What? no BVR?

Hethwill_Khan

Hethwill_Khan
Robert Maynard said:
The fact that the pilot's viewpoint moves around in response to accelerations would tend to suggest that there are*....

*: with "Gs" being a colloquial reference to accelerations acting on a body.
Click to expand...

You know you can actively disable the movement right ? In any case I don't lose sight of anything going around so no, no G's.

And why pitch when half of time a roll and vertical slide can perfectly position you on his 6 ?

TBH I love the 0m/s knife fights. After all the years conduction from ACM the E.D space 0 grav action is great. Only bad thing is the pure blandness of the weapon systems.
 

Flying Penguin

Flying Penguin
Anyone wanting to understand what more "realism" could look like should read the Rocketpunk Manifesto essays for a well considered view on what real, practical space combat could look like. And it's nothing like Elite, or any existing game.

http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=71672.0 (not the blog itself, but the link to each of the essays is in the first post and it's easier to navigate like this)
 

BillD

BillD
Problem with Newtonian based dogfights in space is that its more like jousting. ED provides something that gives a little more variety and most people can relate to. With real Newtonian it would be real hard to fly through those asteroid fields at any speed. Some of my best fights have been in the roids.
 

Seonid

Seonid
That and the fact that some people asking for "full Newtonian physics" don't actually understand what they are asking for. Want to dogfight in real-time in KSP? Didn't think so. ;)
 

Valethar

Valethar
Cmdr_Arri said:
Have you ever seen Star Trek or Stargate, for instance? There's a reason why you can't shoot things in hyperspace, which is essentially what supercruise is.
Click to expand...

Bad analogy.

There's no need to slow to sublight to fire weapons in Trek. This has been documented in several episodes and is even mentioned in the TNG Tech manuals.
 

Jex =TE=

Banned
J
JohnMalcolm said:
I don't honestly mind combat as it is right now. It's fun. Lots of fun. Some things jar a little though. We have sensors able to tell us what type of ship is flying 250,000LS away, and exactly how it is armed and equipped, yet once out of frame shift we are back to 6km ranges. I don't want the sensors to have that range in normal space, but I'd prefer not to be able to pick up as much information as we can at present while frame-shifting. It seems unreasonable to get that level of detail about a small spaceship when stars aren't yet in range to be picked up by sensors.
.
BVR combat might be more realistic but it would make for a very dull game indeed. It would be nice to have some powerful BVR weapons, but probably only fired by capital ships. More variety and types of sensor would also be nice. Active and passive for example.
Click to expand...

This - the "radar" should scale out massively. The F16 radar in Falcon 4 scales out to at least 120 miles. The current radar feels like I'm looking through a keyhole.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Jex =TE= said:
This - the "radar" should scale out massively. The F16 radar in Falcon 4 scales out to at least 120 miles. The current radar feels like I'm looking through a keyhole.
Click to expand...

If it did then it would probably reduce the number of ships near to you in your instance as the instance would require to cover a massively larger volume. Up to 32 players in a 12km diameter (or so) spherical volume vs. the same in a c.380km diameter spherical volume equates to an average player density reduction from 0.024 players per cubic kilometre to 7.4E-7 players per cubic kilometre....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom