Thank goodness FDev does what is good for gameplay and doesn't listen to the players for everything..
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Thank goodness FDev does what is good for gameplay and doesn't listen to the players for everything..
Is that A rated? Stock?
And that is for stopping, not "changing direction".
Could try this for the cat, but too lazy. Since top speeds in SC are so much higher, it is gonna take way more to stop. Stats page says 890m/s for a cat, which sounds about right.
That's A-rated engines with Coriolis "trader" setup.
If you change direction, you will fly 0 metres, obviously, because your deceleration and acceleration distances will cancel out.
If I turn 10 degrees to the right, I am changing direction and I will not come to a complete stop.
Depends on what is mean by "change direction".
I remember these forums were pretty excited about Elite's new planetary colors, the starlight color filters, and doubly excited (and then disappointed) with just the concept art for the ice planet revisions, so no.
Before that, there was also the addition of just a handful of new station interiors, which yeah was also a big big deal for people at the time.
Personally, the planetary color changes have probably contributed more to my enjoyment of Elite than a lot of other changes Frontier has made, if I'm being honest. I don't know if my experience is typical, but it sure isn't uncommon.
I took change direction as "will fly in opposite direction in full speed", as that's the only case where you have nicely measurable "stopping distance". In all other cases it's harder to calculate it, since you're shifting one vectors in another and it's not intuitive for people.
Frontier must have their ship size vs maneuverability reduction tradeoffs on a totally different curve which starts off more or less level and then suddenly goes asymptotic once you get up to fleet carrier sizes.Well, certainly don't want to get the mods in here telling us that there is a whole other part of the forum for discussing ED, but i do wish big ships in ED were a lot less less manouverable. I can get behind this idea in SC as well.
And I'm thinking of it more practically, like something you would actual try and do.
The cat was already so unmaneuverable, that if you were cruising along at top speed and something pops up in front of you that you can not "change direction" fast enough to not hit it. For seconds you will will be hurtling towards it knowing you are gonna explode and there is nothing you can do.
That's part of the problem. They're doing that stuff roughly a decade too early (going by CI¬G dev time scale). Whereas…
…this was not. There's a difference between doing something pointless that will not last when you should be focusing on creating a foundation that will matter and last for a while and doing a visual update on something that has already been in place for years and is due for an overhaul.
Last edited:
Thank goodness FDev does what is good for gameplay and doesn't listen to the players for everything..
You mean like modes and ship transfer times? Yes! I agree!
Now that's gameplay!
A texture rework is a tad different from making a hill a bit higher.
And something doesnt seem right about this. 19 m/s^2 is only like 2g's of acceleration.
So this thing couldnt fly on even moderate g moons? Or is just because of impulse boasting this thing would survive. It's been too long since I've played ED.
But this does bring up a different concern of mine with SC. If all these ships can barely fly in 1g of gravity, it is gonna mean there will never be high g bodies in SC. And that blocks of some interesting game play. Is possible that CIG is shortsighted enough to have not thought it all through though.
Nah, I really like the planet colors in ED.
And I appreciate mountains now looking more like mountains in SC.
If they were really efficient recycling backer's money they wouldn't need that loan or sell shares to investors
“Possible”… yes. That's one way of expressing it.
I admit the calculation is a bit too hard for me here, especially since the turning isn't instant and Anaconda spend roughly a second turning. It would be better to plot it, but I am not experienced in that.
EDIT: Or test it in-game, since you can fly full speed, have a friend in a ship targeted and see how far you have to be to avoid clipping them - then calculate from the size of their ship.
I think it cannot fly up on some moons and planets indeed, and that FDev artificially boosted the upwards thrusters to be able to lift all ships instead - only after some time you can turn the nose up and fly away.
Side note that the acceleration number is found on some forum or reddit post where the person claimed they tested it (should be pretty easy, though, measure how fast you reach top speed from zero, divide that speed by time), didn't do my own research on that.
Last edited:
in this case they listened to the players to the detriment of game play.
Ah, you see. This is simply because in relation to any change there will be some for and some against it. So it all depends on which side of the change you are on rather than whether the devs are listening or not.
Yes, there will always be some who are wrong and some who are right.
Luckily for me, I am always on the side of those who are right. Batting 1000 baby!