Forums » Bugs
Wing bug
i hate this bug. this is the most annoying one of all the bugs in vendetta. when i am in a vulture and i am dueling, then i accidentally crash into a roid and i am gone with the slightest hit. and it also goes below your score so it is hard to use that ship. the culture is the most causious ship to be in like s12,5,4,6,and all of those places with lots of roids. here are some reasons it is annoying.
1.it kills u very fast.
2.the slightest hit kills u .
3.and when u try and go to station in a hurry it keeps hitting u around the station till u die so u dont get a chance to dock.
1.it kills u very fast.
2.the slightest hit kills u .
3.and when u try and go to station in a hurry it keeps hitting u around the station till u die so u dont get a chance to dock.
IMO all ships should have the wing bug.
yes I don't think space ships are supposed to take beatings from crashing into roids (at least the lighter ones).
and this has been reported many times.
yes I don't think space ships are supposed to take beatings from crashing into roids (at least the lighter ones).
and this has been reported many times.
Indeed, the wing bug needs to be fixed. But I think all the other ships should take more damage with collisions. Realistically a ship would be instantly crushed if it were to hit an asteroid. The mass difference between the two objects is HUGE. So I think ALL ships should explode if they were to hit a roid at 35+ m/s. Anything lower will only cause moderate damage.
And one of the things that I feel detracts from the believability (is that a word?) of Vendetta's realism is the collision physics. Right now it feels like every ship has the surface property of rubber. When you hit an asteroid you bounce back like a rubber ball, rather than sticking to the surface of the asteroid and taking massive damage (if you're still alive). Otherwise I love physics mode and how it's handled during dogfighting. But I think it needs to go a little further and have collisions with A LOT less bouncing and more damage. There needs to be a lot more emphasis on momentum, where your ship would maintain a straighter path if it were to clip its wing against an object, for example. It shouldn't look like a game of pong. Piloting a ship should be a valued skill, and not just something that's an added bonus for avoiding enemies or whatever.
Anyway, I think the devs have already stated the collision detection will be revamped in the future. I only hope the feeling of rubber ships will be gone by then.
And one of the things that I feel detracts from the believability (is that a word?) of Vendetta's realism is the collision physics. Right now it feels like every ship has the surface property of rubber. When you hit an asteroid you bounce back like a rubber ball, rather than sticking to the surface of the asteroid and taking massive damage (if you're still alive). Otherwise I love physics mode and how it's handled during dogfighting. But I think it needs to go a little further and have collisions with A LOT less bouncing and more damage. There needs to be a lot more emphasis on momentum, where your ship would maintain a straighter path if it were to clip its wing against an object, for example. It shouldn't look like a game of pong. Piloting a ship should be a valued skill, and not just something that's an added bonus for avoiding enemies or whatever.
Anyway, I think the devs have already stated the collision detection will be revamped in the future. I only hope the feeling of rubber ships will be gone by then.
When i nick something in space, i wanna lose control and spin out. i dont think it would be that hard to add. YOu keep your current speed (or a little less) but you spin out if you hit your wing.
...but you should still maintain the same course, or nearly the same course, after collision. Rather than just bouncing off in a random direction like a rubber ball.
yeah
How about losing the intersecting portion of your ship, so long as it didn't kill any crucial systems?
Yeah, I've requested that feature, but I have serious doubts whether they'll ever implement it. I don't see why we couldn't have a settings option for visible model damage though. I was actually also thinking about damage that would affect your ship's flight dynamics. For example your left engine gets blown out or damaged by a missile. From that point on your ship will constantly have a tendency to tug to the left side, because your right engine is now providing an uneven force that would cause your ship to turn like so. Of course it'll go away when you repair and whatnot, but you'll have to deal with a crippled ship for the time being. The same goes for damaged retro rockets, decreasing your rotational speed in one specific direction.
Of course I'm speaking in terms of damage only and not a complete system failure. It's limited damage, in other words; so the player won't be stuck drifting in space. And also note that the variety of damage possibilities will vary per ship, since not all ships have two engines or whatever. So it may in fact help make ships be more unique in that respect. For example, while you may be annoyed with that tugging of one damaged engine on a twin-engine ship, you'll probably be even more annoyed with having 50% power on a single-engine ship. So clearly there'll be advantages/disadvantages to each configuration.
Of course I'm speaking in terms of damage only and not a complete system failure. It's limited damage, in other words; so the player won't be stuck drifting in space. And also note that the variety of damage possibilities will vary per ship, since not all ships have two engines or whatever. So it may in fact help make ships be more unique in that respect. For example, while you may be annoyed with that tugging of one damaged engine on a twin-engine ship, you'll probably be even more annoyed with having 50% power on a single-engine ship. So clearly there'll be advantages/disadvantages to each configuration.
Just a reminder: the fact that a feature has not appeared yet does not mean that a request has been ignored or denied. Most of the work going into the game engine right now is to make sure that things are done "The Right Way" rather than just having things implemented quickly only to create problems down the line.
A lot of effort is being made in the beginning to make sure that features and improvements will be more easily integrated later. In order for the final game to be anything new and special there has to be a good amount of trial and error, sometimes resulting in ripping out code and starting over. Thats where things stand right now. If people are patient, this will all pay off later.
A lot of effort is being made in the beginning to make sure that features and improvements will be more easily integrated later. In order for the final game to be anything new and special there has to be a good amount of trial and error, sometimes resulting in ripping out code and starting over. Thats where things stand right now. If people are patient, this will all pay off later.
soooooo the devs are doin this :P
IMO it depends. If they're ever gonna implement shields, and those shields would repell ballistical weapons fire, they should let you bounce off rocks n' stuff as well. But once the shield is gone it should just use realistical physics to determine the effect of a collision on your ship.
Example: fly around in a vult. Shields 100%. Hit a roid with left wing. You should sustain no damage, but shield should be reduced and you would spin around.
Do the same without shield though, and your wing might get ripped off, depending on the force of impact.
Don't know if the devs are ever gonna include shields though. Time will tell. Personaly I got mixed feelings about shields. They give you more chance of survival, good shield management can give you quite a bonus, but AFAIK shields are not physicaly possible. At least not in the sense we know: spherical or elliptical area around your ship that absorbes damage from all kinds of energy based weapons (not all energy based weapons are based on the same energy type) plus ballistic weapons as well.
On the other hand, the whole propulsion and turbo system in vendetta isn't quite realistic either. As of yet we still got no clue how to use electricity for efficient propulsion in space, and the only kind of propulsion that does work reasonably well is fuel-based. Fuel will only be expended when changing direction, orientation and when accellerating/decellerating. Once you reach a certain speed, you can fly in that direction forever without ever spending one more drop of fuel (except perhaps a little to keep the engine running, like in a car that's parked with a running engine). But using a realistic propulsion model would probably be too hard for most gamers to swallow, so compromises must be made.
Example: fly around in a vult. Shields 100%. Hit a roid with left wing. You should sustain no damage, but shield should be reduced and you would spin around.
Do the same without shield though, and your wing might get ripped off, depending on the force of impact.
Don't know if the devs are ever gonna include shields though. Time will tell. Personaly I got mixed feelings about shields. They give you more chance of survival, good shield management can give you quite a bonus, but AFAIK shields are not physicaly possible. At least not in the sense we know: spherical or elliptical area around your ship that absorbes damage from all kinds of energy based weapons (not all energy based weapons are based on the same energy type) plus ballistic weapons as well.
On the other hand, the whole propulsion and turbo system in vendetta isn't quite realistic either. As of yet we still got no clue how to use electricity for efficient propulsion in space, and the only kind of propulsion that does work reasonably well is fuel-based. Fuel will only be expended when changing direction, orientation and when accellerating/decellerating. Once you reach a certain speed, you can fly in that direction forever without ever spending one more drop of fuel (except perhaps a little to keep the engine running, like in a car that's parked with a running engine). But using a realistic propulsion model would probably be too hard for most gamers to swallow, so compromises must be made.
dude. it's a game. Why should it be real?
Uhh... Coz it's a MMO_RPG_??? You know, role playing, immersion, all that crap? No? The more realism you add without sacrificing playability, the better. It doesn't really add to my willingness to believe I'm a space merchant or a military ace if I fly around in something that feels like a rubber ball and doesn't tear off the wing when I hit said wing against a roid at full turbo.
I do not wanna feel like I'm playing the same game I been playing since I got my first Wing Commander game, in fact I don't wanna feel like I'm playing a game at all. From the moment I log in to the moment I log out I wanna actualy believe I'm a real space merchant or military ace or bounty hunter or vigilante or pirate or whatever line of work I choose, flying an actual space vessel designed for combat.
I do not wanna feel like I'm playing the same game I been playing since I got my first Wing Commander game, in fact I don't wanna feel like I'm playing a game at all. From the moment I log in to the moment I log out I wanna actualy believe I'm a real space merchant or military ace or bounty hunter or vigilante or pirate or whatever line of work I choose, flying an actual space vessel designed for combat.
Woohoo!! Yes, Nighty! Yes! Yeah... what Nighty said. Plus realism is cool. Fakeness sucks. And that includes invulnerability.
And station nuking Arolte.
ROFL
and I mean every character of that previous statement.
and I mean every character of that previous statement.