e-clips, what are they?

[flatline]

Well we can at least put a stake in one of the persistent myths about E-Clips.
E-clips do not sort 0.1 GJ of energy and the Conversion Book 1 is not a 'typo' that is correctable from 1GW to 1GJ.
This is provable since we demonstrated that 10,000 Car Batteries is not 1GJ....thus what ever the 1GW was supposed to be it can't be 1GJ since that is not a valid solution.
It could be a value between 2GJ and 6.5GJ.
But it is not 1

I'm not convinced of this. 10,000 modern car batteries might have a total capacity far in excess of 1GJ, but CB1 was printed in 1993 and we have no idea how old of a statistic Kevin used when he decided to use 10,000 car batteries in the power description. In a previous thread (which I can't find right now), I found a graph that showed how car batteries improved over time and based on that graph, if we used car batteries from the 1970's or early 1980's, the combined capacity of 10,000 batteries would be in the ballpark of 1GJ. I apologize for not being able to find that graph now. I will continue to look for it.

However, given Glitterboy's interpretation of GW in the context of energy storage, which is consistent with how I've heard other folks talk about the same subject, then this discussion doesn't need to go any further. 1GW without qualification assumes 1 second. Therefore, 1GW * 1 sec = 1GJ = 10 e-clips which means 1 e-clip has a capacity of 0.1GJ or 100MJ.

I find either of the above paragraphs sufficient to disagree with your assertion that 100MJ must be wrong.

But really, I don't think it matters much. Pick whatever number you want and I can calculate how long it takes for a particular power source to produce that much energy. All the starting number does is scale the time up or down.

[Pepsi Jedi]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

[eliakon]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

Agrees 100% with Pepsi....and then realizes that the End Days must be upon us all.

Seriously. Any issue that Pepsi and I can agree on are few and far between.
But this seems to be one of them.
And even petter example that the Kessel run....
The flux capacitor on the DeLorean hold 1.21 Gigawatts for example....

[flatline]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

You may accept the number or not. It doesn't matter. The actual capacity of an e-clip isn't important to the OP's question. The discussion has moved on.

--flatline

[eliakon]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

You may accept the number or not. It doesn't matter. The actual capacity of an e-clip isn't important to the OP's question. The discussion has moved on.

--flatline

What is there to 'discuss' though?
There is quite literally nothing here to 'discuss'
We have 'what is an E-clip' with the answer so far "something that stores energy"
we have "how does it work" with the answer of "it does"
we have "how does it get recharged" with the answer of "with a recharger"
and we have "how much does it store" with "as much as it does"
Quite literally getting any much more specific than these answers requires venturing into the wilds of house rules and the far realms of "well I figure that"....
Which really doesn't leave much room for a discussion to have moved on to.

[flatline]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

You may accept the number or not. It doesn't matter. The actual capacity of an e-clip isn't important to the OP's question. The discussion has moved on.

--flatline

What is there to 'discuss' though?
There is quite literally nothing here to 'discuss'
We have 'what is an E-clip' with the answer so far "something that stores energy"
we have "how does it work" with the answer of "it does"
we have "how does it get recharged" with the answer of "with a recharger"
and we have "how much does it store" with "as much as it does"
Quite literally getting any much more specific than these answers requires venturing into the wilds of house rules and the far realms of "well I figure that"....
Which really doesn't leave much room for a discussion to have moved on to.

A forum benefits from active discussion. Perhaps if you and Damian Magecraft weren't so openly hostile to speculation and the discussion of house rules, we could have good discussion on the answers of any of those topics.

"What is an E-clip?"
"How does it work?"
"How does it get recharged?"

Any of those questions could be answered in any number of ways that could then be followed up by more probing questions and that's how a discussion gains steam. Pouncing on speculative answers squelches the discussion and makes forum members less likely to want to participate.

Please don't do that. Find constructive ways to participate instead.

And Merry Christmas!

--flatline

[eliakon]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

You may accept the number or not. It doesn't matter. The actual capacity of an e-clip isn't important to the OP's question. The discussion has moved on.

--flatline

What is there to 'discuss' though?
There is quite literally nothing here to 'discuss'
We have 'what is an E-clip' with the answer so far "something that stores energy"
we have "how does it work" with the answer of "it does"
we have "how does it get recharged" with the answer of "with a recharger"
and we have "how much does it store" with "as much as it does"
Quite literally getting any much more specific than these answers requires venturing into the wilds of house rules and the far realms of "well I figure that"....
Which really doesn't leave much room for a discussion to have moved on to.

A forum benefits from active discussion. Perhaps if you and Damian Magecraft weren't so openly hostile to speculation and the discussion of house rules, we could have good discussion on the answers of any of those topics.

"What is an E-clip?"
"How does it work?"
"How does it get recharged?"

Any of those questions could be answered in any number of ways that could then be followed up by more probing questions and that's how a discussion gains steam. Pouncing on speculative answers squelches the discussion and makes forum members less likely to want to participate.

Please don't do that. Find constructive ways to participate instead.

And Merry Christmas!

--flatline

Speculation is fine. I love speculation.
Its when people try to pass their personal speculation of as official, as their house rules as canon that I have a problem with.
Saying "I think that if we assume that E-Clips are high efficiency capacitors, because X, Y, and Z, and thus we can extrapolate A, B, and C" is wonderful. Saying E-Clips are Capacitors so they have properties A, B, and C is not.

[Suicycho]

I'm in awe that this much vitriol is being tossed about in a discussion about e-clips.

A political argument in Sound Off? Sure. But e-clips?

[Nightmask]

I'm in awe that this much vitriol is being tossed about in a discussion about e-clips.

A political argument in Sound Off? Sure. But e-clips?

You missed the previous times this has happened? There must be at least six now locked threads where e-clips were discussed, all covered several pages if not more before they required locking and warnings were given out because of the animosity being expressed.

[guardiandashi]

well its like I was saying that to me they seem more like capacitors to me because of their apparent discharge properties, it could also explain their "touchiness" to overcharging because I have seen where you hook up a capacitor "backwards" and or try to force it to take more voltage/charge than it can handle and the results can be not pretty (exploding caps is bad)

now I am not saying they HAVE to be capacitors... but a number of statements about them make me believe they behave in many ways more like a cap than a battery

[eliakon]

well its like I was saying that to me they seem more like capacitors to me because of their apparent discharge properties, it could also explain their "touchiness" to overcharging because I have seen where you hook up a capacitor "backwards" and or try to force it to take more voltage/charge than it can handle and the results can be not pretty (exploding caps is bad)

now I am not saying they HAVE to be capacitors... but a number of statements about them make me believe they behave in many ways more like a cap than a battery

I don't honestly know enough about modern advanced capacitors to answer with certainty so does anyone know

What shelf life for a charged capacitor can be? (and what is the known shelf life of a charged E-Clip? I know its years but do we know how many years? A few, decades, centuries, for ever?)

How are capacitors/capacitor banks at being discharged at different rates (i.e. if I have my E-Clip as a capacitor with some control systems to govern discharge, can I get from constant trickle for a year to all in one go over a second or less and of course everything in between?)

Is there precedent for the idea of capacitors wearing out? (as I recall there is mention of E-Clips wearing out after so many reuses, though I could be mistaken)

Not trying to kill the idea, just curious?

(for disclaimer purposes I am firmly in the Battacitor camp on the "What are E-Clips" question)

[Suicycho]

I'm in awe that this much vitriol is being tossed about in a discussion about e-clips.

A political argument in Sound Off? Sure. But e-clips?

You missed the previous times this has happened? There must be at least six now locked threads where e-clips were discussed, all covered several pages if not more before they required locking and warnings were given out because of the animosity being expressed.

I did miss them. I'm usually in Sound Off or Other Games forums. I haven't played an rpg for years so I don't check the game forums very often. Based on this thread alone I'm thinking I probably should.

[flatline]

well its like I was saying that to me they seem more like capacitors to me because of their apparent discharge properties, it could also explain their "touchiness" to overcharging because I have seen where you hook up a capacitor "backwards" and or try to force it to take more voltage/charge than it can handle and the results can be not pretty (exploding caps is bad)

now I am not saying they HAVE to be capacitors... but a number of statements about them make me believe they behave in many ways more like a cap than a battery

I don't honestly know enough about modern advanced capacitors to answer with certainty so does anyone know

What shelf life for a charged capacitor can be? (and what is the known shelf life of a charged E-Clip? I know its years but do we know how many years? A few, decades, centuries, for ever?)

If you have an ideal dielectric, the capacitor can store energy forever (assuming there isn't leakage through the circuit that the capacitor is part of). In real life, we don't have ideal dielectrics and the capacitor loses energy as electrons "leak" through the dielectric. That said, you can buy flashlights now that have supercaps in them that will reportedly hold a useful amount of energy for weeks or even months.

If you're willing to posit that Rifts technology allows for near-ideal dielectrics to be manufactured, then the charge could last as long as you want.

How are capacitors/capacitor banks at being discharged at different rates (i.e. if I have my E-Clip as a capacitor with some control systems to govern discharge, can I get from constant trickle for a year to all in one go over a second or less and of course everything in between?)

Capacitors have no issues delivering their stored energy all at once or in little bits and pieces.

That said, capacitors with extremely large internal surface areas sometimes can't provide all their stored energy at once because it takes time for the charge to arrive from the parts of the surface furthest from the leads. I have no idea how big an effect this really is. Modern supercaps can experience this to some degree because of the use of charcoal to create their internal surface, but surfaces created with nanotechnology would have geometries that minimize or eliminate this issue (or enhance it since it can be useful for some applications).

Is there precedent for the idea of capacitors wearing out? (as I recall there is mention of E-Clips wearing out after so many reuses, though I could be mistaken)

Some types of capacitors age. Some wear out. Some last forever unless abused. There are lots of different types of capacitors, all with their pros, cons, and quirks.

For what it's worth, I think e-clips are more likely to be more like capacitors than batteries. Chemical reactions happen more slowly than electrical ones and high discharge rates from chemical batteries usually release significant heat. This is not true of capacitors. In Rifts, nanotechnology might allow the creation of capacitors with truly enormous internal surface areas which could allow for tremendous capacity in a small volume. It just seems like the more likely path of technological evolution, especially since Rifts has manufacturing processes that utilize nanotechnology.

[Nightmask]

I'm in awe that this much vitriol is being tossed about in a discussion about e-clips.

A political argument in Sound Off? Sure. But e-clips?

You missed the previous times this has happened? There must be at least six now locked threads where e-clips were discussed, all covered several pages if not more before they required locking and warnings were given out because of the animosity being expressed.

I did miss them. I'm usually in Sound Off or Other Games forums. I haven't played an rpg for years so I don't check the game forums very often. Based on this thread alone I'm thinking I probably should.

If you like heated discussions or arguments (although those generally die quickly unless a perfect storm of events happens and the mods don't get around for a few days to stop them) you've been missing out then, you haven't seen 'it's serious business' until you've seen gamers arguing over a point of contention like 'how easily can a PC recharge his e-clips?'

[glitterboy2098]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

Agrees 100% with Pepsi....and then realizes that the End Days must be upon us all.

Seriously. Any issue that Pepsi and I can agree on are few and far between.
But this seems to be one of them.
And even petter example that the Kessel run....
The flux capacitor on the DeLorean hold 1.21 Gigawatts for example....

whether or not you agree with the number doesn't really matter.
yes the number chosen was probably just arbitrary. it was probably arbitrary when HU was written, and the choice of how many E-clips that equals was probably just as arbitrary.
but it is a hard statistic. and the nice thing about a hard statistic is that you can take it and analyze it and draw conclusions from it.
whether the writer put any detailed thought into it matters less than the fact it exists, its is incontrovertible, it can be shown to be true in the game.
arguing that we should ignore a hard statistic that is part of the game mechanics based on a persons gut feeling about what the writer was thinking at the time is pointless. it does not alter the fact that the entry exists, it is hard data, and can be quantified.
do you have to use the conclusions derived from the facts? no. palladium's informal "rule zero" certainly applies. but to argue that we should ignore the established numbers and the conclusions that derive from them is illogical and in terms of debate, fallacious.

[The Beast]

I'm in awe that this much vitriol is being tossed about in a discussion about e-clips.

A political argument in Sound Off? Sure. But e-clips?

You missed the previous times this has happened? There must be at least six now locked threads where e-clips were discussed, all covered several pages if not more before they required locking and warnings were given out because of the animosity being expressed.

My personal favorite was the one with the guy arguing that a laser rifle and a plasma rifle couldn't possibly use the same e-clip because one fired laser energy and the other fired plasma energy. Sucks I couldn't show the numerous examples in the books of weapons that fired different types of energy blasts while using the same e-clip before the thread-lock.

[Nightmask]

I'm in awe that this much vitriol is being tossed about in a discussion about e-clips.

A political argument in Sound Off? Sure. But e-clips?

You missed the previous times this has happened? There must be at least six now locked threads where e-clips were discussed, all covered several pages if not more before they required locking and warnings were given out because of the animosity being expressed.

My personal favorite was the one with the guy arguing that a laser rifle and a plasma rifle couldn't possibly use the same e-clip because one fired laser energy and the other fired plasma energy. Sucks I couldn't show the numerous examples in the books of weapons that fired different types of energy blasts while using the same e-clip before the thread-lock.

I don't know, it's pretty comical when someone tries to insist that electricity doesn't work the same because it's 'the future' or that the tech doesn't run on electricity at all (makes you wonder why a skill like ELECTRICAL engineering exists to repair and build things then, or Basic Electronics). Although admittedly while I don't remember that post that is also pretty comical.

The main problem you run into in that case though is when you switch that e-clip from the one weapon to the other how many shots do you still have left to power? The odds are against the weapons having the exact same number of shots from a charged e-clip and since they do seem to function more as super-capacitors rather than batteries (since a battery depending on how worn down it is has the potential to recover some charge if left unused) so if you use up X shots in the one weapon how many do you now have left?

[glitterboy2098]

actually swapping Eclips and figuring out how many shots you have left is fairly easy mathematically.. its just annoying. you have to work out a proportion of the total shots for what is left, then use that to determine the number of shots for the new weapon. and just remember to round down.

so if i have a weapon that gets 8 shots per eclip, fire 3 shots, and i switch to one that gets say, 60:
in the first one i fired 3 of 8, leaving me 62% charge

62% of 60 = 37.2 shots.

round down to 37 shots.


fairly easy if you have a calculator and know how to generate percentages, just annoying to have to do.

[flatline]

actually swapping Eclips and figuring out how many shots you have left is fairly easy mathematically.. its just annoying. you have to work out a proportion of the total shots for what is left, then use that to determine the number of shots for the new weapon. and just remember to round down.

so if i have a weapon that gets 8 shots per eclip, fire 3 shots, and i switch to one that gets say, 60:
in the first one i fired 3 of 8, leaving me 62% charge

62% of 60 = 37.2 shots.

round down to 37 shots.


fairly easy if you have a calculator and know how to generate percentages, just annoying to have to do.

You can scale the units so that you don't have to work with fractions. For instance, if weapon A that gets 20 shots per e-clip and weapon B gets 30 shots per eclip, simply record the e-clip as having 60 units of energy.
Weapon A would consume 3 units of energy per shot. Weapon B would consume 2 units of energy per shot.

However, if you have a dozen different weapons and some of them have weird capacities (21, 27, etc), then it's probably more trouble than it's worth to avoid using percentages.

[Pepsi Jedi]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

You may accept the number or not. It doesn't matter. The actual capacity of an e-clip isn't important to the OP's question. The discussion has moved on.

--flatline

What is there to 'discuss' though?
There is quite literally nothing here to 'discuss'
We have 'what is an E-clip' with the answer so far "something that stores energy"
we have "how does it work" with the answer of "it does"
we have "how does it get recharged" with the answer of "with a recharger"
and we have "how much does it store" with "as much as it does"
Quite literally getting any much more specific than these answers requires venturing into the wilds of house rules and the far realms of "well I figure that"....
Which really doesn't leave much room for a discussion to have moved on to.

A forum benefits from active discussion. Perhaps if you and Damian Magecraft weren't so openly hostile to speculation and the discussion of house rules, we could have good discussion on the answers of any of those topics.

"What is an E-clip?"
"How does it work?"
"How does it get recharged?"

Any of those questions could be answered in any number of ways that could then be followed up by more probing questions and that's how a discussion gains steam. Pouncing on speculative answers squelches the discussion and makes forum members less likely to want to participate.

Please don't do that. Find constructive ways to participate instead.

And Merry Christmas!

--flatline

Speculation is fine. I love speculation.
Its when people try to pass their personal speculation of as official, as their house rules as canon that I have a problem with.
Saying "I think that if we assume that E-Clips are high efficiency capacitors, because X, Y, and Z, and thus we can extrapolate A, B, and C" is wonderful. Saying E-Clips are Capacitors so they have properties A, B, and C is not.

I was going to say it, but... exactly this. --EXACTLY-- this.

Speculation is fine. I love speculation.

It's when people try and pass their PERSONAL SPECULATION off as OFFICIAL, and their HOUSE RULES as CANON, that I have a problem with.

--Exactly that--

It gets worse when they try and treat others as idiots or stupid if they don't agree with before mentioned personal non canon speculation.

[Pepsi Jedi]

I'm in awe that this much vitriol is being tossed about in a discussion about e-clips.

A political argument in Sound Off? Sure. But e-clips?

You missed the previous times this has happened? There must be at least six now locked threads where e-clips were discussed, all covered several pages if not more before they required locking and warnings were given out because of the animosity being expressed.

I did miss them. I'm usually in Sound Off or Other Games forums. I haven't played an rpg for years so I don't check the game forums very often. Based on this thread alone I'm thinking I probably should.

Believe it or not, this one has been pretty tame, usually with just mention of the more .... spirited ones.

[Pepsi Jedi]

You're assuming that some statistic, any statistic was used for a purposeful conversion from the side handed use of a power unrelated to the question at hand.

We've no real indication that's remotely the case. The number was very likely yanked out of the air because it sounded good. I mean not for nothing guys but 10,000 of anything converting neatly to 1 of anything unless that was purposefully created to be the standard (and 10,000 car batteries is not the standard for any unit of measurement) isn't going to be found anywhere. It's an arbitrary number used to fit in because it works for what little math you're supposed to do (or rather not do) in an RPG.

The number, like the sci fi tech itself, was created whole cloth, from the writer's mind. Kevin (Nor anyone else writing Palladium RPGs) is not sitting around looking up car batteries, and thinking about how many of them go into an eclip or any unit of measurement you want to throw out there. There was no scientific study or debate. There was no mythbusting session performed. It was a large number that 'sounded ok' for that power.

Trying to break down super-science, or scifi science based on an arbitrary number the author threw in there is not going to get you anywhere, especially as pointed out already to even TRY you have to convert it to something else from what was written.

As soon as you go "Well that seems silly he must mean _____ " You're in the realm of house rules. You're changing what is written and redefining what you're talking about to suit what you think is correct. (Whom ever the 'you' is, at that point). The point about the Kessel run, while said in jest, is 100% apt.

Agrees 100% with Pepsi....and then realizes that the End Days must be upon us all.

Seriously. Any issue that Pepsi and I can agree on are few and far between.
But this seems to be one of them.
And even petter example that the Kessel run....
The flux capacitor on the DeLorean hold 1.21 Gigawatts for example....

whether or not you agree with the number doesn't really matter.
yes the number chosen was probably just arbitrary. it was probably arbitrary when HU was written, and the choice of how many E-clips that equals was probably just as arbitrary.
but it is a hard statistic. and the nice thing about a hard statistic is that you can take it and analyze it and draw conclusions from it.
whether the writer put any detailed thought into it matters less than the fact it exists, its is incontrovertible, it can be shown to be true in the game.
arguing that we should ignore a hard statistic that is part of the game mechanics based on a persons gut feeling about what the writer was thinking at the time is pointless. it does not alter the fact that the entry exists, it is hard data, and can be quantified.
do you have to use the conclusions derived from the facts? no. palladium's informal "rule zero" certainly applies. but to argue that we should ignore the established numbers and the conclusions that derive from them is illogical and in terms of debate, fallacious.

But that's the thing. The 'hard statistic' being spoken about is in something that is being perceived as 'wrong' and in need of correction to be used in any sort of way (That we understand)

If the book gives the hard statistic that a starship has 24,000,000 pigeon power, you can't just go "oh they meant horse power, so we can quantify it and use it to form conclusion and derive facts!"

Well no. You can derive facts about pigeon power but not horse power.

Thus any and all speculation derived from it, has to first accept that the book is 'wrong' and must be 'corrected' and that the players know more than the writers and.... well you can see where that goes.

[Pepsi Jedi]

I'm in awe that this much vitriol is being tossed about in a discussion about e-clips.

A political argument in Sound Off? Sure. But e-clips?

You missed the previous times this has happened? There must be at least six now locked threads where e-clips were discussed, all covered several pages if not more before they required locking and warnings were given out because of the animosity being expressed.

My personal favorite was the one with the guy arguing that a laser rifle and a plasma rifle couldn't possibly use the same e-clip because one fired laser energy and the other fired plasma energy. Sucks I couldn't show the numerous examples in the books of weapons that fired different types of energy blasts while using the same e-clip before the thread-lock.

I don't know, it's pretty comical when someone tries to insist that electricity doesn't work the same because it's 'the future' or that the tech doesn't run on electricity at all (makes you wonder why a skill like ELECTRICAL engineering exists to repair and build things then, or Basic Electronics). Although admittedly while I don't remember that post that is also pretty comical.

The main problem you run into in that case though is when you switch that e-clip from the one weapon to the other how many shots do you still have left to power? The odds are against the weapons having the exact same number of shots from a charged e-clip and since they do seem to function more as super-capacitors rather than batteries (since a battery depending on how worn down it is has the potential to recover some charge if left unused) so if you use up X shots in the one weapon how many do you now have left?

I remember the thread in question. The person was trying to insist that super high tech, sci-fi miniaturized nuclear reactors all had poles on them like car batteries and if you hooked jumper cables up to the poles you could charge an Eclip with them. And acting like that super high tech sci-fi miniaturized nuclear reactor was nothing more than a car battery being used to jump off another car. It -was- pretty comical as the guy tried to imply that 'electricity is electricity, it all acts the same" and that they knew how nuclear reactors the size of coffee cans or hockey pucks worked, and that other people were stupid if they didn't agree.

[flatline]

I remember the thread in question. The person was trying to insist that super high tech, sci-fi miniaturized nuclear reactors all had poles on them like car batteries and if you hooked jumper cables up to the poles you could charge an Eclip with them. And acting like that super high tech sci-fi miniaturized nuclear reactor was nothing more than a car battery being used to jump off another car. It -was- pretty comical as the guy tried to imply that 'electricity is electricity, it all acts the same" and that they knew how nuclear reactors the size of coffee cans or hockey pucks worked, and that other people were stupid if they didn't agree.

You're over-simplifying what I was saying and therefore misrepresenting my position. Knock it off or I'll report you for trolling.

Here's my actual position (not the straw man Pepsi Jedi keeps referring to):

If an e-clip behaves like every other type of energy storage device that is charged via electric power, then charging the e-clip will require 4 components:
1. A power source. Nuclear, solar, hamster wheel, whatever. The power source will produce an output voltage at the terminals that you can somehow connect leads to.
2. A power converter that converts the output of the power source to the working voltage of the charging circuit. If the power source's output is already appropriate for the charging circuit, then no conversion is necessary but it's still a good idea since this is the step that guarantees clean power to the charging circuit (surge protection, rectification, that sort of thing).
3. A charging circuit. This takes power from the power converter and applies it to the secondary cell being charged using the appropriate charging algorithm.
4. The secondary cell being charged. In the context of this discussion, the e-clip.

Now, the source of your confusion might be that, in theory, the power converter, the charging circuit, and the secondary cell might all be contained inside the e-clip. If that's true, then you could totally hook leads from your reactor directly to your e-clip to charge it, but I've never claimed that it had to be that way. It's a good design decision to at least include the charging circuit in the e-clip since the same circuit can monitor the health of the cells and prevent certain kinds of failure. A common example of this is any modern consumer electronic device that contains an internal rechargeable battery: the outlet is the power source, the wall wart is the power converter, and the charging circuit and secondary cell are contained inside the cell phone/laptop/whatever.

The power converter and charging circuitry are not difficult to design or to manufacture, so if they're not already contained within the e-clip, they should be easily available from the manufacturer or other 3rd parties. Characters and NPCs with the proper skills and equipment should have no difficulty making the appropriate adapters.

That's my position. Bookmark this post if you need to. I don't ever want to see your straw man again.

--flatline

[Damian Magecraft]

I remember the thread in question. The person was trying to insist that super high tech, sci-fi miniaturized nuclear reactors all had poles on them like car batteries and if you hooked jumper cables up to the poles you could charge an Eclip with them. And acting like that super high tech sci-fi miniaturized nuclear reactor was nothing more than a car battery being used to jump off another car. It -was- pretty comical as the guy tried to imply that 'electricity is electricity, it all acts the same" and that they knew how nuclear reactors the size of coffee cans or hockey pucks worked, and that other people were stupid if they didn't agree.

You're over-simplifying what I was saying and therefore misrepresenting my position. Knock it off or I'll report you for trolling.

Here's my actual position (not the straw man Pepsi Jedi keeps referring to):

If an e-clip behaves like every other type of energy storage device that is charged via electric power, then charging the e-clip will require 4 components:
1. A power source. Nuclear, solar, hamster wheel, whatever. The power source will produce an output voltage at the terminals that you can somehow connect leads to.
2. A power converter that converts the output of the power source to the working voltage of the charging circuit. If the power source's output is already appropriate for the charging circuit, then no conversion is necessary but it's still a good idea since this is the step that guarantees clean power to the charging circuit (surge protection, rectification, that sort of thing).
3. A charging circuit. This takes power from the power converter and applies it to the secondary cell being charged using the appropriate charging algorithm.
4. The secondary cell being charged. In the context of this discussion, the e-clip.

Now, the source of your confusion might be that, in theory, the power converter, the charging circuit, and the secondary cell might all be contained inside the e-clip. If that's true, then you could totally hook leads from your reactor directly to your e-clip to charge it, but I've never claimed that it had to be that way. It's a good design decision to at least include the charging circuit in the e-clip since the same circuit can monitor the health of the cells and prevent certain kinds of failure. A common example of this is any modern consumer electronic device that contains an internal rechargeable battery: the outlet is the power source, the wall wart is the power converter, and the charging circuit and secondary cell are contained inside the cell phone/laptop/whatever.

The power converter and charging circuitry are not difficult to design or to manufacture, so if they're not already contained within the e-clip, they should be easily available from the manufacturer or other 3rd parties. Characters and NPCs with the proper skills and equipment should have no difficulty making the appropriate adapters.

That's my position. Bookmark this post if you need to. I don't ever want to see your straw man again.

--flatline

except the the main stumbling block of your argument hinges on ignoring a few basic facts.

Fact: the system is permission based. (If the ability does not grant you permission do x you cannot use it to do x)
Fact: we have 3 abilities that explicitly grant permission to recharge e-clips.
Fact: one of those abilities requires the skills you want to claim allow the recharge. (We can infer from this that the prerequisite therefore is not enough).

your argument trivializes those 3 specified abilities that the CANON material goes out of its way to say can do this.

This demonstrates a lack of understanding of basic game design. (That or a blatant attempt to end run the rules).

[eliakon]

I remember the thread in question. The person was trying to insist that super high tech, sci-fi miniaturized nuclear reactors all had poles on them like car batteries and if you hooked jumper cables up to the poles you could charge an Eclip with them. And acting like that super high tech sci-fi miniaturized nuclear reactor was nothing more than a car battery being used to jump off another car. It -was- pretty comical as the guy tried to imply that 'electricity is electricity, it all acts the same" and that they knew how nuclear reactors the size of coffee cans or hockey pucks worked, and that other people were stupid if they didn't agree.

You're over-simplifying what I was saying and therefore misrepresenting my position. Knock it off or I'll report you for trolling.

Here's my actual position (not the straw man Pepsi Jedi keeps referring to):

If an e-clip behaves like every other type of energy storage device that is charged via electric power, then charging the e-clip will require 4 components:
1. A power source. Nuclear, solar, hamster wheel, whatever. The power source will produce an output voltage at the terminals that you can somehow connect leads to.
2. A power converter that converts the output of the power source to the working voltage of the charging circuit. If the power source's output is already appropriate for the charging circuit, then no conversion is necessary but it's still a good idea since this is the step that guarantees clean power to the charging circuit (surge protection, rectification, that sort of thing).
3. A charging circuit. This takes power from the power converter and applies it to the secondary cell being charged using the appropriate charging algorithm.
4. The secondary cell being charged. In the context of this discussion, the e-clip.

Now, the source of your confusion might be that, in theory, the power converter, the charging circuit, and the secondary cell might all be contained inside the e-clip. If that's true, then you could totally hook leads from your reactor directly to your e-clip to charge it, but I've never claimed that it had to be that way. It's a good design decision to at least include the charging circuit in the e-clip since the same circuit can monitor the health of the cells and prevent certain kinds of failure. A common example of this is any modern consumer electronic device that contains an internal rechargeable battery: the outlet is the power source, the wall wart is the power converter, and the charging circuit and secondary cell are contained inside the cell phone/laptop/whatever.

The power converter and charging circuitry are not difficult to design or to manufacture, so if they're not already contained within the e-clip, they should be easily available from the manufacturer or other 3rd parties. Characters and NPCs with the proper skills and equipment should have no difficulty making the appropriate adapters.

That's my position. Bookmark this post if you need to. I don't ever want to see your straw man again.

--flatline

except the the main stumbling block of your argument hinges on ignoring a few basic facts.

Fact: the system is permission based. (If the ability does not grant you permission do x you cannot use it to do x)
Fact: we have 3 abilities that explicitly grant permission to recharge e-clips.
Fact: one of those abilities requires the skills you want to claim allow the recharge. (We can infer from this that the prerequisite therefore is not enough).

your argument trivializes those 3 specified abilities that the CANON material goes out of its way to say can do this.

This demonstrates a lack of understanding of basic game design. (That or a blatant attempt to end run the rules).

Okay Suicycho NOW The Holy Wars shall commence (the previous debate was just the preliminaries to the main event...that being the principles of recharging mechanics....which is one of the holy third rails of the forums. I would mention the others but I suspect simply uttering there names aloud in a thread would be seen as both flaming, trolling AND threadjacking.)

[Mack]

Good job, children.

You've gotten another topic locked.