Blaspheming against the flight model.

[KellyR]

As the AI has gotten better over the years, the flaws in the flight model have become harder to ignore.

With ships being able to strafe and even reverse at full speed combat always ends up with both ships facing each other and flying in parallel, which is effectively the same as both standing still.
Because of this the ship with the most shielding and firepower is guaranteed to win, which does not make for very entertaining combat.
Whenever i fly a more agile ship my opponent will usually fly in reverse preventing me from exploiting its blind spot. And when i fly a less agile ship the roles reverse with me putting my ship in full reverse.

However the fault does not exclusively lie with the flight model. The hitscan weapons are in part to blame since they cannot be evaded unlike projectile weapons. This is likely why most space sims i have played so far shy away from hitscan weapons and exclusively use projectile weapons.

I fully acknowledge the pointlessness of this criticism since it is far too late to change something as fundamental as the flight model, 3 years too late to be specific. I also acknowledge that creating a good and satisfying flight model for space sims is difficult.

Now go head and tell me how wrong i am about everything and brag about how mindblowing your FA-off skills are because you are so much better at everything than me .

What you say is true. if you always use flight assist on. I don't. I'll use flight assist in combat, but for turning? No way. Off it goes as well as throttle to 0. I can then turn much faster. I actually turn at the same rate, but I don't have my main engine working against me taking the extra time to arc around. I just pivot. Occasionally I'll need to use reverse, but it's usually when I'm facing an Elite pilot who knows all the tricks. In most other cases I never use reverse cause I don't need to. Even in my Python, I keep eagles off my tail and in firing arc using this method. If you can do it against an Eagle, then other ships are no problem as the eagle is the most agile craft in the game (too bad it has the weakest armor as well).

 

[Siranui]

All of these weapons could be regulated not to be unbalanced. That is feasible.

Can they?
How?
And how can that happen 'realistically'?
We don't usually have/use guns on planes today in dogfights. they aren't 'balanced' with missiles, because missiles are better. Being able to shoot someone thirty seconds away is intrinsically better than walking up to them and punching them.

Initially in the combat, yes. But, eventually, all combat would break down to a "knife fight"

That's a false supposition.
Why?

Why would a pilot in a boom and zoom machine enter into a knife fight when they control the engagement and can use slashing attacks ad nausium? Why would the Me262 pilot 'eventually' get bored of engaging something agile and slow on its terms and get into a turning fight?

 

[Jack Schitt]

Shh! Don't you know that talk of this nature risks an inadvertent summoning of The Bounder? Does nobody remember the horrors of the Great Newtonian Wars of 2014-2016?

 

[SpeakerToAliens]

The original Elite had roll and pitch but not yaw, which was awkward to use when targeting other ships, but you learned how to do it. It also had ships that were generally wide and thin and space stations had entry ports that were long thin slots. Partially replicating that is why ships and stations in E: D are the way they are.

When you think about it these are an incredibly bad design for a combat space craft. They should be a sphere, with 6 axis weapons and 6 axis thrusters, with the crew in the centre so their soft squishy bodies don't limit the rotational speed due to being crushed by the centripetal forces near the outer edge. But that would make for a boring game.

... combat always ends up with both ships facing each other and flying in parallel, which is effectively the same as both standing still.

Don't fly in a straight line. You'll die! Use rolls, turns, thrusters, boost and FA-Off all at the same time, especially when running for your life!

I'm trying to learn how to fly FA-Off and do use it in combat, but I hit FA-On once my target is in my FA (forward arc) because that's the fastest way to stop turning. If a "quick-stabilise" control existed without changing my speed, that would be great (of course, when I learn to be better at FA-Off I won't need that control).

One thing I can't do FA-Off is land at a spinning space station. FA-On synchronises your ship's roll with the turn of the station, FA-Off does not. It's like I'm suddenly flying very drunk. Even if you don't want to learn FA-Off, try this - it's a good laugh.

 

[Slopey]

The reason to implement theses mechanics were that the backers wanted them.
The high level backers(DDF) wanted a flight model, based on the pitch/roll model of of Elite.

Those that payed, got to vote. Simple as that.

This is totally incorrect. The Flight Model was never up for discussion in the DDF or chosen by the DDF, and was presented as is by FD at the first Alpha. It is how it is because it mirrors the first Elite, also they nerfed the Yaw on purpose to promote a more 3 dimensional approach, otherwise with just pitch/yaw players tend to stick in the same plane (i.e. Star Trek Syndrome where everything is oriented with the same "Up" even though they're in a 6DOF environment). Having to roll then pitch rather than yaw makes it manifestly more interesting - much in the same way they didn't add target indicators on the hud - otherwise it'll just be a "follow the marker with your mouse" style flight model which is currently in use by the "other" game, and is FPS in space.

(xyphic ninja'd me!)

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

So, have you played Elite Frontier? Because if you lust for realism, that one has you covered. And it is not a lot of fun.

Yes, combat consisted of 'zap the pixel'. It was like playing a bad Atari 2600 game. I avoided it whenever possible.

I love it when I read comments like this

Because they are opinions coloured by not using the Frontier: Elite II flight model correctly, in the past

Isinona made a fantastic video showing how the Newtonian flight model was actually rather good. In my opinion that smashes the old myth that Frontier: Elite II's Newtonian flight model was bad.

It wasn't bad - it was the pilots who were bad

[video=youtube;9UMIbdN0UFE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UMIbdN0UFE[/video]

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Shh! Don't you know that talk of this nature risks an inadvertent summoning of The Bounder? Does nobody remember the horrors of the Great Newtonian Wars of 2014-2016?

I have the memories (and scars) from that.

And I still think the flight model sucks.

p.s. YAW IS NERFED

 

[EpicUnforgiven]

Its a game not simulation, a realistic flight model doesn't makes it fun for most nor it makes any business sense. what concerns me is all combat takes place WVR.

It's sold as a space simulation game so yes it's supposed to simulate real space physics to the best ability Allowed by the programming. Now to their credit flight assist off simulates most aspects very well but like the original poster said the blue zone for thrust and the unreasonably nerfed yaw rates dose kinda mess up the simulation angle just a tad

 

[Tadeus72]

ED has the most fun flight model in any space game I've played, including I-WAR, which was only fun for a time because it was something new and different. The most important thing - it also does a pretty good job at making many of the ships feel different to fly, which is crucial in a game like this. I don't even wanna start on BVR combat, which is horrible even in hard SF pen and paper games and only works for single player jet fighter simulations... kind of, cause it's not really the gameplay of the fight that is fun in those games... and would be a nightmate in a multiplayer game.

Really guys, there are so many things in this game that could benefit from improvement... but the flight model isn't part of it.

 

[Aldaris]

I love it when I read comments like this

Because they are opinions coloured by not using the Frontier: Elite II flight model correctly, in the past

Isinona made a fantastic video showing how the Newtonian flight model was actually rather good. In my opinion that smashes the old myth that Frontier: Elite II's Newtonian flight model was bad.

It wasn't bad - it was the pilots who were bad

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UMIbdN0UFE

That looks terrible in either case, hence why we have what we have now.

 

[ebbrell]

The flight model is correct while flight assist is off. But impossible to handle.
While flight assist helps us control, it removes the feelings of realisum

I remember an old version of elite tried to do it without flight assist, it was a nightmare. Slowing down while approaching planets 24 hours before you needed, combat was impossible.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

That looks terrible in either case, hence why we have what we have now.

What looks terrible? The only terrible thing about it was most pilots didn't git gud at flying a realistic newtonian flight model

Then blame the flight model rather than their utterly poor piloting skills.

But I suppose E: D's flight model is perceived to be more fun, purely because it's got training wheels on it - even in FA Off

p.s. Combat in ED still consists of jousting and orbiting the other ship, despite the training-wheels flight model. You cannot help BUT joust or orbit another ship - it's space! Space is nothing but orbits!

 

[babelfisch]

It's sold as a space simulation game so yes it's supposed to simulate real space physics to the best ability Allowed by the programming. Now to their credit flight assist off simulates most aspects very well but like the original poster said the blue zone for thrust and the unreasonably nerfed yaw rates dose kinda mess up the simulation angle just a tad

Physics are simulated correctly in ED.

What you are talking about is called fly by wire, which is also realistic since it already exists in todays planes and cars.

 

[Siranui]

It's sold as a space simulation game so yes it's supposed to simulate real space physics to the best ability Allowed by the programming.

Um, no. That's a false conclusion. Plenty of flight sims don't make you manage fuel mixture.

not that I can see any mention of it being a hardcore space sim here... https://www.elitedangerous.com/

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Physics are simulated correctly in ED.

Physics are - but the team of engineers in the 3300's who redesigned the flight software for all ships are obviously quite insane.

I mean, who would design a ship's flight model which is specifically programmed to 1) Fight against Newtonian flight, and 2) Specifically designed to try to get you killed by imposing an arbitrary relative speed limit!?!?!

 

[Aldaris]

What looks terrible? The only terrible thing about it was most pilots didn't git gud at flying a realistic newtonian flight model

Then blame the flight model rather than their utterly poor piloting skills.

But I suppose E: D's flight model is perceived to be more fun, purely because it's got training wheels on it - even in FA Off

p.s. Combat in ED still consists of jousting and orbiting the other ship, despite the training-wheels flight model. You cannot help BUT joust or orbit another ship - it's space! Space is nothing but orbits!

I said what looks terrible.

P.s, no it doesn't. Plenty of people have stated it's possible to stick to the behind of a ship.

 

[babelfisch]

Physics are - but the team of engineers in the 3300's who redesigned the flight software for all ships are obviously quite insane.

I mean, who would design a ship's flight model which is specifically programmed to 1) Fight against Newtonian flight, and 2) Specifically designed to try to get you killed by imposing an arbitrary relative speed limit!?!?!

That's how Science-Fiction works, have you seen Star Wars?

Thermal exhaust port

 

[Rubbernuke]

ED is has arcade (as in a more advanced version of) X-Wing / Freespace controls. Its not supposed to be 'real' in any sense, just fun.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

I said what looks terrible.

You said "That looks terrible...". The word that could mean anything.

 

[Aldaris]

You said "That looks terrible...". The word that could mean anything.

Got to love it when someone partial quotes and misses the context.

I actually said "That looks terrible in either case" as in there are two cases presented, and they both look terrible.