Didn't make anything up, but repeated what I'd heard before. My bad for taking hearsay at face value.
Why do manufacturers hate Yaw?
- Thread starter umbabrahattasil
- Start date
Didn't make anything up, but repeated what I'd heard before. My bad for taking hearsay at face value.
It had always been about yaw. I guess you don't understand hyperbole?
Because the ships are optimised for pitch and roll.
The reasoning in my handwavium thinking is that they need more thrusters top side a bottom side for maximum lift for level flight in high g planets and atmospheric flight.
Adding more thrusters to the sides would add weight and power draw.
The reasoning in my handwavium thinking is that they need more thrusters top side a bottom side for maximum lift for level flight in high g planets and atmospheric flight.
Adding more thrusters to the sides would add weight and power draw.
Not doubting the source, just the reasons given
Name dropping starwars and all that business about rolling. Well ok if he says so
Last edited:
Not doubting the source, just the reasons given
Name dropping starwars and all that bsuiness about rolling. Well ok if he says so
They sound like pseudo-scientific reasons to justify a gameplay decision based on nostalgia and homage to the original.
Honestly don't think I could handle yaw at the same rate as pitch/roll.
I already use vJoy to damp yaw on any of the small/medium fighters I fly. I certainly couldn't ever get rails on target if it weren't for that.
I already use vJoy to damp yaw on any of the small/medium fighters I fly. I certainly couldn't ever get rails on target if it weren't for that.
Limited Yaw was always the intent, and the only debates came up with how FAOFF effected different vectors and whether there was the slowdown after boost et cetera
But
Fine
Keep you lies and delusions if it makes you feel better about yourself
All bad things are due to the Devs listening to forum cry babies and not your supreme genius who is the embodiment of perfection
Keep you lies and delusions if it makes you feel better about yourself
All bad things are due to the Devs listening to forum cry babies and not your supreme genius who is the embodiment of perfection
Thanks for acknowledging my superior intellect.
Just try to be consistent next time, thats all. Oh and kill that source of yours
I did try to be consistent, otherwise I would have not acknowledged being wrong in the first place.
It wasn't a single source, but more of a mosaic of hearsay based on multiple Discord conversations about the subject.
Well you do seem to only be able to cope with such external validation
Correct, yaw tolerance is lower by a huge amount, around 9g on the yaw axis compared to 27g on the forward axis (forward Survivability can be much higher with a g-suit)
g tolerances in ED are insane, like liquefied internals insane.. The lack of Yaw thrusters in ED was purely a design decision to avoid turrets in space. I hate space games with a turret flight model, I don't give a damn about realism, if cmdrs want realism then let's take humans completely out of the equation.. No? Ok then lets keep the flight model fun with a bit of a challenge.
Last edited:
Please, psychoanalyze me more. I'll grab the popcorn.
Nah, the horse is still alive and kicking as evidenced by the fact you're continuing to post.
The flight model has been part of the game since day 1, they aren't going to change it, and complaining about it is futile.
Well the psycho-analysis would be based on numerous discord conversations on the subject so it will be 100% correct and the truth and only forum crybabies would deny
I wouldn't call it complaining (since that would imply an expectation of possible change), more like mocking the poor decisions and the pseudo-scientific explanations behind them that led to airplanes in space being considered "space-sim worthy" in 2012
Last edited:
How dare you sir! Wrong or right you defend your side like it was your baby! Are you new here or something!?
Last edited:
I thought I'd already acknowledged I was incorrect? Not sure where this "100% correct and the truth" stuff is coming from.
Yes, since most ships are wide and flat, turning moments should mean that yaw would be much faster than pitch. It's just another example of physics being very optional in ED. As already said, it's all so that we can have WW1 dogfighting in space. This emphasis on combat as if in atmosphere is why I don't enjoy and avoid most combat in the game.
OK, I can see that physics compromises have to be made for a playable game, but then don't start going on about the mass or volume of particular ships or their ability to fly backwards etc.
OK, I can see that physics compromises have to be made for a playable game, but then don't start going on about the mass or volume of particular ships or their ability to fly backwards etc.
Last edited: