Renovated normal space navigation, is needed

[Bad Move]

Breaking speed after boosting, not only breaks immersion. But, makes awful gameplay, too.
Spamming engine boost button to go anywhere while travelling in normal space sucks, and anyone who says otherwise, hasn't got a clue.
The first thing i did when i first took off in a sidewinder was to check the game physics.
Then, gave up on the game for quite a while, even tried going back to eve on line, but the lack of collision control, was too much to bare, and star citizent is not out yet, so -thankfully- i gave a second try to the game, and it won me over with it's stunning visuals, and rather good... Not ecxeptionally good, but, relatevely interesting gameplay.
And after fianally upgrading to horizons from base game, i realised ed is still under developement, and many, if, not all of those halfbaked features, would eventually b developed to fully functioning, user friendly features.
Including, but not limited to things like, srv's with turrets, but with out any lights attouched to them. Lack of options to plot a route to a destination star system str8 from the mission's panel, or, the engineer's panel, or, a notebook's panel, intergraded to the navigation panel. lack of options to set bookmarks in space, or, on planets and moons. the lack of options to store matterial/data, outside the ship. lack of option to store a ship in a station, or, outpost with shipyard services with commodities in it's cargo modules... And a lot more.
But.
Elite dangerous is a gigantic game, and all this stuff already added to it, can easelly ceep me busy for quite some time, and it is allready an allmost fully functioning game.
BUT.

there is ONE thing i simply can not forgive.
What the bloody is the deal with boosting the engines for a lousy few seconds, and then dragging back down to... I don't even have a word to discribe it... Cruising speed? What ever, anyone who has played the game, knows what i am talking about.
Who thought of this game mechanic? And if that person is still in the development team... Why?
How do u make a first person space game, with anything like that? How could it possibly make sense?

I guess pure neutonian physics, wouldn't make good gameplay... Allthough, with flight assist, i don't think it would b that difficult. A good way around it, would b to add something like an upgradeable grabbling hook, or, some sort of tractor beam to all ships, that could very well have more than one functions... But, what ever, i guess there was fear that pure neutonian physics, could scare away non hard core gamers... But, still... Even with flight assist off... ESPECIALLY with flight assist off, dragging back to cruising speed after boosting, is simply stupid... I didn't mean to go on an ungry rant here, but, the more i play this game, the more i love it, and the more i love it, the ungrier i get, when i think about the engine boost thing... Any way.

i took the time to read the titles of 30 pages of posts, and found only one about this topic, with some interesting ideas in it. i posted there my idea about this problem too... And hell yeah! The engine boost thing we have today is a big problem, especially with star citizent's realish around the corner. And here is my suggestion to fix this major flaw, with a small bit of improvent.

Breaking speed after boosting has got to go.
I too have an idea about the thing, but, somehow, i don't think is going to happen.
Three modes of normal space movement, regardless of flight assist. Thruttle mode, the same speed for forward, backward latteral and vertical movement, with different acceleretion rates for lateral and vertical, depending on the ship's shape controled by throttle and lateral/vertical controls.
A dedicated engine key for gradual acceleretion, forwards only, with some added manueverability, but, less than what we get today with engine boost, using power from the capacitor, untill the ship reaches it's top speed, or, run out of power, and maintatining that speed, untill u throttle down.(allthough i guess there sould b some sort of deadzone for gamepad users, i use a hotas, so, i wouln't know)
and a new type of engine boost, using any power u may have in the capacitor for rapid forward acceleretion, and maintaing that speed, with the same boost to manueverabiltty we get with the engine boost we have now. even after realishing the button.
Allso, either with a dedicated key, or, by throttling all the way back, add a breaking feature, using any power from the capacitor to rapidly slow the ship to a halt, unless the capacitor runs out of power, in which case, the ship's rate of deceleration should b depended to it's thruster's capacity.
And some lost of momentum, everytime u roll-pitch-yawn, thrust, down , left or, right.

I don't expect everyone to like my idea about this subject. But, if anyone thinks this thing sould stay as it stands today... Please... Be quiet...

 

[Faded Glory]

The point of posting threads on this sub-forum is to put your suggestions out there.

Whether the devs read them, or whether they would want to implement them are secondary. Just because we post suggestions on this forum (and I have myself) doesn't necessarily make them good suggestions in anyone's mind but our own.

 

[Bad Move]

I failed giving a informative title to the thread.... Guilty, i'll try to fix that.
But if u did read my post above, what do u think sould b done, with normal space navigation?

 

[13A]

There used to be semi-permanent boost when the game was still in early beta. If you hit boost and turned off flight assist you stayed at full boost until you turned FA back on. IIRC it was changed as it caused issues with some elements of game play, especially combat; e.g. if you interdicted somebody, by time you stopped spinning they'd FA-boosted and you couldn't catch them before they jumped (even in a Cobra).

 

[Faded Glory]

I failed giving a informative title to the thread.... Guilty, i'll try to fix that.
But if u did read my post above, what do u think sould b done, with normal space navigation?

That wasn't your original post, was not the short angry post I responded to.

As to what you have now written, I'll just keep quiet, because frankly it doesn't bother me anything like as much as it seems to bother you.

 

[Yaffle]

I failed giving a informative title to the thread.... Guilty, i'll try to fix that.
But if u did read my post above, what do u think sould b done, with normal space navigation?

Fixed it for you.

 

[William H. Bonney]

It has to become a game at some point.

Whilst I don't disagree with you, engineering allows for ships to reach ridiculous speeds, your proposal would give an absurd advantage to those who have mastered flying without the flight assist. It could also take away the ability to submit and boost away for non-engineered builds, or at least 'allow teasing' for the mass-lock slow time.

Consider adding a TL;DR, I got lost a bit in your wall of text in the last paragraph, I start to see "blinds" when I look away from the screen due to the blackout forum theme I use.

just in case you arent sure what that means, read this

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Full Newtonian physics would make flying quite a chore.

I-War was the closest game to full Newtonian physics, which was still fun to fly, I've ever come across.

FD chose the more approachable route to space flight, making it easier and more accessible to more people (which directly translates to more sales!).

The cruise and boost thingie is also for gameplay. If I recall correctly, you can boost to maximum speed, then disable your thrusters in the module tab to maintain it. However, you can't do much else. I used this to maintain a very very very low orbit over a planet when I was hunting for aliens ruins.

Why are you travelling so far in normal space anyway? You don't normally need to fly more than a few km in normal space.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[Bad Move]

There used to be semi-permanent boost when the game was still in early beta. If you hit boost and turned off flight assist you stayed at full boost until you turned FA back on. IIRC it was changed as it caused issues with some elements of game play, especially combat; e.g. if you interdicted somebody, by time you stopped spinning they'd FA-boosted and you couldn't catch them before they jumped (even in a Cobra).

Not sure how what i'a proposing would work on those instances... But, it sounds like they nerfed prey's ability to escape, instead of boosting the predator's ability to catch prey.
What i would do was to add some sort of tractor beam, or, even a grabbing hook, or, a special limpet to grab and slow down prey.
Something like that could allso help with collecting loot.
Ideally, i wouldn't add what i discribe above as an optional module, but, as a default feature to all ships, and optional modules to upgrade said grabbing hook's/tractor beams speed, strength and range.
Allso, what i am proposing is an entierly new method of moving in normal space. Adding mobility to both prey and predator.

 

[Bad Move]

That wasn't your original post, was not the short angry post I responded to.

As to what you have now written, I'll just keep quiet, because frankly it doesn't bother me anything like as much as it seems to bother you.

Yes, it does.
I had spent about two hours reading posts in the suggestions forum, by the time i thought i was ready to post what i had in mind, my brain was in a melt down.

 

[StiTch]

Full Newtonian physics would make flying quite a chore.

I-War was the closest game to full Newtonian physics, which was still fun to fly, I've ever come across.

The two games following the original Elite featured full Newtonian physics iirc, and caused many people a fair amount of grief.

FD have to do what will make this a good game. On the other hand, I don't know where they get the guts to call ED a "space simulator".

 

[Bad Move]

It has to become a game at some point.

Whilst I don't disagree with you, engineering allows for ships to reach ridiculous speeds, your proposal would give an absurd advantage to those who have mastered flying without the flight assist. It could also take away the ability to submit and boost away for non-engineered builds, or at least 'allow teasing' for the mass-lock slow time.

Consider adding a TL;DR, I got lost a bit in your wall of text in the last paragraph, I start to see "blinds" when I look away from the screen due to the blackout forum theme I use.

just in case you arent sure what that means, read this

Thnx for the wiki link.
I am full aware i sometimes get carried away when i am writting something about a subject i am passioned about...

But, about giving an absurd advantage to fa off players.

What i labeled as "thrust speed" gives the abiltity to all ships to fly at cruising speed to all directions,(cruising speed being full throttle ahead.) taking away one of the major advantage fa off flying style has, but, would require players to b more thrifty when firing vertical and lateral thrusters.
While turning nose to where ur target is, and fire up engines, would gradually accelerate ur ship, towards the direction of ur target, untill relishing the engine button, in which case the ship sould ceep on moving at the same speed, giving better control of the ship's momentum, than pressing a key, and accelerate to top speed, for a brief period of time.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

The two games following the original Elite featured full Newtonian physics iirc, and caused many people a fair amount of grief.

FD have to do what will make this a good game. On the other hand, I don't know where they get the guts to call ED a "space simulator".

Definitely, FE2s flight model was a chore in itself. I pretty much used to rely on the autopilot for everything, especially since I was young when I used to play it, and couldn't understand Newtonian physics.

ED is more of a galaxy simulator than a space flight simulator. But it's for the best I believe.

I-War style Semi-Newtonian physics doesn't work in online play at all, and fights would just be dull jousting matches, or very high speed reverse flying.
But it was the most fun to fly for a single player game, far more fun than ED.
Basically, Newtonian physics is bad for gameplay, but great for realism. Lol
ED sits far more on the gameplay side than I-War did. Some games, like the X series has no Newtonian physics(without mods), and other games go even further and don't even allow you to stop, in space, but arguably can also still be incredibly fun, if completely unrealistic.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[Bad Move]

Full Newtonian physics would make flying quite a chore.

I-War was the closest game to full Newtonian physics, which was still fun to fly, I've ever come across.

FD chose the more approachable route to space flight, making it easier and more accessible to more people (which directly translates to more sales!).

The cruise and boost thingie is also for gameplay. If I recall correctly, you can boost to maximum speed, then disable your thrusters in the module tab to maintain it. However, you can't do much else. I used this to maintain a very very very low orbit over a planet when I was hunting for aliens ruins.

Why are you travelling so far in normal space anyway? You don't normally need to fly more than a few km in normal space.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

I took the time to check a couple of vids in youtube about i-war, it doesn't really looks like the game i am looking for... But, it does feels interesting. Anyway, i am not asking for full neutonian physics, what i am suggesting is a new method of normal space navigation, that ceeps every ship's max speed as it is now, but, with a bit of more freedom of mobility... Turning off thrusters to gain some speed, doesn't sounds like a viable alternative to dragging back to cruising speed after boosting.

But, thnx for the reply.

 

[Bad Move]

The two games following the original Elite featured full Newtonian physics iirc, and caused many people a fair amount of grief.

FD have to do what will make this a good game. On the other hand, I don't know where they get the guts to call ED a "space simulator".

Haven't played any of the previous elite dangerous games, so, i don't know if they had implemented any sort of flight assist, and how did that work like.
But, i'm not suggesting full neutonian physics, but, something more intermidiate to neutonian physics, than this poor excuse of space sim game mechanic we have now... If they had the game taking place under the sea on some post apocayptic earth, or, in an other planet like one of all those water worlds we can't approch, and instead of space ships we had submarines... Those same game mechanics would accually make a lot of sense.
May very well b, i would buy that game.

But elite dangerous as it stands today. It's normal space navigation, has a long way to go before accually beinc a space simulator.

 

[newman1702]

Before I begin, let me just say that I'm a big fan of games like I-War 2, have done everything imaginable in KSP, so I do like newtonian mechanics in space (not "neutonian, it's Isaac Newton, not Neuton ). That being said, people constantly calling and thinking of ED as a "simulator" is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. It's not a simulator, and it never intended to be. What is this supposed to be "simulating"? It's a space shooter / trading / exploration game. You fly spaceships that don't exist, using made up technology. Full newtonian mechanics wouldn't really work for a game of this type, especially if you want to make it online.

So, sure, it's not realistic that your ship slows down after you throttle down. It's also not realistic that ships have top speeds (other than the speed of light, but let's not get into relativity right now) at all. It's not realistic that I'm flying at a constant speed while my engines are burning fuel all the time. It's not realistic that planets don't appear to really have an escape velocity. It's not realistic that in order to set down on a planet, I point my nose to it and fly towards it, when in reality we'd probably establish orbit first, KSP style, then do a deorbit burn and do a controlled descent using the thrusters to slow down and maintain attitude. It's not realistic that using a few tons of hydrogen, we get to produce enough energy to power what is essentially a mixture of Alcubierre (warp) drive and an instant wormhole generator that is capable of tearing a hole through spacetime and teleport us lightyears away in an instant.

A lot of things aren't realistic, and they could certainly have made the spaceflight a lot more so. However, any good developer should always know what kind of a game do they want to make - a realistic simulator, an arcade shooter, something in between that kinda feels like it has some sim elements but is still very much a game intended to entertain more than niche audiences limited in numbers? Frontier have gone for the latter, and sure, they could have taken a few more smaller steps towards realism, but they chose to do what they did taking into account their entire audience, as well as how this would impact the dynamic of combat in an online environment. Having infinite maximum boost speed via FA off would certainly feel a little more realistic to some people (not really to me, as I'd still be wondering why my ship's top speed is still magically restricted to an arbitrary number, which, after it's reached, my top speed remains constant even though my engines are still burning), they made the call because online fights simply work better this way.

In the end, it's a sci fi game set 1000 years into the future, so for some elements to work, you simply have to suspend your disbelief and go with it, relax, and have fun. I'd say Frontier have succeeded in creating a really fun flight model, imo vastly superior to that of Star Citizen, where each ship feels different and has character in how it flies. In fact, the flight model is the one area of the game I literally have no complaints about. If I want an actual sim experience, I'll go play Orbiter, or KSP for "orbiter light with fun rocket building", or DCS for planes, etc. Elite is, well.. it's own category.

 

[xondk]

I don't expect everyone to like my idea about this subject. But, if anyone thinks this thing sould stay as it stands today... Please... Be quiet...

You are repeating what many have said and suggested before, it is nothing new, the problem is how it would affect gameplay, using 'boost' as a general boos, wouldn't really solve the issue either, there would still be the slow down at some point, your idea just shifts when it happens. And the slowdown happens, purely for gameplay mechanics, because otherwise distances would increase and catching others would be significantly harder.
So yeah solution isn't unfortunately 'easy'.

 

[Bad Move]

Definitely, FE2s flight model was a chore in itself. I pretty much used to rely on the autopilot for everything, especially since I was young when I used to play it, and couldn't understand Newtonian physics.

ED is more of a galaxy simulator than a space flight simulator. But it's for the best I believe.

I-War style Semi-Newtonian physics doesn't work in online play at all, and fights would just be dull jousting matches, or very high speed reverse flying.
But it was the most fun to fly for a single player game, far more fun than ED.
Basically, Newtonian physics is bad for gameplay, but great for realism. Lol
ED sits far more on the gameplay side than I-War did. Some games, like the X series has no Newtonian physics(without mods), and other games go even further and don't even allow you to stop, in space, but arguably can also still be incredibly fun, if completely unrealistic.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

Imagine this.
The same game we have today, same top speeds for all ships, but, instead of flying forwards faster than up, down, left, right and backwards. ceep the same speed to all directions, regardless of flight assist. But, with different acceleration rate, depending on the ship's shape.
An asp, for example, drifting left or, right, in lower aceeleration rate than a dimondback, becasuse it has less space to fit thrusters at her port and starboard.
With a button to ingage engines, and accelerate forwards, and an other button, or, by double tabbing the engine button to get the same rapid forward boost we get now, while maintainng speed to all occations. And an extra feature for rapid deceleration, like space breaks, by either pushing a dedicated key, or, by thruttling all the way back. and all that, concuming power from the capacitor.
I could go in to more details, if u want to ask me any questions.

 

[Bad Move]

You are repeating what many have said and suggested before, it is nothing new, the problem is how it would affect gameplay, using 'boost' as a general boos, wouldn't really solve the issue either, there would still be the slow down at some point, your idea just shifts when it happens. And the slowdown happens, purely for gameplay mechanics, because otherwise distances would increase and catching others would be significantly harder.
So yeah solution isn't unfortunately 'easy'.

Distances could b sorten by adding a tractor beam, or, grabbing hooks, or, special limpets. Slowing down could b achieved by adding a "break" feature.

 

[Bad Move]

Before I begin, let me just say that I'm a big fan of games like I-War 2, have done everything imaginable in KSP, so I do like newtonian mechanics in space (not "neutonian, it's Isaac Newton, not Neuton ). That being said, people constantly calling and thinking of ED as a "simulator" is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. It's not a simulator, and it never intended to be. What is this supposed to be "simulating"? It's a space shooter / trading / exploration game. You fly spaceships that don't exist, using made up technology. Full newtonian mechanics wouldn't really work for a game of this type, especially if you want to make it online.

So, sure, it's not realistic that your ship slows down after you throttle down. It's also not realistic that ships have top speeds (other than the speed of light, but let's not get into relativity right now) at all. It's not realistic that I'm flying at a constant speed while my engines are burning fuel all the time. It's not realistic that planets don't appear to really have an escape velocity. It's not realistic that in order to set down on a planet, I point my nose to it and fly towards it, when in reality we'd probably establish orbit first, KSP style, then do a deorbit burn and do a controlled descent using the thrusters to slow down and maintain attitude. It's not realistic that using a few tons of hydrogen, we get to produce enough energy to power what is essentially a mixture of Alcubierre (warp) drive and an instant wormhole generator that is capable of tearing a hole through spacetime and teleport us lightyears away in an instant.

A lot of things aren't realistic, and they could certainly have made the spaceflight a lot more so. However, any good developer should always know what kind of a game do they want to make - a realistic simulator, an arcade shooter, something in between that kinda feels like it has some sim elements but is still very much a game intended to entertain more than niche audiences limited in numbers? Frontier have gone for the latter, and sure, they could have taken a few more smaller steps towards realism, but they chose to do what they did taking into account their entire audience, as well as how this would impact the dynamic of combat in an online environment. Having infinite maximum boost speed via FA off would certainly feel a little more realistic to some people (not really to me, as I'd still be wondering why my ship's top speed is still magically restricted to an arbitrary number, which, after it's reached, my top speed remains constant even though my engines are still burning), they made the call because online fights simply work better this way.

In the end, it's a sci fi game set 1000 years into the future, so for some elements to work, you simply have to suspend your disbelief and go with it, relax, and have fun. I'd say Frontier have succeeded in creating a really fun flight model, imo vastly superior to that of Star Citizen, where each ship feels different and has character in how it flies. In fact, the flight model is the one area of the game I literally have no complaints about. If I want an actual sim experience, I'll go play Orbiter, or KSP for "orbiter light with fun rocket building", or DCS for planes, etc. Elite is, well.. it's own category.

There is not a sngle thing to ur reply i disagree with.
There has to b a top speed to all ships, newtonian physics (And not "neutonian" thnx for correcting me.) wouldn't make a fun game... Or, at least not a popular one. But, i strongly beleave breaking speed after boosting is a mistake. And there r ways around it.