Overloads during maneuvers

[GT21]

Please add overloads during maneuvers to the game. What will change: now ships have a maneuverability parameter. But passenger and cargo ships with low maneuverability will have their own advantage - the player does not need to strain, that passengers will be unhappy with the overloads, that they get seasick; cargo in the hold will not be damaged by sharp maneuvers. If the player transports passengers on a ship with a high maneuverability parameter, then he will need to drive carefully. Overloads are also affected by sharp acceleration and braking. Ideally, you need to add head motion sickness and darkness in the eyes to the overloads

 

[PilotB]

Zooming around in space is the fun part of the game. This is one of those theoretically realisitic changes that's just a fun vampire. There's no positive to adding this to the game at this stage. We don't need it. It improves nothing and it just makes the fun bits less fun. Handwave it with the FSD compensates for acceleration if you need to mentally deal with it but absolutely do not add it. No motion sickness no darkness none of it.

 

[GT21]

This is necessary so that both cargo and passenger ships have a big advantage over multi-purpose ships.

 

[Ned Flandalorian]

One person is arguing for darkness and another is arguing against it... both seem unaware it's already in the game.

 

[PilotB]

This is necessary so that both cargo and passenger ships have a big advantage over multi-purpose ships.

They already have a big advantage. They carry far far more of both and often at very little loss of speed. There's no need to make the fun ships less fun. That's approaching the problem from the wrong direction. If they need improving do it by improving them not by making the ships that are nice to fly less nice.

The t8 is a medium cargo ship with the performance of a race car. The dolphin is a passenger ship with the performance of a stealth cruise missile. There's far fewer things that'd benefit from this than you'd think. The t9, anaconda and maybe a beluga. They don't need anything but if they did it's not this.

 

[GT21]

the main point of my post is not the darkness in the eyes, but that on a ship with low maneuverability it is harder to accidentally damage the cargo

 

[Morbad]

As Ned has mentioned, blackout and redout are already in the game. They only occur at fairly absurd g (several dozen), but they are there, and it's quite possible to induce them and even momentarily lose control input from them.

Personally, I rather like the idea of lower limits for passenger comfort and the survival of some cargo. I think it would be a fun challenge...but I suspect this is a minority viewpoint and there is no way Frontier is going to implement such constraints at this point.

 

[PilotB]

My point is that it's not fun. There's no improvement to the gameplay. People can't even be bothered sticking to the speed limit when docking. Having combat ships suddenly blacking out because someone else wants their passenger missions to be more spicy is a bad addition. It's exactly the sort of change we should avoid as it's got a broad negative for what is unlikely to change anything about running cargo or passengers.

 

[Badmiker]

But look at your ships acceleration: you go to 500m/s in a few seconds, so an acceleration of at least 100m/s^2. Your passengers are all groaning and blacking out at 10g+ just under normal flight. Then there's the impact of landing on a high g world.

There's clearly some interia relief system which the Pilots Fed are conspiring to keep secret. This is why you can do fancy maneuvers in a Beluga.

 

[Morbad]

My point is that it's not fun.

Fun is subjective. Some of us would consider tighter constraints in regard to these mechanisms to be fun.

But look at your ships acceleration: you go to 500m/s in a few seconds, so an acceleration of at least 100m/s^2. Your passengers are all groaning and blacking out at 10g+ just under normal flight. Then there's the impact of landing on a high g world.

There's clearly some interia relief system which the Pilots Fed are conspiring to keep secret. This is why you can do fancy maneuvers in a Beluga.

There has never been any mention of such a system, only omission and some vague handwavium that largely started with Horizons. The game is seriously lacking in internal consistency with it's depictions of this stuff.

 

[PilotB]

Fun is subjective. Some of us would consider tighter constraints in regard to these mechanisms to be fun.

You say that but I think you'd only appreciate it on paper. It would remove a lot of variation between ships making more ships feel the same. Not that it can't be a good thing in other games. I just don't think ED has the framework for this to be a fun addition to ED.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

As someone who - 30 years on - still habitually rolls to pitch up rather than pitching down for any significant turn because my first flight sim experience did have semi-realistic G-force handling, it'd be an interesting change to the game, but it would certainly need to ignore all actual "realism" of what G-forces would be applied to get the effects to be in line with how fast our ships move and turn.

But look at your ships acceleration: you go to 500m/s in a few seconds, so an acceleration of at least 100m/s^2. Your passengers are all groaning and blacking out at 10g+ just under normal flight. Then there's the impact of landing on a high g world.

And angular acceleration is even worse in this context. Maintaining a 131m/s linear speed (top E-rated T-9 cruise speed), your "safe" pitch rate to maintain 1G in an upward pitch turn would be about 4 degrees per second - approximately three times slower than the E-rated T-9 really turns, which is already painfully slow, and giving you a turning circle almost 2km in radius. Yaw turns or downward pitch would need to be slower than that, of course.

 

[BackToTheMud]

This is necessary so that both cargo and passenger ships have a big advantage over multi-purpose ships.

Ever played war thunder? If you haven't, I can tell you that bombers definitely don't have a big advantage agains fighters just because the fighter pilots may black out from high G.

With the speed we're going and the turns we make in this game, the G-forces that should be applied to the pilots wouldn't just make them black out, they the would be crushed.
If you think G-forces should apply to the pilots it should also apply to the ships. The way most ships move in this game, and that inculdes the big ones, they should rip themselves appart.
And none of the above even consider going into super cruise. That acceleration should liquify the pilot, and crumple the ship like if it was made of tissue paper.

So how about we keep enjoying the excellent flight model without tunnel vision, grey outs, and passing out.

 

[Nidoboros]

This is necessary so that both cargo and passenger ships have a big advantage over multi-purpose ships.

If this is your actual goal as opposed to ultra realistic flight simulation (which I am not against in theory), consider joining my 'make ship roles matter' crusade where cargo/passenger ships get free slots that can only accept X or Y, just like combat ships get free slots that can only accept hull/shield/module reinforcement modules, or like how smol ships get access to performance enhanced thrusters.

 

[BackToTheMud]

. . .just like combat ships get free slots that can only accept hull/shield/module reinforcement modules. . .

Those aren't free slots. They're not extra space you have because it's a combat ship. They're slot you would have regardless, you just have no flexibility with what to put in them. The only thing your...not thought out...idea would do is make ship customization worse. I'm pretty sure I told you this a few weeks ago; so how about you stop trying to ruin one of the best features of this game.

 

[Nidoboros]

make ship customization worse

[Citation Needed]

ruin one of the best features of this game.

In what way am I doing that?

 

[BackToTheMud]

[Citation Needed]

In what way am I doing that?

Considering you didn't grasp that I have already explained that, I don't see much point in trying to hammer additional points thtough your reading comprehension. I wish you all the luck with your crusade that the historical ones had.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

You say that but I think you'd only appreciate it on paper.

Not sure about tighter contstraints, but I appreciate the current limitations every time I run into them. Especially when I cause a blackout (outside of extreme glide turns) in a ship where I have clearly forgotten it's capable of blacking me out. Makes me giggle every time.

 

[Nidoboros]

Considering you didn't grasp that I have already explained that, I don't see much point in trying to hammer additional points thtough your reading comprehension. I wish you all the luck with your crusade that the historical ones had.

Alright, bet.

No, that is a terrible idea.

Facts not in evidence.

One of the truly great things with this game is how flexible the ship modification is.
Also, the problem isn't the haulers, or the miners, or the flexible mission runners. The problem is the pure combat builds. If there is any limit that should be imposed on outfitting, apart from the military only slots we already have, it should be how many hull, module, and shield reinforcements a ship can have. And to do that you need to decide that for each ship individually.

'The great part of this game is its flexibility, if there is any fix needed, it is reduced flexibility'.

Interesting.

 

[BackToTheMud]

Alright, bet.

Facts not in evidence.

'The great part of this game is its flexibility, if there is any fix needed, it is reduced flexibility'.

Interesting.

Maximum possible DPS increase: 78%
Maximum possible potential dmg output (not counting las weapons and plasma slug mod): 106%
Ships defensive increase is easily in the many 100s of %, going into the 1000s if you want be really sweaty with your build.
It of course on how you count. But regardless how you count, the fact is that you can increase your defensive abilities far more than you can increase your offensive ones.

You want to force certain ships to to haul cargo/passengers by limiting their ability to to other things.
I want ships to not be imortal.
These are not the same thing.

The best thing with this is that I know you won't actually think about what I wrote here, in the same way you didn't think about my post that you linked.