Match speed to target

[The space tyrant]

A feature I liked from X-Wing vs. Tie-fighter back in the day was

Match speed to target



Useful in dog fights with an enemy who likes to 'slam the brakes' and make you overshoot. Also for if you want to fly formation in a wing.

 

[Riverside]

Or use skill?

 

[The space tyrant]

Lol. Classic ED forums response

 

[Macy]

The X series had that ability. It was useful for following your other ships in formation.

 

[ShadowWolf Kell]

Lol. Classic ED forums response

Classic counter response.


Formation flying is learning to anticipate, managing your throttle and most importantly, having good situational awareness. Match Speed just makes you the guy struggling to get into formation beyond a straight line at a constnat speed.


We had it in Star Wars Galaxies and most of the veteran pilots (the squadrons that actually flew in formation) didn't use it.

 

[Macy]

People will probably click this thread just to leave some arrogant, condescending, unhelpful and stupid comment. Just ignore it.

 

[The space tyrant]

People will probably click this thread just to leave some arrogant, condescending, unhelpful and stupid comment. Just ignore it.

No kidding, lol.

 

[Arkadi]

I did love the x-series. I even bought the remastred X-Wing Alliance

I think the "match speed" function would not really fit the PvP style of this game. I can't exactly put my finger on it and give you precise arguments.

But I have another related idea.

For formation flying in a wing it could be a nice feature to have a function to set throttle to absolut speed values. This would enable all wing-(wo)men to set throttle to same speed.

How about that?

 

[Rob At Work]

People will probably click this thread just to leave some arrogant, condescending, unhelpful and stupid comment. Just ignore it.

I would agree the tone could have been better in some instances, but I happen to think the reasoning behind their sentiment is correct.

In essence, the person being attacked is slowing down rapidly in order to turn defense into attack, if they can. If it can be mastered if would be a skillful maneuver.

 

[Jack Schitt]

People will probably click this thread just to leave some arrogant, condescending, unhelpful and stupid comment. Just ignore it.

But that's the reason the thread was created isn't it? Along with all the other threads of similar provenance?

• Search the DDA and/or forum archives
• Find an idea that was often discussed, was maybe a bit contentious but hasn't been mentioned for a while
• Create a new thread to suggest it as a feature
  
  
  
• When that thread drops off the front page, rinse and repeat
• Don't forget the snarky preemptive signature block

I'm just wondering what the OP's next suggestion is going to be. Has he done increased yaw rate yet?

 

[the100thmonkey]

But that's the reason the thread was created isn't it? Along with all the other threads of similar provenance?

• Search the DDA and/or forum archives
• Find an idea that was often discussed, was maybe a bit contentious but hasn't been mentioned for a while
• Create a new thread to suggest it as a feature
  
  https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/513436/Elite/popbeer160.png
• When that thread drops off the front page, rinse and repeat
• Don't forget the snarky preemptive signature block

I'm just wondering what the OP's next suggestion is going to be. Has he done increased yaw rate yet?

Yep.

Dude's a troll with little else to do.

 

[the100thmonkey]

Ooh, ooh, ooh! We did not have an open-vs-solo discussion for a few days...

I think he's already done that one.

 

[Cmdr Chaos]

But that's the reason the thread was created isn't it? Along with all the other threads of similar provenance?

• Search the DDA and/or forum archives
• Find an idea that was often discussed, was maybe a bit contentious but hasn't been mentioned for a while
• Create a new thread to suggest it as a feature
  
  https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/513436/Elite/popbeer160.png
• When that thread drops off the front page, rinse and repeat
• Don't forget the snarky preemptive signature block

I'm just wondering what the OP's next suggestion is going to be. Has he done increased yaw rate yet?

I'm not the only one then...

Seems to create more Waaaa's for himself though than generate them.

 

[Monk]

It seems like a good idea, in theory. However, there is a fundamental difference to flight mechanics between TF and ED. In Tie Fighter, I have 100% agility at any speed, limited only by the ship's max pitch, yaw and roll rates. For this, it makes sense to match my target's speed. In ED, we take serious penalties to agility if we go outside of our optimum throttle range. Even if a target is slower than my optimal speed, I will want to stay in the blue zone or risk exposing my broad side taking a slower turn outside the blue zone.

So, in this context, a match speed function would likely be more detrimental, in combat. However, it could be useful for formation flying.

EDIT: If a target in ED tries to just do a full stop to get an advantage on me, they are truly screwed. In this scenario, I don't try to slow down, rather, I apply full vertical thrust and whip myself to their broadside (and the most exposed part of the power plant).

 

[The space tyrant]

But that's the reason the thread was created isn't it? Along with all the other threads of similar provenance?

• Search the DDA and/or forum archives
• Find an idea that was often discussed, was maybe a bit contentious but hasn't been mentioned for a while
• Create a new thread to suggest it as a feature
  
  https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/513436/Elite/popbeer160.png
• When that thread drops off the front page, rinse and repeat
• Don't forget the snarky preemptive signature block

I'm just wondering what the OP's next suggestion is going to be. Has he done increased yaw rate yet?

While I admit this community's hyper-sensitivity and aversion to any change does make it tempting to troll, most of my posts are completely sincere suggestions. Lol

In the words of Mr. Freeze: Everybody chill...

 

[Achilles7]

I think he's already done that one.

Did the OP disagree with you once?

Hell hath no fury like a pretentious, condescending monkey scorned..

 

[Jack Schitt]

While I admit this community's hyper-sensitivity and aversion to any change does make it tempting to troll, most of my posts are completely sincere suggestions. Lol

I guess I can only give you the benefit of the doubt, although your thread-starters have had my snidey-sense tingling for a while and the last couple of days have been an absolute festival of rehashing. I haven't seen so many old saws flying around since that scene in Twister when the barn gets torn apart.

Assuming you're genuine and just staggeringly unlucky when it comes to picking horses that have already been flogged to death, you might want to search the DDA and the early forum archives from 2013 until launch if you haven't already. Nearly everything you've suggested or asked about in the past several days has been suggested before and was either

A) dismissed completely by FD for various reasons,

B) put on their "maybe" list for long-term consideration, or

C) bounced around the community for ages without any sort of agreement and not addressed by FD either way.​

So you can see why these subjects tend to spawn exasperated responses. It's not because the majority of the community have some sort of aversion to change (although there are one or two evangelists who behave as though they fear punishment from the FD gods if they don't stop praising them). Rather it's that many members of this community have been here a long time and have seen these subjects go through the grinder over and over and over and over. It's not change we fear, it's quite the opposite: it's the same old crap going around and around for all eternity.

BTW "match target speed" was, along with "this way to target" arrows, a firm Category A if I remember correctly. Not going to happen, ever. FD want their seat-of-the-pants WWII style combat to be as pure as possible for their own reasons. You might disagree with this, and you wouldn't be alone, but you're not going to change their collective minds. And any attempt to do so is just going to rile up the community who've seen it all before.

On the other hand if that's what you set out to do, congratulations on some of the most effective trolling yet. To be honest, I still can't make my mind up but that might be my problem rather than yours. This forum does breed a certain amount of cynicism.

 

[Monk]

y'all...match speed is a terrible idea for this game. You will get matched outside the blue zone and then die.

 

[Tataboj]

I don't have a clear opinion on the suggestion, but seriously, Waagenator, from the first post from you that I have seen, almost everybody that disagreed with your suggestion got an arrogant reply and/or a reply where you try to make yourself the victim.

 

[The space tyrant]

I guess I can only give you the benefit of the doubt, although your thread-starters have had my snidey-sense tingling for a while and the last couple of days have been an absolute festival of rehashing. I haven't seen so many old saws flying around since that scene in Twister when the barn gets torn apart.

Assuming you're genuine and just staggeringly unlucky when it comes to picking horses that have already been flogged to death, you might want to search the DDA and the early forum archives from 2013 until launch if you haven't already. Nearly everything you've suggested or asked about in the past several days has been suggested before and was either

A) dismissed completely by FD for various reasons,

B) put on their "maybe" list for long-term consideration, or

C) bounced around the community for ages without any sort of agreement and not addressed by FD either way.​

So you can see why these subjects tend to spawn exasperated responses. It's not because the majority of the community have some sort of aversion to change (although there are one or two evangelists who behave as though they fear punishment from the FD gods if they don't stop praising them). Rather it's that many members of this community have been here a long time and have seen these subjects go through the grinder over and over and over and over. It's not change we fear, it's quite the opposite: it's the same old crap going around and around for all eternity.

BTW "match target speed" was, along with "this way to target" arrows, a firm Category A if I remember correctly. Not going to happen, ever. FD want their seat-of-the-pants WWII style combat to be as pure as possible for their own reasons. You might disagree with this, and you wouldn't be alone, but you're not going to change their collective minds. And any attempt to do so is just going to rile up the community who've seen it all before.

On the other hand if that's what you set out to do, congratulations on some of the most effective trolling yet. To be honest, I still can't make my mind up but that might be my problem rather than yours. This forum does breed a certain amount of cynicism.

Well thanks for the well-thought response. Certainly haven't had many of those yet...

I understand that many of these may be old issues, yes I admit I haven't searched to see what others have already posted. I also think tho the new players perspective is also important sometime (I'm a month old), maybe some issues get forgotten?

Problem for me is that when these scenarios come up, it never seems to be a simple explanatory response like "This is an old issue" "FD is aware of this" "FD has specifically declined to implement this", on the contrary my posts have more often turned into snarky brat conventions with posters basically attacking me in the first few responses. Lol, doesn't bother me, but I'll respond to them in kind.

I'm certainly responsive to valid criticism

But yeah, that's pretty much it, no trolling from me (yet anyways, just throwing out ideas as I get them. )

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I don't have a clear opinion on the suggestion, but seriously, Waagenator, from the first post from you that I have seen, almost everybody that disagreed with your suggestion got an arrogant reply and/or a reply where you try to make yourself the victim.

Lol, well I'd encourage a closer look at said thread(s)

I'm very respective to appropriate feedback/criticism, but show me one where I responded with arrogance to a reply that wasn't in the first place a bratty rude response to me.

I respond in the tone I"m spoken to, I strongly encourage people to point out valid concerns with my suggestions, but rudeness for it's own sake not so much