|
Last edited:
Flight Physics Improvements!! (Small but DESPERATELY NEEDED!!)
- Thread starter InBlack
- Start date
Hi there, if you look in the archives, there were many arguments about this topic (slow yaw, the "sweet spot" for turn rates etc) in Aplha/P Beta and Beta.
.
Various approaches were applied (for example the reduction in turn rate at low speed was added to prevent "turrets in space" and favour forward flight based combat) and tried and what we have now is the result of hundreds if not thousands of hours of play testing.
.
Ultimately FD decided that gameplay trumps realism, so it is extremely unlikely that this aspect will be reverted. That's not to say that little tweaks won't be applied to balance out the game as things develop.
.
Various approaches were applied (for example the reduction in turn rate at low speed was added to prevent "turrets in space" and favour forward flight based combat) and tried and what we have now is the result of hundreds if not thousands of hours of play testing.
.
Ultimately FD decided that gameplay trumps realism, so it is extremely unlikely that this aspect will be reverted. That's not to say that little tweaks won't be applied to balance out the game as things develop.
If you check my posting history from months ago, you'll see I'm right with you on the newtonian front.
Unfortunately, there have been a few megathreads on this already, and it seems that as soon as you mention the N word, the automatic response is going to be hostile - especially from those who won't fully read your post
You should have left the N word out in this case, because your point is about the mass of ships - which again I entirely agree with you, that an Anaconda should turn/maneuver like a battleship compared to say a Cobra or a Viper, whereas at the moment the Anaconda seems surprisingly agile during a fight.
Now, you could put that down to Anacondas having vastly more powerful thrusters than say a Cobra. But seeing as there's no such thing as artificial gravity in the ED universe (except for centrifugal forces in the big space stations) or any mention of inertial dampeners, the pilot and crew of Anacondas (and the other ships) must be being subject to the most horrendous G forces. Perhaps this could also be handwaved away by saying that humans in the 3300's have advanced medicine and/or bionic implants to help cope with those G forces - who knows?
Anyway yeah I see your point.
Rgds.
Unfortunately, there have been a few megathreads on this already, and it seems that as soon as you mention the N word, the automatic response is going to be hostile - especially from those who won't fully read your post
You should have left the N word out in this case, because your point is about the mass of ships - which again I entirely agree with you, that an Anaconda should turn/maneuver like a battleship compared to say a Cobra or a Viper, whereas at the moment the Anaconda seems surprisingly agile during a fight.
Now, you could put that down to Anacondas having vastly more powerful thrusters than say a Cobra. But seeing as there's no such thing as artificial gravity in the ED universe (except for centrifugal forces in the big space stations) or any mention of inertial dampeners, the pilot and crew of Anacondas (and the other ships) must be being subject to the most horrendous G forces. Perhaps this could also be handwaved away by saying that humans in the 3300's have advanced medicine and/or bionic implants to help cope with those G forces - who knows?
Anyway yeah I see your point.
Rgds.
Thanks for the reply. Guess there is no hope then....Turrets in space. *sigh* Yeah I guess 99% of Elite's players dont even know about turning flight assist off and how that can make really REALLY short work of anyone stupid enough to stay stationary for any length of time...
Gotta say for a game where you spend so much time flying around to have such a big glaring design fault is something I did not expect. All games tend to the lowest common denominator these days, I guess Im just dissapointed and sad that Braben and the team have fallen to the levels of EA, Actiivision and everyone else....Bah....
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Rather than starting a new thread on that, I'd suggest searching the forums and joining one of (too)many existing discussions about this
Sorry about that, feel free to close the thread if you so wish.
Last edited:
David B, produced fully Newtonian flight model based game in 1988 or so, it was called Zarch / Lander. In it you played a little Cobra like ship that flew around on a planet. Man it was hard, but apparently it was a sketch for a later game, which it seems was Frontier.
So, in 1994 or so, Frontier was launched, and again it was a fully Newtonian flight model, in space, on planets. And it sucked so very very hard. The basic issue was, there was NO flight assist, and as such it was a total nightmare to control in general. Also another issue was the ability to accelerate to very very high speeds, which in turn meant you had to decelerate over the same time period. If you were travelling at 250k per second and you intersected a planet, this did not work very well.
Anyway, 20 years later and we have Elite Dangerous. It has made certain decisions due to experience, others through design and still more through feedback from many many alpha / beta / gamma users.
What you have now is the result. Personally I think it rocks, but yes there are some irks.
The Yaw speed was nerfed some while back due to the turret issue. I made a wish that Yaw speed gets faster when you have your landing gear or fuel scoop deployed, allowing us to manouver more effectively when either scenario is in play. No luck with that yet.
Do credit them with some intelligence old bean. Your not the only person that knows about newtonian physics...
So, in 1994 or so, Frontier was launched, and again it was a fully Newtonian flight model, in space, on planets. And it sucked so very very hard. The basic issue was, there was NO flight assist, and as such it was a total nightmare to control in general. Also another issue was the ability to accelerate to very very high speeds, which in turn meant you had to decelerate over the same time period. If you were travelling at 250k per second and you intersected a planet, this did not work very well.
Anyway, 20 years later and we have Elite Dangerous. It has made certain decisions due to experience, others through design and still more through feedback from many many alpha / beta / gamma users.
What you have now is the result. Personally I think it rocks, but yes there are some irks.
The Yaw speed was nerfed some while back due to the turret issue. I made a wish that Yaw speed gets faster when you have your landing gear or fuel scoop deployed, allowing us to manouver more effectively when either scenario is in play. No luck with that yet.
Do credit them with some intelligence old bean. Your not the only person that knows about newtonian physics...
Main issue is, with fully assist off the large chunk of the game population wouldn't be here. Would be a nich same as any proper flight sim.
While some KB and Pad players can effectively cope with FA off and having a good overall control of inertia movement vectors and still be able to yaw and orbit around a helpless FAon target it is not the norm, and in this matter full HOTAS setup is half way through to faster mastery of it, same as any other proper flight sim.
I guess the E.D design team reached a game balance to cope with all hardware choices versus true space flight nature.
While some KB and Pad players can effectively cope with FA off and having a good overall control of inertia movement vectors and still be able to yaw and orbit around a helpless FAon target it is not the norm, and in this matter full HOTAS setup is half way through to faster mastery of it, same as any other proper flight sim.
I guess the E.D design team reached a game balance to cope with all hardware choices versus true space flight nature.
Indeed, well said.
Perhaps I wasnt being clear in my original post. I dont have a problem with flight assist. I dont have a problem with slower (but fixed) yaw speed. My only problem is that the turn rate of the ships is artificially linked to a so called 'sweet spot'. All the smaller, in theory better manouvering ships are very very unbalanced (negatively, compared to larger and better armed ships) as a result and turning off flight assist for a strafing run or to turn into your enemy at this point doesnt make sense if your turn rate is slower with flight assist off.
Countless other space games (TIE Fighter, Xwing, Freespace etc.) did this very well, despite having a drastically simplified flight model. They didnt suffer from turreting, and I dont think this is an unreasonable request.
Last edited:
Then the turrets in space would happen, I'd simply boost, but, let it go and rool and thrust laterally ( there is no up and down, nor left nor right in space), rinse and repeat while the big poor ship, no matter the guns it had could do nothing at all.
Again, while a KB and Pad user would struggle to do this manoeuvre but a simple use of quadrant and pedals would make a whole turn possible with no seat with some practice.
The sweet spot is the game balance, or else a Viper on hotas would eat at any rate any equal ship being KB and pad. It is simply more intuitive. The sweet spot makes you split from the knife fight whether you want it or not...
Sorry. I don't agree nor disagree with the design decision. I simply accept it.
And turning FA off makes a lot of sense in a straffing run, as you can keep your forward moving vector while rolling back to keep the guns aimed. Done it and been at its end. Makes the whole difference at the start of the fight when the first priority is to mangle shields for good.
Again, while a KB and Pad user would struggle to do this manoeuvre but a simple use of quadrant and pedals would make a whole turn possible with no seat with some practice.
The sweet spot is the game balance, or else a Viper on hotas would eat at any rate any equal ship being KB and pad. It is simply more intuitive. The sweet spot makes you split from the knife fight whether you want it or not...
Sorry. I don't agree nor disagree with the design decision. I simply accept it.
And turning FA off makes a lot of sense in a straffing run, as you can keep your forward moving vector while rolling back to keep the guns aimed. Done it and been at its end. Makes the whole difference at the start of the fight when the first priority is to mangle shields for good.
I dont agree with this. You would be able to do swift turns to escape or get into a better position, but the manouver you are describing is impossible with the yawing, lateral and vertical thrusters being much weaker than anything else. (Which, I emphasise is I agree good for balancing purposes and having fun dogfights)