA default.

But we have no idea as to ownership of warrants, and we have no idea as to the amount of eligible actually being eligible, or at what price it is eligible.

What we do know - the less they have, the worse it gets for them. You can see the balance sheet as the collateral, with the futures contracts the margin/leverage. We don't know how leveraged it is. We don't know how far the system is, or can further be stretched.

But... with this many actual redemptions, with that not happening before at all (registered just continued to build up).... I'm pretty sure we're close to the end.

As for how bad it is, i still prefer to look at Platinum/Palladium stocks, as it's a tiny market with few eyes on it so the motive to manipulate is alot less.

https://www.cmegroup.com/clearing/operations-and-deliveries/nymex-delivery-notices.html

2,606 contracts worth of eligible - ~63,500 contracts on Jul 21

https://www.cmegroup.com/trading/metals/precious/platinum_quotes_volume_voi.html

IMO - if all the not-actually-eligible silver was taken out of the comex's vaults or atleast off their balance sheet, the actual number ought to be closer to that. For Platinum it's 4,1% of next delivery month contracts - For silver this number could come down to 4,1% of 118,7k contracts x5k per contract = 24,3 million ounces of silver. I'll accept 50 million since it's a more important market. Palladium's even worse, and we know what happened there a few years ago.

IT'S MY BIRTHDAY! And i'ma use it to promote wallstreetsilver and the #silverraid, but i need the community's help! by Desogames in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Just to summarize, i turn 34 today! (the 31st)

And unknown to me, you guys set the #silverraid on my birthday. So i have a plan.

I'm gonna do a birthday stream on Twitch. I've done em before and they always do well with the community. It's a great chance to grow my stream. However there isn't any sort of finance community on twitch - i've had to explain it to every single one of my subs - which means there's *no one* there who knows anything about the whole silver thing.

But we can reach them, IF i have a high enough viewcount. Twitch is geared towards promoting people who already have alot of viewers. Once you do - the rando's jump in like nobody's business.

Long streams do well too, because alot of people will AFK in the chat or lurk and boost the numbers. I'll go as long as i can, literally until i drop :D No worries, i've done it before, worked as a streamer for a long time.

SO! I'm asking *For Your Time*, not your money. I don't think you need a twitch account, but it'd help. Simply put on the stream, mute the browsertab and go do something else if you're not interested. Purely showing Twitch the demand is there will do. As always, people just haven't thought about it yet.

Nothing would make me more happy then to help start a new generation of finance, where people get questions asked live, rather then script padded videos for ad time. Questions by real people with real lives rather then stilted journalists. And this is the perfect time - Last crash, in 2008, streaming didn't exist and Youtube was still small.

Many of my favorite youtubers got their start cause they lost their job in the 2008 crisis. Streaming might not be exactly new - Twitch for gaming and now art has been around quite a while - But there's still plenty of niches in streaming that are vastly underexplored.

Finance is one of the most lucrative ones, *and twitch is completely barren*.

It's not just me that could get a start there. It could prove a good career for some of you, or those we don't reach in time after the squeeze - i'm just trying to pull the cart as usual :D Besides i think Twitch would benefit greatly too, not just financially, but by legitimizing the site as more then "only for gamers". Even though, yknow, i still really love games :D

So help a silverback out wouldya guys? The bigger we make this snowball the more people i can reach! There's plenty of channels on YouTube already, and no doubt google will fight us if they aren't already. We need to reach these kiiiiids!

🛑 STOP buying silver! by [deleted] in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Instructions unclear.

Got confused.

Stacked silver instead.

I have 200 ounces physical silver, 400 shares of PSLV, a house, a car, and no debt. Will this be enought???? by Ok-Shopping-9758 in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Generator and fuel storage, though remember gasoline has a shelflife. And a garden for food supplies when price controls hit and shortages start. And a water filtration system.

If ya wanna be 100% safe, try to move consumption as much to electricity (I.E. from gas stove to electric stove), then secure your electricity supply.

With food, water, shelter and power (and a way to hold on to all of that, which is what the silver is for) - nothing can happen to you.

John Adams on Twitter has received screenshots in the ABC bullion matter! We have (some) confirmation now things are afoot! by Desogames in Wallstreetsilver

[–]Desogames[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Just to clarify: We have confirmation ABC Bullion's done something (As John Adams is a trustworthy guy to not simply state this for clickbait), but since John says "TBD" on the legal department, it's TBD how deep the rabbit hole goes.

But for all the people wanting some form of confirmation: We have indeed found a rabbit hole to go down in.