Canyon running in reverse with FA off is a lot of fun. Instruments only to guide you.
Tip: use a cheap ship.
Nerf Reverski
- Thread starter Powderpanic
- Start date
Canyon running in reverse with FA off is a lot of fun. Instruments only to guide you.
Tip: use a cheap ship.
And people call PvP a niche activity.
And people call PvP a niche activity.
Blazing my own trail. What can I say?
And you're not the only one to enjoy it. And these folks are on their latest campaign to get Frontier to further mould the game to their sole needs by changing something which works for just about everyone else except the PvP-pro-bros.
More power to ya. If FA-off reverse ever did get adjusted, you'd still have the option to run canyons with your nose straight up or straight down, belly first. Equally impossible to see, with the added difficulty of all the orientation being off by 90 degrees and the added difficulty of the overdriven ventral thrusters no longer being able to help with altitude control!
Never thought of trying that, in reverse is hard enough. I'll have to try it on my next outing.
I'm not a PvP'er.. You find the flight model "already-insanely stupid Star Wars" and you say you're happy with the way it works?
So how would not being able to fly at full speed FA off in reverse adversely affect your (and the "most" you speak for) gameplay, other than it being a "PvP" thing or that it doesn't follow real life physics? Serious question btw..
Then clearly we should strive for a solution that benefits (or at least doesn't affect) EVERYONE, instead of just saying, "Nope. Keep it as it is. Let group A suffer because things work fine for group B." Just because a mechanic works fine for some (but not all) situations, doesn't mean it should just be forever left as is.
Because the flight model as-is works for most people. Simples.
I was not aware you had gathered the opinion of most people. I must have missed out on that game-wide survey. For reference, PvE is my main activity. While I do enjoy the occasional PvP fight when it comes up, I have probably done more mining than I've done PvP combat. I just happen to appreciate balance, and want combat to be as fun, exciting, and cinematic as possible.
god dammed Lock Ness Monster!
Well simple would have been a direct answer to a simple question.. the fact you didn't provide one speaks volumes.
CMDR's, stop asking for nerfs... seriously, if fdev starts messing with ships stats, it wont be pretty so be happy with what is already there.
Last edited:
Ok. I"ll take a stab at answering that.
Right now, the departures from a full 6DOF flight model are already quite severe enough. I can totally appreciate the way that allowing full 6DOF in FA-off would lead to space turreting which would not be a good thing for combat pilots at all and would rapidly run up against the limits of practicality for effective interpolation of position and heading inherent to the games architecture. I know that there will always be hard limits there but I'd personally much prefer that any ship could reach those limits, just with varying rates of acceleration.
In an ideal ED universe for me, a ships handling characteristics would be defined by a maximum rotational acceleration (common to all three rotational axes) A maximum translational acceleration (common to lateral and vertical thrusters and also applied to the retro thrusters) and a maximum main engine acceleration. Speed capped, but acceleration fully newtonian without FA. To the point that there would be some planets too massive for a given ship to approach safely and if the planets gravity overcame your ventral thrusters you'd crash unless you realized it was happening in time to stand your ship on its tail and cut loose with the mains. Preferably before you'd built up so much of a downward vector that you ended up buttstomping the terrain anyway.
Now, I know that is never going to happen in ED. We had this discussion before there was even an alpha release and that ship has long since sailed - because FD did not want those flight characteristics. They deliberately made the flight model more aircraft-like, with the rotational axes not being created equal although all three of them employ the same thrusters to shift the same ship about its center of mass. They made top speed a differentiating factor between ships. These changes delivered their benefits overwhelmingly to the combat pilots and I'm OK with that.
I don't have a problem with ALL ways of playing ED having a slightly less-than-perfect system to work in. The places where things are worse for one playstyle than they are for another will tend to average out and I don't believe any single group of players in ED constitutes a majority. The galaxy still needs to cater to all of us. At the same time though, there have been people that I've tried to introduce to the game where the tweaks to the flight model that currently exist have elicited a response that a family-friendly forum should probably render as "I say, old boy. This does seem a rather unfortunate flight model for controlling a spacecraft!" and a potential player lost to the game.
Dedicated "space pilots" may not be as loud as dedicated "combat pilots" but we are getting just a little tired of FD being asked to lean into the sandbox we share and take away even more of our toys then give them to the scrappy kids.
Dead stop FA off fighting is dull
I fight FA-off in "full Newtonian" all the time (playing other Elites, not ED obviously) and it's just vastly more fun and exciting than anything in ED.. just lightyears out in front.
You can see the same inane misgivings and confusions in this thread that always crop up whenever actual spaceflight (shock horror) is mentioned - basically that it's boring and impossible, and submarines in custard are much more agreeable.
The inherent handling differences between small and large ships are moronically dismissed as "jousting" and "turreting", in favour of a one-speed-fits-all slow-pitching kiss chase. A stiffly choreographed, slow, drawn-out wrangle, for a dubious and fake cinematic aesthetic, wherein 'skill' means coping as best as possible with the overarching constraints on basic movement, just a little better than your equally-hapless opponent. Like watching drunks fight wearing straightjackets. The precise opposite of learning to exploit the full unfettered freedom of motion actually offered by the premise of CQB with so-called spaceships, in so-called space.
My Eagle in ED does 140 m/s. Or was it 170? Who cares, no material difference anyway... in previous Elites, you can have an Eagle with over 52 G of thrust. Fly to the moon in under 30 mins, in real-time, in real space.
The ISS is travelling at 7.66 km/s, for crying out loud! My ED Eagle couldn't even run a simple supply mission. It's less useful than a Soyuz.. Couldn't even replicate the flight of Sputnik 1.
Yet most of you still think more nerfs are the answer. If you could only restrict basic freedom of motion just-so - like in your fave "sci fi" movie or TV show - it could be just perfect.
ED is not Elite.
You can see the same inane misgivings and confusions in this thread that always crop up whenever actual spaceflight (shock horror) is mentioned - basically that it's boring and impossible, and submarines in custard are much more agreeable.
The inherent handling differences between small and large ships are moronically dismissed as "jousting" and "turreting", in favour of a one-speed-fits-all slow-pitching kiss chase. A stiffly choreographed, slow, drawn-out wrangle, for a dubious and fake cinematic aesthetic, wherein 'skill' means coping as best as possible with the overarching constraints on basic movement, just a little better than your equally-hapless opponent. Like watching drunks fight wearing straightjackets. The precise opposite of learning to exploit the full unfettered freedom of motion actually offered by the premise of CQB with so-called spaceships, in so-called space.
My Eagle in ED does 140 m/s. Or was it 170? Who cares, no material difference anyway... in previous Elites, you can have an Eagle with over 52 G of thrust. Fly to the moon in under 30 mins, in real-time, in real space.
The ISS is travelling at 7.66 km/s, for crying out loud! My ED Eagle couldn't even run a simple supply mission. It's less useful than a Soyuz.. Couldn't even replicate the flight of Sputnik 1.
Yet most of you still think more nerfs are the answer. If you could only restrict basic freedom of motion just-so - like in your fave "sci fi" movie or TV show - it could be just perfect.
ED is not Elite.
Have you played the first Elite? Because the movement in that one is way closer to what we have in E
than full Newtonian... No yaw whatsoever, and no lateral thrusters whatsoever.