You see, you just can't help yourself. Another attack. All because you had to snarkily post something that was wrong, and I had to point out it was wrong. What can I say? Grow up dude. I'm done with you.
Last edited:
Nerf Reverski
- Thread starter Powderpanic
- Start date
You see, you just can't help yourself. Another attack. All because you had to snarkily post something that was wrong, and I had to point out it was wrong. What can I say? Grow up dude. I'm done with you.
lol, You made an assertion, I proved it wrong, since then you've been attacking me non stop. You're still 'trying' to make me mad. Please, get back on topic or just shut up. See how I'm having a nice discussion with everyone else? Feel free to join in!
If you two don't behave, a mod is going to pick you both up by your ears and put you in the naughty corner.
Last edited:
"I will survive... So long as I reverski, I know I'll stay alive. I've got this life to live, and long range ammo to give..."
If you watch your recalled ships land from the SRV you can clearly see some sizeable "reverse" thrusters being fired by the AI.
As for reversie? It's fundamental to the FA-OFF Newtonian physics. If you want to prevent that you need to redesign the physics model. The half-speed FA-ON reverse is annoying but understandable because it discourages newbies from flying backwards all the time.
As for reversie? It's fundamental to the FA-OFF Newtonian physics. If you want to prevent that you need to redesign the physics model. The half-speed FA-ON reverse is annoying but understandable because it discourages newbies from flying backwards all the time.
Attack? What attack? I don't see an attack. I see a criticism. Can't handle criticism? Don't share ideas. Pretty simple. Welcome to the adult world.
Wouldn't it be better that the moments that lead to non gameplay (the one being reverskied leaves the instance), be turned into gameplay moments, though?
Cameras work at the speed of light too. The same speed as radar pulses and laser beams.
That's my favourite corner.
Lol... seal clubbers club baby seals... you they don't get any opportunity to 'reverski'... even if they did, the next plasma volley seals their fate.
Reverski of the type that generates this much backlash is just a trolling tactic. Kudos to those that use it, as it would bore me to Netflix.
Yeh, I've blocked him now, so it'll stop from my side, I can do without people who resort to personal attacks when someone disagrees with them. All because I said he sounded angry. /shrug
I apologise to the forum for my part in that.
Based on your other posts, I think we're in agreement. I'm not for nerfing the reverski. Also, comparing atmospheric flight models to this game is beyond irrelevant.
However, I have to disagree with you on the WWII aviation skill issue. Oh sure, they might have been more experienced with dog fight tactics and had more of an issue with physics (altitude = potential energy/speed, and they didn't have afterburners to compensate). But beyond that, please. Have you played any realistic flight sims? The easiest are the WWI flight sims. The next easiest are WWII. Modern air combat... ugh. I stopped with Falcon 3.0 back in the 90's. Dang thing came with a manual the size of most Microsoft press technical books and was equally interesting to read. The last "modern" flight sim I played was the one for the A-10, because it wasn't that complicated and was fun. Again, that was in the 90s. I don't think you could pay me to play any modern air warfare today. Or for that matter, any naval sim controlling a single sub or ship up to a task force or fleet. Way too much to keep track of with all the sophisticated weapon systems.
But back to the main topic, anything real world should just be left out of this discussion. ED's flight model is a cross between Newtonian physics and fun. I have no desire to play an ultra-realistic flight sim. I'll pass on "Traveller the MMO/Simulator". Ugh.
Reverski needs balancing because it is an extremely potent combat tactic that requires no skill other than to fly backwards while firing weapons. We all do that on day one in our noobwinders.
I mean, if you don't like personal attacks then you shouldn't make them. I didn't. Criticism =/= personal attack.
Technically, double the speed, as they don't need to send a signal to bounce off the target. If the target is 1 LS away, you know your information is 1 second old. With radar, it will be 2 seconds.
I know it's not a huge difference, but I don't see how the inferior solution is "vital" in any way, instead of simply redundant.
Best give up, I don't think he can even see your posts... Unless blocking doesn't actually work on this forum? No clue.
Thermal optics would be a more likely form of target aquisition in space. After that, heat detection munitions and away you go.
Yeah, but 1 light second is almost the distance to the moon. No camera on earth* will spot something like a Midnight Black FDL that far away. Trying to bounce a laser off it is impossible without knowing where it is. A search radar with narrow pencil beam covering a lattice of beam positions stands a chance if given long enough (>2 seconds per beam position).
<Edit> * Not even an IR camera.
Last edited:
Yes, I've played proper study combat sims, actually. Specifically, DCS. Try the Mustang or Spitfire in that, then try the Su-27 and the F-15, then come back and tell me it doesn't take significantly more skill to fly and fight in the older planes than the newer ones. I have been flying sims for 30 years, and flying IRL for 15. All fighters take significant degrees of skill to master, but the old guard were the real aces. Today, we have predictive radar-assisted gunsights. Back then, you had a fixed gunsight (an adjustable electric one at best in some of the later model Mustangs) and had to play it by eye. You had to line up a moving target that is constantly changing speed and direction while also constantly changing speed and direction yourself. At the same time, you had to monitor your engines and make sure your oil and coolant stayed at a certain temperature and pressure. You had to constantly monitor your hydraulic pressure. You had to constantly correct your aircraft from the torque generated by incredibly powerful radial engines, and you didn't have radar or AWACS, you had to eyeball everything. EVERYTHING.
Yes, WWII pilots had a lot more skill than modern ones do. They had to. It was necessary just to stay alive.
If you're interested in finding out for yourself, check out DCS and buy the Spitfire module. If you pull negative Gs in that, you'll be lucky if the cloud of smoke from oil flooding your engine is white instead of black.
guess that depends on whether you want to be attacked or not. If people are using it in consensual pvp then its a bit lame, but if someone is being attacked who doesn't want to it fine
Radar is vital in space. Anything involving manoeuvring ships close together will have no appreciable lightspeed delay. Cameras are good too in RL, but in ED I think they would be useless because combat ships would all switch to the Midnight Black paint job.
All ships in ED have stealth technology. Our sensors rely purely on heat detection and other passive detection to find ships. That's the justification for why our sensor range is so limited in combat/real space, but why we can detect objects so far away in supercruise. This is all documented in the official EDRPG done by Michael Brookes. If you want, I'll try to find the exact citation.
Also the sound we hear (as there is no sound in space) is simulated by speakers in the back of our pilot chairs, since humans are good at using sound for 360 degree awareness. Just fyi.