Bring Newtonian Physics up to full speed

[Hooplah]

Well, since so many players ask for desires they may never get anyway I decided why not put one in for me? Heck if nothing else I'll feel good talking to myself.

When Throttle Assist is off a ship should be flying without engines and with inertia in the direction of travel. This is the real life Newtonian Physics (NP) of space flight and was implemented in Frontier Elite II (FE2) and Frontier: First Encounters (FFE). There are so many wonderful possibilities a player can do with NP from Combat, station approach/egress, even cruising to Hutton Station in Alpha Centuari with inertia and saving fuel is possible.

But in Beta this was nerfed a little. Here's the numbers.

Originally: Max speed, add Boost then TA off to maintain that speed.
Currently: Boost hits for a moment then drops back to max speed without the boost.

Why?

PvP players were complaining that their targets could use Boost plus TA off to maintain the fastest speed to elude their attackers. They were right if the attacker had a slower, heavier and more powerful ship. Go figure! But FD listened and nerfed the fastest speed possible for inertia flight. Rather silly now as say a Cobra with the proper equipment can do the same thing with effective continual boosts until the FSD is online. Meanwhile Newtonian Physics loses a little.

Solution

FD went too far. Bring back the TA off and Boost for NON-COMBAT situations. Keep the current in Combat but open it up for everything else! This was done with the FSD drive taking longer to recharge in Combat. Do the same for TA and Boost.

That is a compromise. I would prefer to bring it back all the way whether or not in Combat. Heck then maybe Solo players would then take a chance in Open Play knowing they have opportunities to escape when needed. Attackers would have to use faster ships versus slower ones with better weapons to take out their victims. I'm missing Newtonian Physics and the cool things one can do with it in flight with the Boost speed advantage.

Regards to All

 

[Joe Spivey]

Originally: Max speed, add Boost then TA off to maintain that speed.
Currently: Boost hits for a moment then drops back to max speed without the boost.

Why?

PvP players were complaining that their targets could use Boost plus TA off to maintain the fastest speed to elude their attackers. They were right if the attacker had a slower, heavier and more powerful ship. But FD listened and nerfed the fastest speed possible for inertia flight. Rather silly now as say a Cobra with the proper equipment can do the same thing with effective continual boosts until the FSD is online. Meanwhile Newtonian Physics loses a little.

Ummmm, I may be wrong but I seem to remember that FD were correcting a glitch by doing this. It was never actually intended that with FD off the boost speed would be maintained.

 

[Hooplah]

Joe I don't know as getting in on Beta what I did see was PvP whining and FD responding. If someone could find that glitch you mentioned in a post I'm all for it. Then again what was considered then may not be working for them now. E.G. offline mode? Neither we as fans nor FD as Developers always get it right. What counts is working together to get it right. I'm all for that.

 

[Morbad]

FD went too far. Bring back the TA off and Boost for NON-COMBAT situations. Keep the current in Combat but open it up for everything else! This was done with the FSD drive taking longer to recharge in Combat. Do the same for TA and Boost.

I never had a problem with how FA Off worked in Beta 1, but I will never be in favor of arbitrary distinctions between combat and non-combat scenarios.

 

[Defacto]

Uh no, the problem wasn't that people could flee too easily, well that might have been the problem too, but the main problem was this:
Shortly after this change was added (the changelog described it as a test) the entire PvP metagame disappeared and was replaced with Viper sky-gods in travelling around at the maximum speed allowed by the engine and blasting any mortal that would dare to get close with their quad-cannon loadouts.

Trouble? Poof! Away! Catch me if you can!
And let's not even start discussing the por NPC's. The only danger they posed was the risk of running into them by mistake.

I can't comprehend how anyone who actually experienced that system could say anything in the favor of it. I don't think that the Viper sky-gods enjoyed it very much either. It was simply terrible.

 

[Morbad]

And let's not even start discussing the por NPC's. The only danger they posed was the risk of running into them by mistake.

This hasn't changed much.

I can't comprehend how anyone who actually experienced that system could say anything in the favor of it. I don't think that the Viper sky-gods enjoyed it very much either. It was simply terrible.

I piloted a quad Cannon Viper in Beta 1, and while there was never any reason to pilot anything else in combat, the problem wasn't with FA off maintaining full speed, it was with arbitrary speed limits on everything else being so much slower.

Speed is the thing in combat. Any time you make one combat capable vessel dramatically faster than all the others, everyone with any sense flocks to that ship, because if you don't have that ship, you can never run from one and you can never catch one.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

-- Deleted --

 

[sutex]

inertia .. sweet , but trying to control in ED with k/m found it a little hard , but in Evochron Mercenary easy , so any tips beside get a flight stick, which I have but never have got use too.

 

[Morbad]

First of all, I think it would be extremely awkward to run 2 different flight models (combat vs. non-combat) - that would be quite inconsistent.

I agree.

Second, the Newtonian flight model is nearly unfit from a gaming point of view (unless you prefer rubber-band fights and frequent, long relative stagnations - as both opponents attempt to get within their own, specific optimum firing parameters).
ELITE II was a prime example of that and thus often failed terribly at it.

Add to that the "digital Afterburner" still giving you a temporary turning rate boost - but sending of you careening kilometers away from the fight instantly all the time, you begin to see the unplayability of newtonian fights.

I don't even want to imagine how weird Conflict zones would look, especially with 30 ships drifting all over the place with the occasional Ship afterburning itself into nirvana and out of the fight. That conflict zone would likely extend over 1000km range within 5 minutes of fighting.
Collisions would be unavoidable and occur frequently - no way to verify your flight path is clear if it may very well be behind you or anyplace else nearly all the time.
Pretty much would look like some Gravity Particle Simulation with occasional Particles shooting easily out of the very low-gravity, loose Furball.

Although I realize the idea sounds sexy - it's simply unplayable.

I never found anything unplayable about Newtonian combat, though I do recognize it will introduce complications that many people would not enjoy. The problems you mention only occur when people fail to grasp the basics of Newton's laws of motion.

As for Elite II, Isinona has a good demonstration:
[video=youtube;9UMIbdN0UFE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UMIbdN0UFE[/video]

 

[Hooplah]

I play Evochron Mercenary. I don't bring it up here as ED is rather simple compared to EM at the moment.

Meanwhile Morbad demonstrated some of the advantages of Inertial flight in combat. That is where ED should be going. Post on the forum per kills are too easy? Try me or Morbad out with years of Inertia skills...when FD gives us the boost combination to use them to our advantage.

 

[Defacto]

Well no
It was tried and then removed because it had pretty horrible results.

I'm personally not against this kind of flight system in space games, and I really think that it's sad how rare newtonian flight is in space games.
Still however, true newtonian flight simply does not work in ED, and if the top speed was removed, I don't think the problems would be as serious, but it's not going to be removed because of game engine and network limitations.

 

[Thebadmf]

I think you're forgetting being able to fly at full speed in reverse, blasting as you go as being a factor in the mobility nerf.

 

[Slo-Mo-Shun]

I also would like to see Newtonian motion in the game. It requires you to work a little harder to get that kill. That being said, do I think it will happen, no. Can you imagine the whining of the instant gratification brigade, they complain now if something gets in the way of them racking up kills. Would like to see it happen but I think the voice of the vocal minority (maybe) will hold sway.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

-- Deleted --

 

[StayFrosty]

There is no such thing as a "non-combat situation".

Though what I still don't understand is why boosting increases your max speed. It should simply cause a sudden acceleration, not bring you above max speed, which would also encourage manoeuvers rather than going fast in straight lines.

 

[Morbad]

Yes, it's a perfect demonstration of why it just doesn't work
(I know the vid)

Unless, of course, you would want to make it a game of "who has the better stats and better aim" in either the classic rubber-band fight - or a static shoot-em-up and hope their ship fails first.
Just like in the vid.

Just imagine the enemy ship in that vid had gimalled Lasers that actually hit their target once a while - the Player controlling his ship here would be dead as a doornail 99.9% of the time.

Newtonian fights were an epic fail - they never worked (unless as said, you preferred that static "who has the best stats" a.k.a. "who blows up fist under constant fire" game).
They are either rubber-band hit&runs - or these static, plain suicidal ones. And all that fairly digital between those.
Problem is : neither of them yield much of a playable combat experience - unless you settle for scenes like above comical "combat". That would be settling for very little, compared to the very dynamic combat environment we already have.

These issues you present have nothing to do with the Newtonian aspect of combat in Elite II. The combat is bad because the NPC ships don't do anything, not because of a Newtonian flight model.

Fighting more competent AI, or players, in the Elite II flight model would work just fine and be just as engaging, if not more so, as the combat we currently have. Nothing about Newtonian combat reduces the importance of maneuvering.

 

[khaitom]

Are there any 2d or 3d combat games using pure Newtonian Physics that are actually fun to play?

 

[Sentenza]

I played FE and FFE and cursed that damned newtonian flight model all the time. Seriously, it's for a space simulator, not for a game.

 

[Morbad]

Are there any 2d or 3d combat games Using pure Newtonian Physics that are actually fun to play?

Fun is really subjective. A lot of things people consider to be fun, I consider to be mind numbingly tedious or overly contrived--like baseball, or combat sports where bringing concealed weapons is frowned upon. I'm sure plenty of people will say worse things about some of the stuff I do for entertainment.

Anyway, there aren't many pure Newtonian physics models around in the genre...because, as ED has realized, most people aren't looking for plausible space games, they are looking for airplanes in pseudospace.

Seriously, it's for a space simulator, not for a game.

Not mutually exclusive things.

 

[Cowboy Bats]

It would have a profound effect on ship balance. The Cobra and Eagle would be huge beneficiaries of this. If boost is newtonian, then the Viper is really now slower than the Cobra. The Eagle keeping it's maneuverability, but now the boost is the de facto top speed? No thanks.