How do you guys pull off FA-OFF flight?

[Madrax573]

A good place to stat is to watch Moxen Wolf's (CMDR Hobs) YT vids. He's the guy who started our little bunch of nutters for all who love/want to learn/are just daft about FA-off flight. The links were posted earlier in the thread.

Also for me it was like Jason, going cold turkey, I decide one day that I didn't want to have my ship computer dictate how I flew so I switched it off and very rarely if ever turn it on (I'm FA-off 99.99999999999% of the time) I taught myself in a Vulture with grade 3 dirty drives. That was a twitchy beast and probably took me longer to learn because of that but like Jason I'm a bit stubborn and wanted to nail it.

For my it's like surfing. It can be very cruisy and zen like when you pull off the perfect FA-off manoeuvre or it can be crazy mad at times when you are working extra hard!

As for your starting ship. We at Newtons Gambit recommend you just pick up a start sidewinder. It's agile enough to lets you do everything but not too twichy etc. Hob's tutorial vids are all in a stock sidey (even if he has put his ship kit on it, it's stock mods)

In the words of the Nike advert - Just do it!

 

[Madrax573]

But… flying with keyboard and mouse to manage FA OFF?!? That would totally break immersion for me, especially as I'm flying in VR. I'm all for keyboard+mouse in FP shooters. But a game like this? Never!

I still need to give it a go by setting up a toggle.

I fly KB+M as an active decision because I travel a lot with work and play on a laptop. So rather than having two different control setups (KB+M for when I'm travelling and HOTAS at home) I decided to keep with KB+M and just practice, practice, practice.

I honestly would love a full HOTAS setup and VR and it's perfectly viable. We have all different control methods in our discord and we are all able to fly with them. This IMO is more down to a pilots skill rather than the control methods. Yes different control methods have different advantages/disadvantages etc but they are all viable if you are willing to put the effort in an learn/practice the skill. Heck I've been full FA-off for a while now and I still go out and practice drills from time to time. If I get a new ship or change my setup/engineers my current one I'll go out and do some drills to get a feel for it's new capabilities.

If you are happy with your control method then I wouldn't recommend changing it just to do FA-off stuff. Just learn with what you are comfortable with.

 

[the100thmonkey]

If you are happy with your control method then I wouldn't recommend changing it just to do FA-off stuff. Just learn with what you are comfortable with.

I dunnno man - FA-off made me ditch the throttle and use a second "stick" (a 3D CAD mouse) - more flexibility and intuitive control.

 

[Spaceburger]

I fly with kb+mouse, would love to try hotas but I don't have one and I'm pretty used to kb+m by now, also after spending hours setting up my controls and memorising them it would be almost like learning to fly all over again, using 2 sticks for full 3d control sounds amazing though

When I first started FA off, I played through the tutorials for a few hours and was noticably better after just sitting there and landing/taking off from the training station a few dozen times, then when you feel like you may be able to maintain control, go for a nice long float through a scenic asteroid belt, try passing close to roids, drifting around (deja vu!) trying to keep track of where your momentum is heading and when you feel confident you can begin to learn circle strafing different size and shape asteroids. Keep your target on the stroid while using vertical and lateral thrusters to spin around it.

When you're in actual combat using FA off, I find it easier to ignore your ships speed completely and focus only on your targets movements, try to match their speed, get around behind them and give them a hard time to see you. I'm still rubbish at PVP but I still have a blast when I'm fighting.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Not a fan how yaw, pitch and roll are not dampened. For flightsticks the system really needs input curves, because out of the box the input just slams in too hard and immediate after your stick leaves the deadzone which leads to just fighting the controls, overcompensation and erratic manoeuvers.

IIRC, Independence War just had Newtonian model, not Flight Assist disable - a lot more accessible and way easier to fly. It was the best flight model for space combat I've yet seen.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

o7 CMDRs,

whenever i try to pull off some FA-OFF maneuver for any longer than 5 seconds everything just goes into spin mayhem that i cant control,try to offset the roll and it starts the opposite way..

how did FA-OFF gods git so gud that its like they are in FA-ON?

any input is greatly appericated!

Practice.

Get yourself back in that Sidewinder you started off in, fly it out to a ring system, drop in to the rings, FA-Off and practice, practice, practice.

You'll get it. It just takes... practice.

 

[StiTch]

I think you've accidentally hit on the answer...

Yo memers, I'm really happy for you, and I'mma let you finish, but GJ51 had one of the best internet comments of all time.

 

[Aashenfox]

Like a BOSS!

*sorry, couldn't resist.*

Seriously though, that's good advice right there (above). But if that's too boring for you, another good one is to try to fly into, turn around inside, then fly out of, a Coriolis starport, without the starport destroying you, with FA off. For extra challenge wait until the first ships start leaving the station, so there;s a bit of traffic. :lol:

Not a fan how yaw, pitch and roll are not dampened. For flightsticks the system really needs input curves, because out of the box the input just slams in too hard and immediate after your stick leaves the deadzone which leads to just fighting the controls, overcompensation and erratic manoeuvers.

IIRC, Independence War just had Newtonian model, not Flight Assist disable - a lot more accessible and way easier to fly. It was the best flight model for space combat I've yet seen.

I agree, it was the perfect middle ground, damn I miss that game, the next most atmospheric space game ever after elite.

 

[Morbad]

My ideal system would be compensated rotational controls, but fully Newtonian translations, with the the ability to temporarily disengage the former. Jumpgate had something close, but unfortunately didn't have vertical/lateral thrust and had an artificial drag value to cap/decay velocities.

 

[StiTch]

My ideal system would be compensated rotational controls, but fully Newtonian translations, with the the ability to temporarily disengage the former.

Aye - alas FD obviously had this odd vision of a space shooter that wasn't a space shooter because it's really an aerial dogfighting game, which wasn't quite an aerial dogfighting game because it's still a space shooter.

I guess it has its own charm but hot damn do some things not work out.

 

[Aashenfox]

had an artificial drag value to cap/decay velocities.

As does elite. More strangely still, Elites implementation somehow drags on your ship down to your maximum cruise speed, then stops! That's magic pixies right there.

 

[eraktor]

Here's my thoughts, they're not the absolute truth, but just a few tips

I've been flying always FA off for couple of years now, started doing it inspired by Isinona, after I had been playing for little over half a year. I found CMDR Lancer's tutorials the most helpful for me: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLtywH7XtIZ0OJd8EM8TKw-fTGGCWJCSoq it's a long watch, but recommended. Imperial Courier was an easy ship to practice FAoff with, it has very responsive handling and its shields are durable enough to forgive small mistakes while you're still learning.

My control setup is technically a HOTAS, but instead of a throttle lever, I use a table-mounted X360 gamepad - its two analogue sticks - with my left hand fingertips for controlling all directional thrust. T.16000M stick in right hand. For stick settings my preference is having relatively wide deadzones, so I can set the ship in motion with a quick flick-and-release, without accidental input from small movements. Don't keep the stick in extreme positions; your turn rates will still be limited and depending on your ship, short controlled inputs are equally effective.

As for weapons, fixed beams are great for practicing tracking, whereas slow ROF weapons allow for some sneaky hits on passing targets. Leading gunsight mode gives you a fixed point to aim towards with projectile weapons (also acting as a super handy relative vector indicator), trailing is very confusing (to me) with FA-off. I feel like the natural sway of gimbals reduces my accuracy versus small targets, but there's no shame in using them. Eventually you might find that you don't have to

In combat, use your target as a point of reference for your manoeuvers. Un-learn the concept of 'turning fight' as it is with FA-on, rather take advantage of being able to aim in a direction different from where you're moving in. Think along the line "What is the best position for me to be relative to my target?" Good pilots in agile ships can have 100% time on target while simultaneously evading enemy fire. Try to avoid boosting for proactive manoeuvers, save it for repositioning if you get caught under fire.

 

[777Driver]

As does elite. More strangely still, Elites implementation somehow drags on your ship down to your maximum cruise speed, then stops! That's magic pixies right there.

Nothing strange about the mechanics, the thrusters are clearly firing to provide the artificial limit. It's not as if it some kind of weird alien tech. Flight control laws have been in existence since the late 1950's

 

[Morbad]

As does elite. More strangely still, Elites implementation somehow drags on your ship down to your maximum cruise speed, then stops! That's magic pixies right there.

That's not drag, that's flight assist (which is never completely off, even with FA Off, or your thrusters disabled). You can watch your thrusters retro rocket you back down to the speed limits.

With FA off Elite is almost fully Newtonian...until you hit a velocity relative to the instances' frame of reference equal to your 4-pip ENG non-boost speed.

Jumpgate had an actual drag coefficient. You would eventually come to a stop without any thruster input, depending on the kinetic energy in your vessel vs. it's drag. Once you fall below the speed limit in ED, you will drift forever (well until your lifesupport runs out).

 

[Spaceburger]

My control setup is technically a HOTAS, but instead of a throttle lever, I use a table-mounted X360 gamepad - its two analogue sticks - with my left hand fingertips for controlling all directional thrust. T.16000M stick in right hand.

I just wanna say this sounds awesome
Nice tips too!

Try to avoid boosting for proactive manoeuvers, save it for repositioning if you get caught under fire.

I need to remember this, find myself with an empty ENG cap and sitting in front of the enemies nose way too often.

 

[Bounder]

Not a fan how yaw, pitch and roll are not dampened. For flightsticks the system really needs input curves, because out of the box the input just slams in too hard and immediate after your stick leaves the deadzone which leads to just fighting the controls, overcompensation and erratic manoeuvers.

IIRC, Independence War just had Newtonian model, not Flight Assist disable - a lot more accessible and way easier to fly. It was the best flight model for space combat I've yet seen.

I-War was much better than ED, but the creme-de-la-creme for me is the Elite 2 & 3 flight model, updated with the kinds of refinements Pioneer has added. Andy J has also recently updated FFED3D to support full HOTAS control (twist yaw, manual throttle etc.).

Said it before and i'll keep saying it - the ability to take full control over the reference frame handling would endow the previous game's handling with all the benefits of ED's dumbed-down pew-pew model. Selectable FoR's, and especially virtual ones (such as selecting your current vector as a temporary FoR), would confer all the benefits of ED's "blue zone" handling envelope, with none of its pitiful restrictions.


As for your point re. the fact that ED's FA-off disables angular damping instead of just linear... it's basically the exact opposite of how it worked in the previous games! In Elite 2 & 3, FA-off disabled linear damping, but angular damping was still applied. Infinitely more practical, sensible and useful...

But you're right - if these are supposed to be spaceships, in space, then by all rights the handling envelope should be fully configurable. Pilot's prerogative, all round, just as it would be in any real vehicle (even the aeroplanes or submarines ED's handling is devoted to emulating). That would be 'full pilot freedom'. That is what Elite really wants to be at its core.

The current implementation just seems like a lazy afterthought, pitching the pilot against the limitations of the ship's handling ability, rather than just giving full control to the pilot and pitching them against the physics of inertia and momentum. I honestly expected a new Elite sequel to be awesome in this respect, not this pathetically lame, lowest-common-denominator regression to 1980's arcade clones. Seriously, Meteors had better physics. Defender, even.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

I-War was much better than ED, but the creme-de-la-creme for me is the Elite 2 & 3 flight model, updated with the kinds of refinements Pioneer has added. Andy J has also recently updated FFED3D to support full HOTAS control (twist yaw, manual throttle etc.).

Said it before and i'll keep saying it - the ability to take full control over the reference frame handling would endow the previous game's handling with all the benefits of ED's dumbed-down pew-pew model. Selectable FoR's, and especially virtual ones (such as selecting your current vector as a temporary FoR), would confer all the benefits of ED's "blue zone" handling envelope, with none of its pitiful restrictions.


As for your point re. the fact that ED's FA-off disables angular damping instead of just linear... it's basically the exact opposite of how it worked in the previous games! In Elite 2 & 3, FA-off disabled linear damping, but angular damping was still applied. Infinitely more practical, sensible and useful...

But you're right - if these are supposed to be spaceships, in space, then by all rights the handling envelope should be fully configurable. Pilot's prerogative, all round, just as it would be in any real vehicle (even the aeroplanes or submarines ED's handling is devoted to emulating). That would be 'full pilot freedom'. That is what Elite really wants to be at its core.

The current implementation just seems like a lazy afterthought, pitching the pilot against the limitations of the ship's handling ability, rather than just giving full control to the pilot and pitching them against the physics of inertia and momentum. I honestly expected a new Elite sequel to be awesome in this respect, not this pathetically lame, lowest-common-denominator regression to 1980's arcade clones. Seriously, Meteors had better physics. Defender, even.

ED's design with the supercruise mechanic would have allowed to enable full freedom of acceleration and impulse in the "normal space" instance without the problems of high speed interplanetary transition. I'd totally mod ED's FAoff to full thruster freedom and reinstate attitude assist.

 

[Aris_]

The pin point accuracy needed for fights is the major reason to use k/m also the way faoff works you can keep your speed easily through the whole fight -the god rolls on the DD5- and since faoff keeps the speed high you need to boost a lot to make the resultant you need to positioning your self -hunt for the best charge PD.

With hotas everyone agrees that you need min input to flight faoff effectively or curves , so you give up max deflection rates in all axes that hotas can provide in maneuvering and positioning with faon i find this peculiar for a "space sim" and more of a programmers choice of how fights and flights are in ED.

 

[the100thmonkey]

The current implementation just seems like a lazy afterthought

I recall that the original intent was not to have FA-off at all, and that one or two programmers on the original team had to fight tooth and nail to have any kind of Newtonian model included.

I personally don't mind the lack of rotational dampening.

 

[Madrax573]

For full newtonian flight you wouldn't have any dampening at all. All movement would be controlled by thruster/throttle input.

As for the need of pinpoint accuracy etc I know people who use all different methods of FA-off control. This is purely a pilot skill and determination as to how good you get in FA-off combat.

Like I have said many times your control method do NOT dictate your ability to fly or fight with FA-off. Your determination to learn does. A good FA-off pilot with HOTAS will still kick the of an ordinary pilot using KB+M and vice versa.

Ultimately the question about FA-off piloting is down to what you want out of it. Advantage in combat? Use it selectively and learn when to switch etc. Agility for manoeuvring? Grab the stock sidey and go practice. Living the true lifestyle? Come join us on the discord and forget about whether or not you are gud enough and just enjoy being a space pilot!