I want my space sim newtonian.
Elite / Frontier The Space Game Control Debate!
- Thread starter Fost
- Start date
I want my space sim newtonian.
True. I just want my yaw and being able to configure it as primary direction. Roll should be in, but is much less usefull than yaw outside the atmosphere.
Indeed. Apart from manually docking with an orbiting station I can't think of a use for roll beyond a planet's atmosphere.
This comes across as obnoxious, but I perceive here a meaningless debate going on between
a)old farts who want Elite 4 to be how it was when they were teenagers, so they can subconsciously relive that happy part of their lives.
When these guys go to rock concerts they will almost always hate the new material of their otherwise favorite band. These guys want Pitch/Roll.
b)trendy youngsters who can't stand the "old" and have to use FPS controls for all they do. When these people listen to music, they can't listen to old stuff, it's got to be new! Always moving forward (nomadic mindset).
These guys want Pitch/Yaw, period.
c)open minded old farts and reasonable youngsters who don't see why on earth these two would be mutually exclusive, and frankly don't see how the discussion can be fruitful. These guys can like both new and old. As long as it's good.
Pitch/Yaw, Pitch/Roll and Pitch/Roll/Yaw thank you! Allow us to customize which control set we want as the default in options! Thanks.
Yes you guessed it. I am C, and I played Elite, Elite Plus, Elite 2:Frontier and FFE.
Very well put. And determining on the fly what would serve you best in each circumstance, depending on your ship design, would be the "fun" factor. Having many choices, and different circumstances/reasons to use the choices is one of the prerequisites for having fun.
Although you should be able to do both yaw and roll - it would also depend on the ship. Perhaps a ship with only roll and pitch was cheaper than a ship with pitch, roll and yaw? As for default space rotations, I'd say that the default space rotations for ships should be Pitch/Yaw, as it would be a more time-efficient way for your ship's thrusters to spend the propellant when your intention is to aim the ship around looking for targets, because in both Yaw and Pitch you are moving the ship's nose closer to your target. Also, I would insert a caveat for atmospheric travel: if the ship is "small" and aerodynamic enough for the task of atmospheric travel (all atmospheric-enabled ships should definitely not look boxy but aerodynamic), it should definitely operate with Pitch and Roll as the default positions. Hopefully the ship would have some sort of ailerons it could maneuver with in atmospheres. That way it wouldn't waste propellants.
So in short:
In Space: Both Roll and Yaw - Yaw being default.
In Atmosphere: Both Roll and Yaw - Roll being default.
These are my opinions on the matter.
a)old farts who want Elite 4 to be how it was when they were teenagers, so they can subconsciously relive that happy part of their lives.
When these guys go to rock concerts they will almost always hate the new material of their otherwise favorite band. These guys want Pitch/Roll.
b)trendy youngsters who can't stand the "old" and have to use FPS controls for all they do. When these people listen to music, they can't listen to old stuff, it's got to be new! Always moving forward (nomadic mindset).
These guys want Pitch/Yaw, period.
c)open minded old farts and reasonable youngsters who don't see why on earth these two would be mutually exclusive, and frankly don't see how the discussion can be fruitful. These guys can like both new and old. As long as it's good.
Pitch/Yaw, Pitch/Roll and Pitch/Roll/Yaw thank you! Allow us to customize which control set we want as the default in options! Thanks.
Yes you guessed it. I am C, and I played Elite, Elite Plus, Elite 2:Frontier and FFE.
Very well put. And determining on the fly what would serve you best in each circumstance, depending on your ship design, would be the "fun" factor. Having many choices, and different circumstances/reasons to use the choices is one of the prerequisites for having fun.
Although you should be able to do both yaw and roll - it would also depend on the ship. Perhaps a ship with only roll and pitch was cheaper than a ship with pitch, roll and yaw? As for default space rotations, I'd say that the default space rotations for ships should be Pitch/Yaw, as it would be a more time-efficient way for your ship's thrusters to spend the propellant when your intention is to aim the ship around looking for targets, because in both Yaw and Pitch you are moving the ship's nose closer to your target. Also, I would insert a caveat for atmospheric travel: if the ship is "small" and aerodynamic enough for the task of atmospheric travel (all atmospheric-enabled ships should definitely not look boxy but aerodynamic), it should definitely operate with Pitch and Roll as the default positions. Hopefully the ship would have some sort of ailerons it could maneuver with in atmospheres. That way it wouldn't waste propellants.
So in short:
In Space: Both Roll and Yaw - Yaw being default.
In Atmosphere: Both Roll and Yaw - Roll being default.
These are my opinions on the matter.
Last edited:
I'd rather have a game with simple customizable key binds - problem vanishes.
As for differences between ships, I think all ships already present should be atmospheric capable. Ships in frontier have so powerful and economic drives, it isn't even funny. You could easily strap one of this babies on one of the least aerodynamic current human spacecraft and, with some skill set it down undamaged anywhere on Earth. Problem of having to brake by plunging into the atmosphere with obscene velocity, because of lack of fuel simply doesn't exist anymore in Frontier. Of course, the rate of heat production when flying fast in the atmosphere should depend on the shape of the ship, however, quite amusingly, blunt objects heat up relatively slowly on reentry, that's why crew capsules of spacecraft like Sojuz or Apollo had wide, only slightly convex heat shields.
One more thing is differences between ships. In space, they could have different rotation rates/rotational acceleration rates depending on their shape and dirrection. For example Boa would be able to roll relatively fast, because it's rather narrow hull.
In atmosphere there could be aerodynamic differences, for example, Panther would fly like a brick, whereas Puma, and, to certain extent Anaconda, would behave much like a plane, generating some lift and being able to steer via turning and rolling (in general, ability to use roll as effective maneuvering assist shoud depend on lift generated by ship's hull). Narrow, pointy ships like Boa or Viperw ould not generate significant lift, but they would be able to change their velocity vector via aerodynamic forces using just pitch and yaw. Flat ships like Asp would generate some lift, so they would benefit from roll and pitch, but yaw would produce almost no aerodynamical forces, so you would be able to easily turn Asp around and fly sideways or even backwards. On the other hand, you would be able to decelerate much faster in Asp by rapidly raising your nose and using thrusters than by using retros only.
I strongly oppose ships with some of the degrees of freedom disabled - it makes as much sense as producing cheaper cars that can turn only right.
As for differences between ships, I think all ships already present should be atmospheric capable. Ships in frontier have so powerful and economic drives, it isn't even funny. You could easily strap one of this babies on one of the least aerodynamic current human spacecraft and, with some skill set it down undamaged anywhere on Earth. Problem of having to brake by plunging into the atmosphere with obscene velocity, because of lack of fuel simply doesn't exist anymore in Frontier. Of course, the rate of heat production when flying fast in the atmosphere should depend on the shape of the ship, however, quite amusingly, blunt objects heat up relatively slowly on reentry, that's why crew capsules of spacecraft like Sojuz or Apollo had wide, only slightly convex heat shields.
One more thing is differences between ships. In space, they could have different rotation rates/rotational acceleration rates depending on their shape and dirrection. For example Boa would be able to roll relatively fast, because it's rather narrow hull.
In atmosphere there could be aerodynamic differences, for example, Panther would fly like a brick, whereas Puma, and, to certain extent Anaconda, would behave much like a plane, generating some lift and being able to steer via turning and rolling (in general, ability to use roll as effective maneuvering assist shoud depend on lift generated by ship's hull). Narrow, pointy ships like Boa or Viperw ould not generate significant lift, but they would be able to change their velocity vector via aerodynamic forces using just pitch and yaw. Flat ships like Asp would generate some lift, so they would benefit from roll and pitch, but yaw would produce almost no aerodynamical forces, so you would be able to easily turn Asp around and fly sideways or even backwards. On the other hand, you would be able to decelerate much faster in Asp by rapidly raising your nose and using thrusters than by using retros only.
I strongly oppose ships with some of the degrees of freedom disabled - it makes as much sense as producing cheaper cars that can turn only right.
Of course, I wasn't alleging that we need to have razor sharp entry surfaces. But aerodynamic means aerodynamic, however you cut it. Having a perfectly flat box primitive entering the atmosphere is not going to be a good heat shield. Emphasis is not that all shapes should be sharp and pointy, but simply to use whatever surface shape works best. The entry modules NASA have drawn for Mars entry for example don't only have the intention of surviving the heat, they also have the intention of slowing the craft down efficiently enough so that the chute may open early enough. Also, every atmosphere being different, they all have different aerodynamics. And probably the heat shield design for Mars would be different from another atmospheric planet.
But this would be perhaps too complicated. I'm just saying that just because blunt shapes can be useful for re-entry - we shouldn't consider flat surface areas.
Goes without saying, and ties in with what I said earlier about the ship "airframe" and possible thruster locations affecting the flight characteristics of that ship. Strong arguments about the Asp.
Not really, a car turning only right is an obviously debilitating limitation. A very cheap space craft (call it "Maggot") with the limitations of a Elite 1 control set would definitely not be a debilitating set-back, and would reflect a lowered manufacturing cost. You might very well upgrade it to have Yaw thrusters at a later time. If you want to buy a "Maggot" with only Pitch/Roll - you may do so. If you want to buy a Maggot with Yaw as well, you can do that also! No degree of freedom disabled what so ever. Simply a reflection of a more involving game universe, with possibilities and choices having interesting consequences.
Roll is a must, especially if ships have differing turn rates depending on which way they are turning.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=hBX8cq0BCdE
Pitch, roll, yaw and lat thrusters too, with brakes, reverse thrust, full Joystick compatibility as well as working for joy pads and other devices inc mouse and keyb aswell.
Thanks
You forgot about top and bottom thrusters!
j/k