Ask and answer stupid questions here! - Page 117

On July 11 2014 19:33 Encdalf wrote:

Because Blizzard nowadays is about getting your money and not making awesome games.

On July 11 2014 20:03 Kleinmuuhg wrote:

hearthstone is a pretty awesome game.
the new moba is also pretty good
making money and good games can be corelative you know

On July 11 2014 22:46 Simberto wrote:
Hm, vampires have certain limitations that other people do not. The most relevant one would obviously be sunlight. It must have to do something with the intensity, as they do not have any problem with starlight. Which means that if they get far enough away from the sun, they don't have a problem. If not, they can not leave their spacecraft for whatever reason, and should probably avoid building windows.

Next would be the food supply. If they can live off of blood conserves, this is no more a problem than the food supply of any living human being sent into space. If not, the logistics become unmanageable pretty quickly because you would need at least 10 human astronauts for each vampire, and they wouldn't be in a good shape to do anything due to the constant blood drain. Which would mean sending vampires into space would be a lot more complicated than sending humans.

I am not quite certain if vampires need air or not, if they do not, this would make them superior astronauts to humans who need air refreshment systems. Even if they need a pressurized atmosphere, not needing a constant supply of fresh oxygen is a major advantage of vampires. If they do need oxygen, once again they are pretty much the same as humans in that regard. If they do not even need pressure, they would obviously have an even bigger advantage over humans.

The other restrictions are probably not very relevant. There is not a lot of stuff in space except what you take with you, so neither garlic nor crosses should be relevant in any way.

The "not entering unless invited" thing is obviously irrelevant too. Crossing flowing water depends on how strict the definitions are. Because strictly speaking in the rotating reference system of earth, a vampire in space crosses flowing water pretty much nonstop. But if we assume that there needs to be some distance requirement for this, you only need to pick your launching point carefully.

On July 12 2014 01:07 ComaDose wrote:
What about a sweet space suit that can resist the atmosphere and UV light. Then the vampire goes up and upgrades a satellite and gets home for diner.

On July 12 2014 00:51 Simberto wrote:
Why should the Vacuum make them faster? Unless air resistance is significantly slowing them down (Which would mean they are either absurdly fast or very, very light), this should not be a relevant factor for their maneuverability on their own.

You can not "duck and cover" from planet to moon and get anyplace relevant. There are simply not enough planets and moons in space, and maintaining a trajectory that keeps you behind those would require absurd amounts of acceleration, and thus energy. This is not something that is practically feasable in any way.

The whole pressure thing is not really clearly defined, since classic vampire mythology tends to not mention space journeys or vacuum at all. Physical strength is not relevant to this, since strength and pressure resistance are two totally different properties.

And regarding air, again the question is not even necessarily whether they need it to survive or not, but whether they need it to be active. Because if they do and you don't supply them with it, you might as well just send a lump of wood into space instead.

And no, a probe containing a vampire is obviously slower than the same probe not containing a vampire. Or, more importantly, it just has a lot less Delta-V, because i space you have a lot of time to accelerate, so usually the main thing you are interested in is the amount of total acceleration you can achieve with the fuel on board, the more of which you have, the more different missions you can achieve with that vehicle. So unless a vampire is for some reason more effective at some task than robotics designed for that task per pound, a mission involving an automated drone will be more effective than one involving a vampire. The only task i can imagine where that might be possible is something involving construction and accurate manipulation of some objects. Maybe even raw physical strength. But for your standard observational mission, an automated drone is greatly superior to a vampire-controlled mission.

Edit: For example, the voyager probes have 105 kg of scientific instruments on board, out of their 773kg total. The rest are engines, energy, communication, etc. So even if we assume that the vampire does not need any supplies whatsoever (very doubtful given their usual tendency to fall into bloodlust), you would have to basically double the size of that ship just to attach a vampire to it. Or replace most of the scientific instruments with vampire, which would make it unable to perform the mission it was designed for since instead of spectrometers, you have a vampire. And the vampire doesn't really do anything useful on that mission.

On July 12 2014 01:16 Simberto wrote:


Probably not, going up is expensive. Probably cheaper to send a new satellite than to fix the old one. However, for any mission where you would send a human, a vampire is probably at least as good as long as he can suffice of blood conserves, and significantly better if he can do without oxygen, pressure or food for some period of time.

On July 12 2014 01:47 ComaDose wrote:

no i mean vampires can fly so there is no fuel so its way cheeper

On July 12 2014 01:51 Simberto wrote:


That highly depends on how vampire propulsion works. I doubt it'd work in a vacuum, it is probably just something based on aerodynamics, being really light, or whatever.

On July 12 2014 08:20 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:
why do burgers in "proper" burger restaurants taste so much worse than fast food burgers?
honestly I am close to puking right now wtf =(

On July 12 2014 08:20 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:
why do burgers in "proper" burger restaurants taste so much worse than fast food burgers?
honestly I am close to puking right now wtf =(

On July 13 2014 02:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:


Because "Proper" burger restaurants take ground beef, make it into patties, and then cook it with house designed spice mixtures.

Fast Food burgers are produced in factories and sent to fast food kitchens designed to taste the same no matter when its cooked, how overly/undercooked it is, and no matter how old it is afterwards.

It simply shows that you don't actually give a fuck about burgers.