Proposal Discussion Elite: Dangerous is a "fly by wire" flight sim?!

[Memnoch]

So are you guys in the alpha, and are you happy with the flying mechanics?

Very happy with it. For me it was simple choice between what we have now and equal yaw speed with everyone turreting about. That just wouldn't have been fun, for me at least.

I suggest watching some Youtube videos of some of us playing the game and see what you think.

 

[noodle]

The retro thrusters should be firing to keep it within limits, therefore newtonian, it's easily implementable in a real spacecraft.

It's an artificial explanation for an arbitrary game rule. By the definition, you could introduce a ship that only moves on one plane, blame the engine, and say it's still a Newtonian flight model.

I don't deal with opinions, only with facts.

Your opinions are facts, opinions that you disagree with are opinions.

Flight Assist off in ED is never fully off, just as it was never fully of in FFE (lack of angular momentum)

Of course it isn't. Because that would involve allowing full Newtonian physics.

Yet I already did.

If that's your inention, then you're a bully

You do the moment you call FFE newtonian while not doing the same for ED, especially since a proper newtonian space ship should not be a simple point mass.

That's an incredible extrapolation. I tell you that I don't even like the FFE combat flight model, and you insist on telling me I'm putting it on pedestal. Have you ever considered a career in politics?

 

[Styggron]

After seeing more reported posts about this thread and after Michael has already weighed in here asking people to STOP sniping, sadly I see it continuing here while people keep trying to have one last word.

Well it is time to cool it and I am closing this thread for a short time while people do that.
If the sniping continues infractions will be issued.

This thread will be reopened after a brief cooling down period.

 

[Brett C]

Hi all,

Personal attacks are not tolerated on the Frontier forums. You're welcome to debate one another, but degrading an argument to personal attacks is neither constructive or welcome on the Frontier boards.

When we reopen this discussion thread and still observe personal attacks, we'll be handing out "time-out vacations" from the boards. (edit; I'm being told that I shouldn't be giving people free vacations as that's very costly. I'll just throw one of these things at you guys:

)

Thanks for understanding.

 

[Geraldine]

Thread Re-opened

This thread is re-opened but I want to reiterate what Brett said below and make it clear that no more personal attacks on other forum members will be tolerated. If it continues moderation action will be brought to bare on those engaged in such activity.

Now on with the discussion.

 

[smsKONG]

<Moderation Edit>
I think I killed a man

 

[Globusdiablo]

I think I killed a man

Apologies all around from me. I got carried away. Sorry!

Now, from what I've heard so far, I shouldn't be that worried right? Flight assist off seems to get me pretty close to the "skate and swivel" combat style that I prefer right?

Anywho, I just bought the beta premium, and only have to sit tight for hopefully no more than a month or so before I can find out for myself.

No matter what, this game is looking so beautiful I can hardly contain myself. Hope I haven't gotten my hopes up too high..

 

[smsKONG]

Apologies all around from me. I got carried away. Sorry!

Now, from what I've heard so far, I shouldn't be that worried right? Flight assist off seems to get me pretty close to the "skate and swivel" combat style that I prefer right?

Anywho, I just bought the beta premium, and only have to sit tight for hopefully no more than a month or so before I can find out for myself.

No matter what, this game is looking so beautiful I can hardly contain myself. Hope I haven't gotten my hopes up too high..

I think the best way to look at it is that the mechanics we have now are fun and complex enough for there to be a host of skills to master.
Regardless of what you want to call it or how you want to categorise it - bottom line is that it works well!

As for getting a bit heated in here: meh we all clash heads at times

 

[noodle]

Regardless of what you want to call it or how you want to categorise it - bottom line is that it works well!

I think from a combat point of view, that's absolutely true. I'm more concerned about the knock-on effects for other areas of the game. I'm having difficulty conceptualising how it'll actually work in practice, so on that level it'll have to be a case of "wait and see".

 

[smsKONG]

As you say - it's wait and see.
I'm sure FD will be open to some feedback once we get to trying supercruise in a full system. But until that time we're just arguing about the shape of smoke!

All we can say for now is that what we've seen so far works in the context we've seen it.
I think that makes sense but it's early for me

 

[Associat0r]

It's an artificial explanation for an arbitrary game rule. By the definition, you could introduce a ship that only moves on one plane, blame the engine, and say it's still a Newtonian flight model.

It's not an artificial explanation, the rules aren't imposed by the ED physics engine, they are simply rules of that ship's flight control computer, therefore it's newtonian.
Flight Assist with flight envelope protection comes from Control Theory and is an orthogonal concept from kind of physics model you use.

The Star Citizen developers are smart to explain this with the correct terminology and not using the correct terminology for ED causes this misinformation to perpetuate and make our game look inferior, it's that simple.

Of course it isn't. Because that would involve allowing full Newtonian physics.

Quote from an FBW rerport

Unmanned aerial vehicles and the X-29 military airc
raft are examples of how fly-
by-wire has enabled uncontrollable designs to be de
veloped into controllable
aircraft. Boeing and Airbus commercial aircraft dem
onstrate the differences in
control theory – Boeing pilots have ultimate contro
l whereas Airbus pilots must fly
within limits determined by the control system soft
ware.

So you're implying that every flightsim that has FBW aircraft is not newtonian, this is flawed logic.

That's an incredible extrapolation. I tell you that I don't even like the FFE combat flight model, and you insist on telling me I'm putting it on pedestal. Have you ever considered a career in politics?

My comments had nothing to do with flight model preference.

 

[noodle]

It's not an artificial explanation, the rules aren't imposed by the ED physics engine, they are simply rules of that ship's flight control computer, therefore it's newtonian.

I think you're arguing over semantics, to be honest. The ship's flight computer is defined by FD. There is no rational reason to impose a speed limit other than the limitations of the game engine, and to make combat more fun. In a truly Newtonian flight model, there would be no such speed limit. We can go round in circles on this all day though, so I suggest we just agree to differ

....and not using the correct terminology for ED causes this misinformation to perpetuate and make our game look inferior, it's that simple.

It's not "our" game. It's "a" game. I have no loyalty to a software product. Nor do I think it's "inferior" simply because it lacks a full Newtonian flight model.

So you're implying that every flightsim that has FBW aircraft is not newtonian

No, I'm not implying that. You're inferring it.

My comments had nothing to do with flight model preference.

Whatever. I am not putting anything on a pedestal.

 

[laforge]

It's not an artificial explanation, the rules aren't imposed by the ED physics engine, they are simply rules of that ship's flight control computer, therefore it's newtonian.

What 'rules' are you referring to?

 

[Robert Maynard]

In a truly Newtonian flight model, there would be no such speed limit. We can go round in circles on this all day though, so I suggest we just agree to differ.

We drive on roads with a fully Newtonian driving model. There are speed limits. Ignoring speed limits can significantly limit one's driving privileges.

Speed Limit != Non-Newtonian. It just means that there is a speed limit that the flight assist system (even when you think that it is switched off - it's lying....) does not let you exceed.

No speed limit (without any other form of travel, i.e. FSD, Hyperdrive) would get very boring, very quickly without time compression. Time compression is, of course, incompatible with multi-player.

 

[noodle]

We drive on roads with a fully Newtonian driving model. There are speed limits. Ignoring speed limits can significantly limit one's driving privileges.

But you're able to. Speed limits in space are a game design decision. This has been stated quite clearly. The reasons for that are perfectly valid, but it does mean that fully Newtonian movement has been intentionally nerfed (same with yaw).

No speed limit (without any other form of travel, i.e. FSD, Hyperdrive) would get very boring, very quickly without time compression. Time compression is, of course, incompatible with multi-player.

Totally agree. I understand the reasoning behind it.

 

[Associat0r]

I think you're arguing over semantics, to be honest. The ship's flight computer is defined by FD. There is no rational reason to impose a speed limit other than the limitations of the game engine, and to make combat more fun. In a truly Newtonian flight model, there would be no such speed limit. We can go round in circles on this all day though, so I suggest we just agree to differ

It's not a semantic issue, newtonian has nothing to do flight control system as the Star Citizen devs properly explain.

And just to re-iterate - the flight model / movement you have seen (and will always see) is 100% Newtonian. All movement of spaceships in gameplay is achieved by applying impulses to the rigid body of the spaceship - either to affect the linear velocity or the angular velocity. There is no cheating / fudging where we introduce fake drag or anything.

It's not "our" game. It's "a" game. I have no loyalty to a software product. Nor do I think it's "inferior" simply because it lacks a full Newtonian flight model.

What I mean is that I have seen many people around the net claim how SC is newtonian and ED is not, while in fact they use the same kind of physics model and flight assist, this is what's hurting the perception of ED.

 

[noodle]

It's not a semantic issue, newtonian has nothing to do flight control system.

I disagree. So like I said, we need to agree to differ

What I mean is that I have seen many people around the net claim how SC is newtonian and ED is not, while in fact they use the same kind of physics model and flight assist, this is what's hurting the perception of ED.

I don't think the majority of consumers are going to base their buying decisions around a bit of forum inter-fanboy complaining. I certainly don't think we should allow it to interfere with free discussion of the game and the expression of opinions.

 

[Rog]

Apparently SC will be implementing a system that allows you a much higher velocity *unless* there are other ships in your vicinity. The in-game reason being your ship systems limit your velocity as potential combat/high-g manoeuvres would squish the weakling meatbag pilot.

I must admit I'd personally prefer a little more of a (less limited, higher possible velocity) FFE dynamic but there you go.

Of course, the game is only partway through alpha, so plenty of scope for tweaking as intra-system travel is added, and more testers appear in beta.

 

[Associat0r]

What 'rules' are you referring to?

Rules of the flight control system

 

[laforge]

We drive on roads with a fully Newtonian driving model. There are speed limits. Ignoring speed limits can significantly limit one's driving privileges.

Speed Limit != Non-Newtonian. It just means that there is a speed limit that the flight assist system (even when you think that it is switched off - it's lying....) does not let you exceed.

The flaw with such an explanation is that it doesnt make sense in space. At best it would be near some space station maybe. But in all other situations you'd expect a free choice of your reference frame by which you measure your speed. Especially in uncharted systems.

No speed limit (without any other form of travel, i.e. FSD, Hyperdrive) would get very boring, very quickly without time compression. Time compression is, of course, incompatible with multi-player.

Not in all situations. A very simple example is if you want to get into orbit around a moon (with no atmosphere) at a very low altitude. This very basic spaceflight maneuver would not require any time compression. For most other situations I agree that the FSD is the solution.