There's no dogfighting in this game and combat is god-awful...

[Jack Schitt]

I know that in previous Elites, hyperdrives had number designations, and higher numbers were bigger and better (class 3, class 4 etc.), but what on earth the letter designations mean is beyond me, and there doesn't seems to be any in-game explanation. Some posts seem to suggest 'A' is better, others 'D', i just don't see any consistent logic..

It is all a bit arbitrary, but in general

E: Cheap as chips, the bare minimum in performance.
D: Lightweight. If keeping the mass low is priority (longer jump range, better manoeuvrability) go for D rated.
C: Middle of the road (I actually know of nobody who fits C-rated stuff).
B: Best integrity (armour) of any rating, at the cost of mass.
A: Best performance.​

It's not very scientific but it's what we have. Basically fit the best you can afford, unless you're building a tank (go for B) or need to conserve mass (D).

As for the other stuff, while I agree with some of it, you have to remember that this is a "reboot" or re-imagining of Elite not Frontier. And FD decided very early on in the process, way before the first alpha, that the flight/combat model would favour aircraft-like manoeuvres over full unrestricted 6-DOF flight. There was some resistance to this, but they stuck to their guns. Some changes have crept in through various iterations (flight assist modes were tweaked, and modified ships will now boost as high as 800m/s) but overall it's the same flight model it's always been.

If you're really jonesing for the FE2 or FFE flight model then unfortunately you're just going to have to learn to live without it. FD wouldn't budge an inch when the game was little more than notes on paper, so the idea of reworking the whole game now isn't going to carry much weight.

Unless you're talking PVP, part of the key to enjoying the combat in ED is, IMO, how well the AI is performing. Right now it's a bit of a mixed bag, better than most earlier versions but not as good as in 2.1 (which was initially OP due to a bug but was still more engaging than the current crop). If the NPCs are performing believably, especially in numbers, then the combat starts to feel very "natural" within the game's limits (although obviously not scientifically realistic). But if the AI is just flying lazy loops, as it is often wont to do, then it's not so engaging.

It sounds as though you have a good joystick setup, possibly even HOTAS, but one other thing you might try if you haven't already is a head tracking setup or maybe even VR if you have access. It adds nothing to the physics of the flight model, but by providing another two or three axes to your view onto the battlespace it adds greatly to the situational awareness, and knowing where you need to be positioned with respect to the the enemy can reduce a lot of the frustration that the limited flight inputs can cause.

 

[Roland2]

But you didn't tell us what these space games are that have "better" combat that you refereed to in your opening post.

How are we supposed to compare what you want with what we have without this so called point of reference of yours?
Just as a reminder of what you put (highlight in green);

I'm still waiting too. I'd love to see what these space games are that have "better" combat are.

 

[ROSS-128]

Honestly, i have absolutely no idea how the weapons grading system works in this game.

I know that in previous Elites, hyperdrives had number designations, and higher numbers were bigger and better (class 3, class 4 etc.), but what on earth the letter designations mean is beyond me, and there doesn't seems to be any in-game explanation. Some posts seem to suggest 'A' is better, others 'D', i just don't see any consistent logic..

In the load-out screen i just click on something to try and determine if it's better or worse than the junk i already have. The galaxy map stopped showing tech levels back in FFE so i've no idea which systems sell better or worse kit either.

Don't even know offhand what weapons i have fitted. Gimballed pulse lasers, maybe. Rubbish, whatever they are.

But without freedom of movement - when 'combat' is just a loop-de-loop pitching contest, with a big clunky joystick taking up your whole desk but which doesn't accept any actual inputs because of 'balance' - and a networking model that prioritises redundant information resulting in a space speed limit.. why even bother? Gimballs, turrets, but yaw's not allowed "because balance"...

ED is like a guided tour of the DPRK. You're not allowed to stray off the carefully laid-out path controlling how and where you're allowed to move, you're a scripted dummy, more automaton than human player, like a driving game that doesn't allow you to turn off steering or braking help, - instead, it's your job to just nudge the controls enough for the ships to follow their carefully-choreographed sequence of allowed movements and suffocatingly, nightmarishly slow speeds..

If ED would just add freedom of movement and a 4 MW fixed beam laser, i could map the thrust keys to regular FPS keys, use the mouse to aim, and actually have a game to play. FE2 and FFE have 'combat', you can fight how you want on your terms with full 6DoF and no nerfs besides inertia / thrust. ED has a broken ballet about combat that goes out of its way to preclude and stifle any actual action. Because "balance".

4 MW Beam lasers are all i need to know about Elite weapons. It's big, it got MW's (four of them, apparently), it's sweet and vicious and no loud screeching sound was ever more sonorous. Also gimme an ability to actually aim and fire it, and i'm happy as a damaged kid with a magnifying glass and an anthill. I actually find breaking stuff with lasers highly engrossing. I could just while away whole days vapourising, cauterising and fusing animal, mineral and vegetable.. You always know where you are and what you're supposed to be doing when you have a 4 MW beam laser. No languid p.ssyfooting here mate.

'Combat' in ED just leaves me feeling bored and listless, like a burnt out old ballet dancer under a neurotic stage director - i ain't feeling the moves or seeing the vision. Where'd'ya want me, over here? And what, i'm allowed to move this way but not that way? In FE2 and FFE i'm a force of nature, a vision of grace, power and energy, poetry in motion. In ED i'm just a fat middle-aged bloke in a leotard and laddered tights with a greasy joystick. How is that escapism?

I'm not sure what you mean by "freedom of movement" here.

Are you saying we should be able to turn as fast as an FPS character (ie whip 180 degrees around in 0.2 seconds if you swipe your mouse fast enough), or are you saying it should be Newtonian, where you can have as much velocity as you want (at least until the game engine chokes) as long as you take the time to accelerate first?

The latter would be pretty awesome, though also pretty scary when docking or in asteroid fields (remember: the time it takes to stop is the same as the time it took to speed up, and that's if you use the main thrusters for both!). Isaac Newton is the deadliest SOB in space.

The former would be rather weird, especially for large ships. If I could turn the corvette as fast as an FPS character, its nose would be going at ludicrous speed. I'd probably be able to use it as a club to bash people's ships with. XD

 

[TESI303]

Couldn't agree one bit with op on the dogfighting bit. I'd rather question op's understanding of what actual dogfighting is as opposed to twitchy arcade games.

 

[Bounder]

@Jack - cheers for the clarifications mate, first explanation i;ve seen and i'm committing it to memory, thx.

And yes i do play with a TrackIR, but so far i find that combat always regresses into the head-craned-back fruity-loops kiss chase, and anything you try to break out and get a shot off inevitably means exposing yourself due to the nerfed angular accelerations. So this applies to "FA off" (more honestly, attitude stabilisation), as well as reverse thrust and hat-switch for retros.

It seems to me that the constricted freedom of movement (disallowing independent control of linear and angular vectors) is the cause for the interminable pitching contests - in FFE i can just manouvre around slower ships, chase after faster ones, duck and weave through the incoming crossfire, flank, run, turret-strafe while spiralling upwards with my bottom and left-side thusters full throttle while dodging a missile barrage, circle-strafe, joust, i can 'whiplash' other trailing ships and missiles with sudden 180° flips at max thrust, i can lower or raise my relative velocity in any plane or axis relative to anything else around me. It's proper martial arts - creative, intelligent, practised and skillfull.

Whereas in ED i sit there gripping a hulking great Saitek Evo with my head craned back, stuck in that position, making small axial corrections, it's dull, insipid tedium, devoid of skill, thrill or any conduit for imaginative excursion... can't afford to expose yourself to fire, yet have to in order for a chance of getting a shot off yourself.. hence the inevitable impasse.

Just seems a rather predictable outcome of trying to force a top-down balance, in place of a truly free environment allowing balance to emerge in the form of player tactics and skills development. In FFE you can break out of any loop in a flash, turn and fire with no other restrictions than inertia, momentum and situational awareness / initiative.

I know, it's never going to improve, so pointless complaining about it anymore. They'll keep trying to tweak here, nerf there, but the fundamental foundation just ain't there..

 

[Truesilver]

Honestly, i have absolutely no idea how the weapons grading system works in this game.

I know that in previous Elites, hyperdrives had number designations, and higher numbers were bigger and better (class 3, class 4 etc.), but what on earth the letter designations mean is beyond me, and there doesn't seems to be any in-game explanation. Some posts seem to suggest 'A' is better, others 'D', i just don't see any consistent logic..

The confusing aspect is that the letter designation system that Cmdr Jack Schitt set out for you ('D' being lightest etc) applies to modules but NOT to weapons. The letters that accompany weapon size numbers are redundant legacy characters that should be removed from the game.

When you look for a weapon you should only look at its numerical size designator (1 = small, 2 = medium, 3 = large, 4 = huge) and its aiming variant if applicable (eg, on lasers, fixed, gimballed or turreted). Do not look at the letter.

In the thread linked below I set out details for every weapon in the game. If you look at that hopefully you'll see what I mean:-

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/246086-Official-FDev-Damage-Stats-for-Every-Weapon

 

[Bounder]

I'm not sure what you mean by "freedom of movement" here.

Are you saying we should be able to turn as fast as an FPS character (ie whip 180 degrees around in 0.2 seconds if you swipe your mouse fast enough), or are you saying it should be Newtonian, where you can have as much velocity as you want (at least until the game engine chokes) as long as you take the time to accelerate first?

The latter would be pretty awesome, though also pretty scary when docking or in asteroid fields (remember: the time it takes to stop is the same as the time it took to speed up, and that's if you use the main thrusters for both!). Isaac Newton is the deadliest SOB in space.

The former would be rather weird, especially for large ships. If I could turn the corvette as fast as an FPS character, its nose would be going at ludicrous speed. I'd probably be able to use it as a club to bash people's ships with. XD

In the last two Elites, ships have mass.

"Mass" in ED is just something that limits your jump range. But previously, it was proper inertia.

Acceleration = force (thrust) divided by mass, and so because inertia is invariant (mass constancy), for a given thrust, acceleration is also constant (regardless of speed).

Acceleration can be angular or linear, but momentum scales linearly, following P=mV and angular inertia times angular velocity. Kinetic energy just adds the time derivative and subtracts the counter-momentum due to Newton's 3rd; KE = 1/2mV^2, equivalent to half angular velocity times angular inertia squared for rotation.

So for a given amount of mass and thrust, a given amount of acceleration takes a certain amount of time, and the more time passes, the more velocity and thus momentum and KE you have on that plane or axis.

So, for a given thrust, bigger, heavier ships take longer to accelerate on any plane or axis, and also have more momentum at a given velocity (because momentum is velocity times mass), and so, as you correctly point out, take equal time to decelerate.

You'll notice this when playing FFED3D - there's a kind of laggy feel to mouse and joystick inputs as craft get heavier - turn too fast and you'll end up having to correct.

But you still can turn too fast, and this is far better than simply forcing you to turn slowly, preventing you overdoing it in the first place. Where's the skill or fun in that? What kind of spacepilot are you supposed to be?

And remember that velocity - like motion - is relative, not absolute. This is the same mistake FD made (apparently) - the reason we have a speed limit is because if two craft on separate clients accelerate together, side-by-side at equal rate, eventually they'll pass a threshold speed beyond which they start to jump around due to network lag, even though the actual velocity between them is a big fat zero. But FD are measuring velocity WRT coordinate space - as if the vacuum itself were a preferential reference frame, against which all other motions are relative. So this is why we have a network-imposed velocity cap.

As you can clearly see in previous ELites, because velocity is actually relative, not absolute, you do not need to come to a full stop WRT space itself in order to interact or fight with other ships etc. - you only have to close your relative velocity with your target destination, whatever that may be. This was always the case in previous Elites, and remains so in ED (what do you think an FSD is for?) - all planets and stations and USS's etc. have their own ambient velocities, they're not all stationary WRT space itself. So we simply match speeds with our destination, by whatever means, whereever we're going and whatever we're doing, like we normally do.

The fact that you were driving at 70 MPH on your way home is no barrier to sitting down at the dinner table, provided you remember to decelerate. Likewise, our planet's orbital or surface angular velocities can largely be disregarded when reaching for a cup of tea. When reverse parking, worrying about the fact that we're at superluminal speed WRT the redshift horizon is just gonna make you clip the curb. Need to change velocoties spontaneously? Et voila! - just select an appropriate reference frame. Could be anything, real or imagined.

Dealing with velocity IS spaceflight. I mean, it's surely one of the most enticing and evocative aspects?

Given that we already have the FSD - which shifts you into any reference frame without physically accelerating, decelerating or moving anywhere, velocity need never be any barrier to interaction.

Not only is there no consistent rationale for a space speed limit, there's no fundamental need nor benefit for one. It's absolutely fundmanetally inimical to the very concept of space flight.

Speed limits built into the ships themselves. So a slower ship is voluntarily slower. Logically, if you have fuel and a working thruster, you could keep accelerating until either or both those conditions were no longer true. Then you could stimulate a complate halt, without actually decelerating, by simply taking your current velocity vector as your rest frame, or ejecting / spawning a virtual particle that continues on that vector and becomes your new frame, or just engage the FSD and come to an actual instantaneous full stop WRT anything anywhere.

I just cannot, for the life of me, fathom why a forum full of intrepid propsective space privateers would be so skittish at the prospect of controlling their own velocity the same way generations of gamers have before them have.. "love spaceflight, but scared of velocity"? I mean, fear of heights, vertigo, deep-vein thrombosis, even psychosis.. all these i'd understand.. but if you're nervous at the thought of unconstrained freedom, what is it about spaceflight that actually appeals - if it's just a glorified no-clipping mode, like space-engine but with more SFX? They just want the arcade buzz, right? It's not about spaceflight at all, it's about keeping the training wheels on a convenient context for spacey wallpaper..

It could be so much more..

Check out some of these images - novel and outdated concept, but these ships got to those locations by flying there!

They literally 'flew', through space, slicing through it as if it were nothing, not even very runny custard. It's way more fun that the supercruise minigame with its jarring lockups either side. And when it comes to combat, the exact same strapped-down handling this lot prefers can fully replicated, since it's only unreasistic in terms of how hopelessly nerfed it is, and with complete freedom, you can fly as nerfed as you like. You just don't have to, all the time, everywhere..

I mean, just imagine the conversation with the mechanic as he's putting the finishing smudges on yer T6 - "so, hull's patched, ammo's topped up, the new motor just needs tuning - how slow you wanna go?" ... "..well, i'm doing a lot of long distance work at the mo, tight deadlines, so.. how slow can you make it?" .. "300 m/s?" ... "whoa, i wanna get there quick but i wanna get there!" ... "..ookay, so 250 m/s?" .. "nah better play it safe, 200 should be fine. I only get to fly around 30 km of real space between supercuise sessions anyway" ... "fair enough, you're the boss"

Like turkeys voting for xmas..

The incredulity. That's it. Layers of it. Mine, at theirs. I am incredulous at aspiring space piratés incredulous towards spaceflight. "Free movement? In space? You do what with the what what? I'm so confused..".. but it's not their fault.. It's FD's. Oh, the opportunities they've missed..

 

[ROSS-128]

In the last two Elites, ships have mass.

"Mass" in ED is just something that limits your jump range. But previously, it was proper inertia.

Acceleration = force (thrust) divided by mass, and so because inertia is invariant (mass constancy), for a given thrust, acceleration is also constant (regardless of speed).

Acceleration can be angular or linear, but momentum scales linearly, following P=mV and angular inertia times angular velocity. Kinetic energy just adds the time derivative and subtracts the counter-momentum due to Newton's 3rd; KE = 1/2mV^2, equivalent to half angular velocity times angular inertia squared for rotation.

So for a given amount of mass and thrust, a given amount of acceleration takes a certain amount of time, and the more time passes, the more velocity and thus momentum and KE you have on that plane or axis.

So, for a given thrust, bigger, heavier ships take longer to accelerate on any plane or axis, and also have more momentum at a given velocity (because momentum is velocity times mass), and so, as you correctly point out, take equal time to decelerate.

You'll notice this when playing FFED3D - there's a kind of laggy feel to mouse and joystick inputs as craft get heavier - turn too fast and you'll end up having to correct.

But you still can turn too fast, and this is far better than simply forcing you to turn slowly, preventing you overdoing it in the first place. Where's the skill or fun in that? What kind of spacepilot are you supposed to be?

And remember that velocity - like motion - is relative, not absolute. This is the same mistake FD made (apparently) - the reason we have a speed limit is because if two craft on separate clients accelerate together, side-by-side at equal rate, eventually they'll pass a threshold speed beyond which they start to jump around due to network lag, even though the actual velocity between them is a big fat zero. But FD are measuring velocity WRT coordinate space - as if the vacuum itself were a preferential reference frame, against which all other motions are relative. So this is why we have a network-imposed velocity cap.

As you can clearly see in previous ELites, because velocity is actually relative, not absolute, you do not need to come to a full stop WRT space itself in order to interact or fight with other ships etc. - you only have to close your relative velocity with your target destination, whatever that may be. This was always the case in previous Elites, and remains so in ED (what do you think an FSD is for?) - all planets and stations and USS's etc. have their own ambient velocities, they're not all stationary WRT space itself. So we simply match speeds with our destination, by whatever means, whereever we're going and whatever we're doing, like we normally do.

The fact that you were driving at 70 MPH on your way home is no barrier to sitting down at the dinner table, provided you remember to decelerate. Likewise, our planet's orbital or surface angular velocities can largely be disregarded when reaching for a cup of tea. When reverse parking, worrying about the fact that we're at superluminal speed WRT the redshift horizon is just gonna make you clip the curb. Need to change velocoties spontaneously? Et voila! - just select an appropriate reference frame. Could be anything, real or imagined.

Dealing with velocity IS spaceflight. I mean, it's surely one of the most enticing and evocative aspects?

Given that we already have the FSD - which shifts you into any reference frame without physically accelerating, decelerating or moving anywhere, velocity need never be any barrier to interaction.

Not only is there no consistent rationale for a space speed limit, there's no fundamental need nor benefit for one. It's absolutely fundmanetally inimical to the very concept of space flight.

Speed limits built into the ships themselves. So a slower ship is voluntarily slower. Logically, if you have fuel and a working thruster, you could keep accelerating until either or both those conditions were no longer true. Then you could stimulate a complate halt, without actually decelerating, by simply taking your current velocity vector as your rest frame, or ejecting / spawning a virtual particle that continues on that vector and becomes your new frame, or just engage the FSD and come to an actual instantaneous full stop WRT anything anywhere.

I just cannot, for the life of me, fathom why a forum full of intrepid propsective space privateers would be so skittish at the prospect of controlling their own velocity the same way generations of gamers have before them have.. "love spaceflight, but scared of velocity"? I mean, fear of heights, vertigo, deep-vein thrombosis, even psychosis.. all these i'd understand.. but if you're nervous at the thought of unconstrained freedom, what is it about spaceflight that actually appeals - if it's just a glorified no-clipping mode, like space-engine but with more SFX? They just want the arcade buzz, right? It's not about spaceflight at all, it's about keeping the training wheels on a convenient context for spacey wallpaper..

It could be so much more..

Check out some of these images - novel and outdated concept, but these ships got to those locations by flying there!

They literally 'flew', through space, slicing through it as if it were nothing, not even very runny custard. It's way more fun that the supercruise minigame with its jarring lockups either side. And when it comes to combat, the exact same strapped-down handling this lot prefers can fully replicated, since it's only unreasistic in terms of how hopelessly nerfed it is, and with complete freedom, you can fly as nerfed as you like. You just don't have to, all the time, everywhere..

I mean, just imagine the conversation with the mechanic as he's putting the finishing smudges on yer T6 - "so, hull's patched, ammo's topped up, the new motor just needs tuning - how slow you wanna go?" ... "..well, i'm doing a lot of long distance work at the mo, tight deadlines, so.. how slow can you make it?" .. "300 m/s?" ... "whoa, i wanna get there quick but i wanna get there!" ... "..ookay, so 250 m/s?" .. "nah better play it safe, 200 should be fine. I only get to fly around 30 km of real space between supercuise sessions anyway" ... "fair enough, you're the boss"

Like turkeys voting for xmas..

The incredulity. That's it. Layers of it. Mine, at theirs. I am incredulous at aspiring space piratés incredulous towards spaceflight. "Free movement? In space? You do what with the what what? I'm so confused..".. but it's not their fault.. It's FD's. Oh, the opportunities they've missed..

You could have just said "Newtonian".

 

[Krait_79]

Don't you just love those threads that whine on about this and that but don't offer a solution! Critique by all means if you can offer a better alternative.

 

[primedragoon]

Sure, here's my critique. Go back and actually read this thread, with attention to the posts I made more recently. Because I haven't been whining and sealing my lips of suggestions, I'm full of them. Hell, if I thought they'd listen, I'd compile a giant preference/comparison list for things that need to change. Or should change, because damnit it'd be more fun. -_-

 

[Padlina]

... I'd compile a giant preference/comparison list for things that need to change. Or should change, because damnit it'd be more fun. -_-

Please don't. The combat is finally fun again after the engineers patch and you're trying to make it dull again.

 

[primedragoon]

Please don't. The combat is finally fun again after the engineers patch and you're trying to make it dull again.

Please actually read what the hell is going on before just spamming your opinion. I'm talking about diversification and more division of roles, I'm talking about expanding on this whole 'World War II' fight model concept they've pushed on us. (In a space sim.) Why is it boring/dull to suggest that it borrow from some of the exciting aspects of World War II aerial combat? Zoom and Boom fighters were a huge thing, but they aren't in Elite. They doesn't even exist really.

And for the record, I'm not advocating that the difficulty be turned down, merely that it'd be more fun with some more diversification. And also, that combat as it is right now would be substantially less frustrating if it paid like....double. It takes twice as long to kill something, I now get paid half as much per unit of time. Compare that to traders, and equality goes to poverty for a bounty hunter. (It was already pretty well slanted in the traders favor.) Plus since you spend double the time you incure double the fatigue for your effort. And, I'm sorry trader advocates, but I hate trading. I don't play a game to willingly attempt to put myself to sleep, and that's all trading is to me. Boring, lackluster, number shuffling, work. I play to have fun. Being a wage slave isn't fun. C'mon!

As for the whole CZ issue, its one of the reasons I'd advocating some stronger diversification. If light/medium/heavy ships each more definitively fulfill a certain roll, I'd think it'd be easier for people to define their place in a combat zone. Someone in a Light ship like an Eagle or a Sidewinder would be better off with a group of such rather than hugging an Anaconda and getting plugged in the bumhole with a railshot or something. More over with the light class more strongly defined as interceptors, they're not going to want to hang around the faster but slower accelerating Anaconda's. It'd be like motorcycles compared to sports cars basically. Though in the Heavy Ships case I'd like to see them become a bit more turret dependent. (And turrets to become a tad more effective, but have little enough health that they're a tempting target.) And they become more specialist Zoom and Boom ships. Biggest engines. Space. Makes sense. They should really have the largest potential Delta V.

You know what? I've gone over most of this already. Go back and read my prior posts before you hurl out an invalid opinion. I really don't see how this would make the game 'dull'. Or can you not handle giving up your dirty drive? Are you afraid all your coolest engineer upgrades would go away? Because they probably should and just be incorporated into the classing system.

But yeah, dear Frontier.

Light Interceptor
Medium Fighter
Heavy Striker

Split up the combat ships into em. Make the Multipurpose ones fit one of said roles with engineer outfits, just because its multipurpose doesn't mean it doesn't have a high combat potential with some modification.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Light Interceptor
Medium Fighter
Heavy Striker

Light Interceptor

Eagle
Viper III
Cobra IIII
​

​

Light/Medium Bomber/Fighter

Cobra IV
Viper IV
Vulture(?)
​

...I'll defer on the rest, since I usually only fly small ships in combat.

The problem, IMO, is that we don't have the PvP content to realize the full potential of the ships available. As it is, we fight NPCs and there is no real coordination or combined-arms tactics. If battles in this game were more realistic, we would see all of these ships fit their roles accordingly. People crap all over the Cobra IV, but employed properly with a fighter escort, it's value as a combat asset would be fully realized. The Eagles and III-Series fighters are the Hellcats, P38s, etc. The Vultures and IV-series ships are the dauntless and devastator bombers, and so-on, and so-forth.

 

[Hexcaliber]

SNIP wall of text.

For every person that does not like the combat as it is now, there is someone who does. Fdev cannot please everyone, and nor should they try. Just like every other game developer, you develop and build the game you want, and do not go chasing your tail to please tom, , or harry because they write walls of text in the forums. If you do not like the current combat system and cannot get past it, you would be better served moving on and finding another game, because it is unlikely to change a great deal. In alpha and closed beta they had a more accurate flight model and many people complained as they could not handle it; most folks currently playing cannot even fly fa off with the flight model we have now.

I would also suggest you wait and see what the Thargoids bring to the table, you may well be glad that Fdev introduced engineer mods.

Finally, Padlina's opinion is no more or less valid than your own, that's why its called an opinion and not a fact.

 

[primedragoon]

For every person that does not like the combat as it is now, there is someone who does. Fdev cannot please everyone, and nor should they try. Just like every other game developer, you develop and build the game you want, and do not go chasing your tail to please tom, , or harry because they write walls of text in the forums. If you do not like the current combat system and cannot get past it, you would be better served moving on and finding another game, because it is unlikely to change a great deal. In alpha and closed beta they had a more accurate flight model and many people complained as they could not handle it; most folks currently playing cannot even fly fa off with the flight model we have now.

I would also suggest you wait and see what the Thargoids bring to the table, you may well be glad that Fdev introduced engineer mods.

Finally, Padlina's opinion is no more or less valid than your own, that's why its called an opinion and not a fact.

Just because I wrote a wall of text doesn't mean my opinion is invalid, just because I like to express as whole and complete a thought as I can doesn't make me a mindless word spamming hippy. All you are encouraging people to do is accept misery, maintain the status quo, accept their lot in life. If such was the true way of the world, there would be no advancement. Zoom and Boom fighters would never have happened, everything would still be turn fighters. Jets wouldn't be a concept, seeker missiles perhaps a vague thought.

Also, the combat system has already changed a great deal, between the severe AI changes and the introduction of engineers. I'd even wager, at some point, we'll transition into a first person universe. And then we may be able to spacewalk to, claim and salvage other ships. Though I'd imagine the insurance rates on an unknown salvaged ship in dubious condition would be a tad more pricey than for a comparable shipyard purchased vessel.

My suggestion basically take into account engineer level changes to drives and suggests differentiating maneuverability/speed between classes more. It wouldn't change the way the game played for turn fighters, but it was change the way some combats occurred. Such as with, say, zoom and boom fighters raking with railguns and speeding off out of range of major retaliation, with a combination of enough speed and shields and guns to suit that gameplay style, but weakened maneuverability in close range that'd make it an awful turn fighter. As in close range with an Eagle would be doom for a turretless ship of this class.

 

[Jack Schitt]

Nobody's opinion is wrong or invalid here, just very very late. Like two years late. Search the DDA for "Newtonian" and look for the oldest threads. Lots of folk were calling for uncapped velocities or un-nerfed yaw (I was among the latter) but FD didn't want "turrets in space" and at the end of the day that was their decision to make. For many of us the decision on the flight model was the single biggest hurdle to overcome but once you've accepted it, it does work for this sort of instanced game structure. The problem at the moment is that the AI isn't bringing its A-game, especially in 1-v-1 encounters. But if you go into a Combat Zone, especially a low-intensity where you can switch between targets of opportunity without risking instant destruction, it works better.

Obviously for anyone still hung up on the "space game without space physics" thing then no amount of AI improvements is going to get past that, and I'm sorry that it'll always be the prime obstacle to enjoying ED. You're not wrong, you're just very late to a party that's already in full swing. Those who embraced the quirkiness are all here having a boogie, while everyone else left. You'll either have to come in and dance to FD's music, or sit in the corner grousing to anyone who'll listen. But the one thing you won't do now is convince the DJ to switch playlists.

(That metaphor got a bit stretched in the end but it just about holds up).

 

[kofeyh]

lol at OP rant.

Actually, the combat mechanics are actually 100% dog fighting. This is why only small ships are actually any good for combat. It's a small ship game. This is also in part because rowdy people agitated for specific flight models despite the MASSIVE issues this presents.

Frontier tried. It just didn't work out very well because people are typically horrifically biased and it's all me-me-me not "wait if we add this maybe combat will suck?"

The problem arises for medium and large, because they cannot actually fight in the same manner, enter stage-left jousting and tanking.

The combat model assumes small ships fight and large ships stand off like old Spanish warships and broadside (only there is no way to actually do that) because "my immersion".

Except nothing has actually fought like this in decades as its all over the horizon and guided weapons. Frigates don't tank and joust, they just launch tommahawk and other cruise missiles.

People demanded large ships in a small ship game and then become confused why that doesn't work? It doesn't work because the game engine simply isn't designed for large ship, large scale combat; and any chance for that was dashed when zOMG my anaconda must be able to dance toe-to-toe with eagle.

Ever wonder why it's agility and hull mass make no sense? Now you know. Anaconda should not have to dance with an eagle any more than an aircraft carrier has to dance with a small patrol boat.

People try and do this anyway, with varying degrees of success. I get the OPs frustration but the game is ironically the exact opposite of what's stated.

 

[OneAmongOthers]

Ships of this timeline shouldn't be dogfighting. Especially the larger ones. They should be jumping in then deploying turret like weapons or missile launchers and firing vollies of death at the smaller ships. The simple fact all ships weapons are forward facing just screams fighters and small ships. Large ships shouldn't have hard points like that.

 

[jasonbirder]

There's no dogfighting at all: it's either jousting, circle straffing (omg so boring / annoying) or backward flying <-- this sucks.

There's no dogfighting at all you say...except for bouts of combat maneuvering characterized by either head on passes (Jousting) attempts to keep the enemy in your firing arc while you avoid his firing arc (Circle strafing) or face to face combat with similar velocity vectors (backward flying)

So no dogfighting - just ships using thrust and maneuver to in combat?

Are you sure you ACTUALLY KNOW what dogfighting is?

Anyway...isn't the real argument that there's TOO MUCH dogfighting...not enough difference in ship velocities to allow any "Boom and Zoom" and the offence vs defence balance weighted too much towards defence making one pass kills very diifcult for all but the largest ships...

 

[Iskariot]

Default There's no dogfighting in this game and combat is god-awful...

Disagree. I love the combat. No matter the size of the ship. I use different configurations and tactics for different ships.

I bought this game (and its expansion) on both PC and Xbox One, and now I regret it because apparently devs at Frontier don't know how to make a game fun.

I have fun. Many do.
Perhaps you are doing it wrong? Could that be a remote possibility?

Combat in this game is beyond frustrating. There's no dogfighting at all: it's either jousting, circle straffing (omg so boring / annoying) or backward flying <-- this sucks.

I think you do not know what dogfighting is.
All the things you describe happen and they are all part of the dogfight!

Dogfighting is nothing more than close range combat.
Dog fighting therefore is 99% of the combat in Elite.
You can fire a medium range missile, but most combat is done within a range of 3km.

I don't know what you expect or want from space combat. DO you want to fly and chase more like in WW I and II aerial combat?
You might want to buy a different game then, although even chases happen in Elite: I just chased an Elite assault ship in my conda.

Also, the whole engineers RNG upgrade grind fest is ridiculous. Nobody wants to go through that crap just be on par with NPCs. Maybe if you limited these upgraded NPCs to defined pockets (combat sites etc), but NO.. it's everywhere and it is killing the fun.

Again you are mistaken.
There are no npc with engineered ships or weaponry.
They use standard weaponry.

Finally, the same messed up bugs persist to annoy us: NPC ships making jumps they couldn't possibly have made, pirates spawning everywhere, omg boring boring annoying so very annoying interdictions that never end unless you engage etc etc.

I agree that npc should not make jumps they can't make. I never encountered it myself.
I also agree that there is a problem with the way certain mission related pirates spawn.
I disagree that you can only end interdictions unless you engage. Perhaps you should watch a few videos about how to handle interdictions. There are many options.

Seriously Braben, you should have made this a single-player game from the start and let us mod it, because you don't know the first thing about making a game fun.

You insult people like you are a little kid. A teenage boy perhaps.
I wonder what your age is.

Go play other (better) space combat games that have ACTUAL dogfighting in them and then think very carefully about everything that is wrong with the combat in this game.

I think you don't know what dogfighting actually is and I suspect you don't understand how to do combat in Elite.