Forums » Suggestions
I dont't want to change the subject, but...
Ships wouldn't become completely disabled, just weakened in certain key categories. You might loose boost, you might go slower, your energy weapons might become weaker, or your energy might recharge slower, etc...
Maybe we could implement it so systems only start failing after your armor drops below half.
And actually, it is fun, because I've done it in other similar games, it just has to been done right.
Ships wouldn't become completely disabled, just weakened in certain key categories. You might loose boost, you might go slower, your energy weapons might become weaker, or your energy might recharge slower, etc...
Maybe we could implement it so systems only start failing after your armor drops below half.
And actually, it is fun, because I've done it in other similar games, it just has to been done right.
Bump for some new players who had similar suggestions :)
My thoughts on turbo/thrust:
The problem with turbo/thrust right now (as I see it):
regular cruising speed is unrealistically slow, and unreasonably so for travel through sectors, this feels constraining for travelers.
Constant turbo is the only reasonable means of travel through sectors. Turbo constrains movement entirely to a straight line, and sucks up battery juice. This, again, feels constraining for traveling.
Solutions?
1. Increase overall cruising speed.
The problem with increasing overall cruising speed: This allows for extreme speed control during combat, and makes maneuvering easy to the point of making combat nothing better than silly, as players throw futile bolts of energy into nothing but vacume, since the target is circling at 140 m/s.
2. Remove the "Vendetta Virtual Inertial Dampner" that makes constant turbo necessary.
The problem with removing the inertial dampner: Once again, this makes certain aspects of combat quite exploitable. Players could boost in one direction, reaching very high speeds while strafing past a target that has no chance of hitting the attacker, who is moving very fast (~200m/s), with a slight curve to avoid being hit.
A balanced solution:
Instead of increasing overall speed, making high speed maneuvering (and annoying latency strain) a problem. simply increase FORWARD movement speed caps. Our ships all appear to have rear thrusters, even though they're supposed to be exhaust vents, it doesn't make any less sense that the rear thrusters would offer more velocity.
There's a speed cap on maneuvering in ALL directions right now.. about 60m/s in any direction (depending on your ship). 60m/s is great for combat balance right now for manuvering. but the main problem is that 60m/s feels slow as molasses for forward travel.
If it were possible, we could have our ships -very- gradually be able to reach a very high cruising speed, possibly close to max turbo speed.
The above would obviously require some changes to that virtual inertial dampner.
If the regular, unpowered cruising speed was universally capped to some speed, strafing by someone at 200m/s is not possible, and in order to maneuver at all, one would have to drop to a more reasonable speed.
Now when I say "unpowered" that means, lacking forward thrust. Only by actively thrusting forward would one be able to exceed the global speed cap, similar to how turbo works, but to a lesser extent.
A physics problem occurs when one is cruising forward, and turns their ship on axis. without that forward thrust, I suppose the vehicle would slow down slightly, while increasing speed in only the direction it's facing. It'd probably look/feel a bit like turning a car in drift or a boat, or even like turning in FA mode, only at a higher velocity.
To sum it up:
-Regular maneuvering mechanics do not change.
-Forward thrust ONLY will -very- gradually allow speeds close to max turbo speed.
-Turbo boost becomes used more as a limited power/speed burst.
Benefits:
-Backrolling becomes less favorable, since a pursuer will always have a speed advantage.
-Traveling becomes less tedious
-maintaining interval speeds becomes possible for escorting.
-regular dogfighting styles remain unchanged
-Spaceflight feels more realistic. Less like a rubberband is pulling you back all the time.
The problem with turbo/thrust right now (as I see it):
regular cruising speed is unrealistically slow, and unreasonably so for travel through sectors, this feels constraining for travelers.
Constant turbo is the only reasonable means of travel through sectors. Turbo constrains movement entirely to a straight line, and sucks up battery juice. This, again, feels constraining for traveling.
Solutions?
1. Increase overall cruising speed.
The problem with increasing overall cruising speed: This allows for extreme speed control during combat, and makes maneuvering easy to the point of making combat nothing better than silly, as players throw futile bolts of energy into nothing but vacume, since the target is circling at 140 m/s.
2. Remove the "Vendetta Virtual Inertial Dampner" that makes constant turbo necessary.
The problem with removing the inertial dampner: Once again, this makes certain aspects of combat quite exploitable. Players could boost in one direction, reaching very high speeds while strafing past a target that has no chance of hitting the attacker, who is moving very fast (~200m/s), with a slight curve to avoid being hit.
A balanced solution:
Instead of increasing overall speed, making high speed maneuvering (and annoying latency strain) a problem. simply increase FORWARD movement speed caps. Our ships all appear to have rear thrusters, even though they're supposed to be exhaust vents, it doesn't make any less sense that the rear thrusters would offer more velocity.
There's a speed cap on maneuvering in ALL directions right now.. about 60m/s in any direction (depending on your ship). 60m/s is great for combat balance right now for manuvering. but the main problem is that 60m/s feels slow as molasses for forward travel.
If it were possible, we could have our ships -very- gradually be able to reach a very high cruising speed, possibly close to max turbo speed.
The above would obviously require some changes to that virtual inertial dampner.
If the regular, unpowered cruising speed was universally capped to some speed, strafing by someone at 200m/s is not possible, and in order to maneuver at all, one would have to drop to a more reasonable speed.
Now when I say "unpowered" that means, lacking forward thrust. Only by actively thrusting forward would one be able to exceed the global speed cap, similar to how turbo works, but to a lesser extent.
A physics problem occurs when one is cruising forward, and turns their ship on axis. without that forward thrust, I suppose the vehicle would slow down slightly, while increasing speed in only the direction it's facing. It'd probably look/feel a bit like turning a car in drift or a boat, or even like turning in FA mode, only at a higher velocity.
To sum it up:
-Regular maneuvering mechanics do not change.
-Forward thrust ONLY will -very- gradually allow speeds close to max turbo speed.
-Turbo boost becomes used more as a limited power/speed burst.
Benefits:
-Backrolling becomes less favorable, since a pursuer will always have a speed advantage.
-Traveling becomes less tedious
-maintaining interval speeds becomes possible for escorting.
-regular dogfighting styles remain unchanged
-Spaceflight feels more realistic. Less like a rubberband is pulling you back all the time.
Maybe the issue becomes easier if we had two modes of flight: combat mode and travel mode. Travel mode would allow for higher speeds but disable the weapons (except for mining beams), combat mode would not allow the speeds of travel mode but enable the weapons.
As to combat mode:
a.) radar needs to be changed
b.) guns have turned out to be totally useless
c.) ships need shields
d.) the afterburner īdoesnīt workī
a.) The radar range is 2.5k or 3k. Make it switchable to closer and farther ranges, like 300m, 500m, 800m, 1000m, 2000m, 3500m and 5000m. I like the Elite-style radar much better than the WC-style radar, so Elite-style should be an option. The two radar screens should be placed closer together on the WC style. The problem is that you donīt see on the radar when another enemy is sneaking to you while you fight one, and the other one just kills you. This reveals another problem with combat: Itīs usually more efficient to concentrate on one enemy and shoot him down before dealing with the next because an enemy who is only damaged continues to attack you. But this is impossible without shields because another enemy attacking you while you try to get down one kills you instantly if you donīt switch to the new one to keep him at distance. Having to do that means that it is only a matter of time before you die, especially since you canīt take them down with guns (see b.).
b.) Guns are totally useless because they donīt hit. I get more hits with rockets than with guns. Spending 10 full charges of a heavy battery on an Assault with a Gatling turret will give you only 1 hit at best, with autotargeting and leadoff enabled. With a gatling gun, itīs a little worse, and the leadoff is off the screen most of the time, though the gun still fires towards the enemy. Keeping the leadoff on screen may put the enemy off the screen and gives no improvement in the hit rate. The only effect of the guns was that it seemed to prevent the enemies from shooting at me as much as they would otherwise do. Trying to get closer to an enemy wasnīt possible because the AB doesnīt work, see d.). If it were possible, they would kill me even sooner because there are no shields and the guns donīt hit them.
c.) You die after taking a few hits. I canīt call that fighting, itīs no more than suicide. I know, nobody wants to hear or believe it, but that doesnīt help it. Shields are a strategical thing in combat, and they save your life. They allow you to hit your enemy because you trade taking hits against placing them, and you trade energy spent on shields vs. energy spent on weapons vs. energy spent on afterburner and eventually vs. energy spent on repair systems. Armor is no more than a last resort, and once itīs damaged, itīs time to flee and to repair. A ship without or with depleted shields is half-dead already and requires you to avoid combat by all means.
d.) The afterburner is a strategical device in combat, like shields are. It should provide a _significant_ acceleration for a limited amount of time and it must not disable steering. You slide on the AB to evade your enemy or to get into a better position. As it is now, the acceleration is insignificant and using it in combat gets you killed more than anything else because it disables steering and you cannot slide. For instances where you could use it to get closer to an enemy, itīs only half-way useful because it disables steering and half-way useable because it depletes the battery, so itīs fully unusable. The fast charging batteries have 1/2 the capacity of the fast charging ones which makes, in combat, the fast charging ones deadly for the one who uses them because the weapons deplete the fast charging ones too rapidly.
Combat is actually the worst part of the game, not the best one.
As to travel mode:
+ a long range radar would be nice for that, especially when thereīs lot of things in a system
+ a speed limit in travel mode may be best when itīs related to the distances that need to be traveled, i. e. it would depend on sector size --- maybe 500 or 1000m/s with current sizes, not neccessarily more with larger systems
It might take some amount of time for a ship to switch between combat mode and travel mode, the explanation being that the ship systems need to reconfigure accordingly.
If relatively high travel speeds become troublesome by being used to run from combat, make it so that they cannot be reached before there is a safe distance to other objects.
As to combat mode:
a.) radar needs to be changed
b.) guns have turned out to be totally useless
c.) ships need shields
d.) the afterburner īdoesnīt workī
a.) The radar range is 2.5k or 3k. Make it switchable to closer and farther ranges, like 300m, 500m, 800m, 1000m, 2000m, 3500m and 5000m. I like the Elite-style radar much better than the WC-style radar, so Elite-style should be an option. The two radar screens should be placed closer together on the WC style. The problem is that you donīt see on the radar when another enemy is sneaking to you while you fight one, and the other one just kills you. This reveals another problem with combat: Itīs usually more efficient to concentrate on one enemy and shoot him down before dealing with the next because an enemy who is only damaged continues to attack you. But this is impossible without shields because another enemy attacking you while you try to get down one kills you instantly if you donīt switch to the new one to keep him at distance. Having to do that means that it is only a matter of time before you die, especially since you canīt take them down with guns (see b.).
b.) Guns are totally useless because they donīt hit. I get more hits with rockets than with guns. Spending 10 full charges of a heavy battery on an Assault with a Gatling turret will give you only 1 hit at best, with autotargeting and leadoff enabled. With a gatling gun, itīs a little worse, and the leadoff is off the screen most of the time, though the gun still fires towards the enemy. Keeping the leadoff on screen may put the enemy off the screen and gives no improvement in the hit rate. The only effect of the guns was that it seemed to prevent the enemies from shooting at me as much as they would otherwise do. Trying to get closer to an enemy wasnīt possible because the AB doesnīt work, see d.). If it were possible, they would kill me even sooner because there are no shields and the guns donīt hit them.
c.) You die after taking a few hits. I canīt call that fighting, itīs no more than suicide. I know, nobody wants to hear or believe it, but that doesnīt help it. Shields are a strategical thing in combat, and they save your life. They allow you to hit your enemy because you trade taking hits against placing them, and you trade energy spent on shields vs. energy spent on weapons vs. energy spent on afterburner and eventually vs. energy spent on repair systems. Armor is no more than a last resort, and once itīs damaged, itīs time to flee and to repair. A ship without or with depleted shields is half-dead already and requires you to avoid combat by all means.
d.) The afterburner is a strategical device in combat, like shields are. It should provide a _significant_ acceleration for a limited amount of time and it must not disable steering. You slide on the AB to evade your enemy or to get into a better position. As it is now, the acceleration is insignificant and using it in combat gets you killed more than anything else because it disables steering and you cannot slide. For instances where you could use it to get closer to an enemy, itīs only half-way useful because it disables steering and half-way useable because it depletes the battery, so itīs fully unusable. The fast charging batteries have 1/2 the capacity of the fast charging ones which makes, in combat, the fast charging ones deadly for the one who uses them because the weapons deplete the fast charging ones too rapidly.
Combat is actually the worst part of the game, not the best one.
As to travel mode:
+ a long range radar would be nice for that, especially when thereīs lot of things in a system
+ a speed limit in travel mode may be best when itīs related to the distances that need to be traveled, i. e. it would depend on sector size --- maybe 500 or 1000m/s with current sizes, not neccessarily more with larger systems
It might take some amount of time for a ship to switch between combat mode and travel mode, the explanation being that the ship systems need to reconfigure accordingly.
If relatively high travel speeds become troublesome by being used to run from combat, make it so that they cannot be reached before there is a safe distance to other objects.
Wow...
Anyway, I love incarnate's initial suggestion that Lebermac drew up that graph for. I think that'd be great and a big improvement over what we have now. In the mean time, even just slowing down the deceleration rate after you let go of the turbo would be a huge improvement and could be done in a quick update.
So after you reach the speed where your battery starts draining, you would be able to turn and strafe? With incarnate's suggeted system, you'd be able to maneuver at any speed, or no?
Anyway, I love incarnate's initial suggestion that Lebermac drew up that graph for. I think that'd be great and a big improvement over what we have now. In the mean time, even just slowing down the deceleration rate after you let go of the turbo would be a huge improvement and could be done in a quick update.
So after you reach the speed where your battery starts draining, you would be able to turn and strafe? With incarnate's suggeted system, you'd be able to maneuver at any speed, or no?
Yun:
I like the Elite-style radar much better than the WC-style radar, so Elite-style should be an option.
Call me picky, but it's more of an X-Wing / Tie radar. WC is completely different (single radar, outer ring represents targets behind you, as opposed to the one-forward one-backward arrangement we have at the moment).
It's been suggested a few times that we have a few alternate radars to play with, but it's already been listed as nice-to-have-but-low-priority by Incarnate (one of the devs).
The problem is that you donīt see on the radar when another enemy is sneaking to you while you fight one, and the other one just kills you.
Our experiences differ. I haven't found any difficulty seeing a fat red blob out of the corner of my eye in my lower-right radar.
(Forum is borked, continued in next post.)
I like the Elite-style radar much better than the WC-style radar, so Elite-style should be an option.
Call me picky, but it's more of an X-Wing / Tie radar. WC is completely different (single radar, outer ring represents targets behind you, as opposed to the one-forward one-backward arrangement we have at the moment).
It's been suggested a few times that we have a few alternate radars to play with, but it's already been listed as nice-to-have-but-low-priority by Incarnate (one of the devs).
The problem is that you donīt see on the radar when another enemy is sneaking to you while you fight one, and the other one just kills you.
Our experiences differ. I haven't found any difficulty seeing a fat red blob out of the corner of my eye in my lower-right radar.
(Forum is borked, continued in next post.)
Itīs usually more efficient to concentrate on one enemy and shoot him down before dealing with the next because an enemy who is only damaged continues to attack you. But this is impossible without shields because another enemy attacking you while you try to get down one kills you instantly if you donīt switch to the new one to keep him at distance.
It's entirely possible to dodge fire without looking straight at the ship firing at you.
You die after taking a few hits. I canīt call that fighting, itīs no more than suicide.
Also, I disagree with your assertion that you're killed "instantly". It does take a fair few whacks to take down a fighter. Considering what happens to present-day fighter craft when they're hit, I don't think the armour on the current ships is too shabby.
(If you're going on the armour of a Centurion, I'd suggesting having a look at other fighters that aren't simply a pair of big engines strapped to a cockpit.)
I know, nobody wants to hear or believe it, but that doesnīt help it.
Nice. If we disagree, we're all just blind raving fanboys?
(And again...)
It's entirely possible to dodge fire without looking straight at the ship firing at you.
You die after taking a few hits. I canīt call that fighting, itīs no more than suicide.
Also, I disagree with your assertion that you're killed "instantly". It does take a fair few whacks to take down a fighter. Considering what happens to present-day fighter craft when they're hit, I don't think the armour on the current ships is too shabby.
(If you're going on the armour of a Centurion, I'd suggesting having a look at other fighters that aren't simply a pair of big engines strapped to a cockpit.)
I know, nobody wants to hear or believe it, but that doesnīt help it.
Nice. If we disagree, we're all just blind raving fanboys?
(And again...)
Guns are totally useless because they donīt hit.
I wonder what I've been doing wrong all this time. It's entirely possible to hit consistently hit your opponent with non-missile weapons. (On the contrary, missiles are by far easier to dodge.)
+ a long range radar would be nice for that, especially when thereīs lot of things in a system
Agreed.
In short, I'd recommend sticking around for a short while before making sweeping comments as to the ineffectiveness of the current combat system. Criticism is nice, but a little background goes a long way.
(Problem with the forum - cut-pasting all the above posts and putting them in the same post results in a blank screen.
This is the third time it's happened. Perhaps InvisionPB might not be so badly behaved.)
I wonder what I've been doing wrong all this time. It's entirely possible to hit consistently hit your opponent with non-missile weapons. (On the contrary, missiles are by far easier to dodge.)
+ a long range radar would be nice for that, especially when thereīs lot of things in a system
Agreed.
In short, I'd recommend sticking around for a short while before making sweeping comments as to the ineffectiveness of the current combat system. Criticism is nice, but a little background goes a long way.
(Problem with the forum - cut-pasting all the above posts and putting them in the same post results in a blank screen.
This is the third time it's happened. Perhaps InvisionPB might not be so badly behaved.)
> WC is completely different (single radar, outer ring represents
> targets behind you, as opposed to the one-forward one-backward
> arrangement we have at the moment).
Sorry, you are right. Itīs lazyness to call all the īflatī styles
WC-style and the 3D style Elite-style.
> I haven't found any difficulty seeing a fat red blob out of the
> corner of my eye in my lower-right radar.
The point is that I would like to see _where_ the enemies are. How do
you tell that from seeing only fat red blobs in the center of the
radar screen?
> It's entirely possible to dodge fire without looking straight at the
> ship firing at you.
Itīs either dodge or shoot, so dodging doesnīt help much. There is not
much that can be dodged, anyway.
> (If you're going on the armour of a Centurion, I'd suggesting having
> a look at other fighters that aren't simply a pair of big engines
> strapped to a cockpit.)
I do that --- some fighters have a little more armor and thus may take
a hit or two more, but that doesnīt really matter. Their only
advantage is that they provide more firepower (once you can finally
buy it) so that you may take down a bot or two before you are either
dead or have to run to repair.
> Also, I disagree with your assertion that you're killed "instantly".
Thatīs just my experience. It takes a second or less, so I call it
instantly.
I vote for shields and I think itīs important to decide if there will
be shields or not before discussing what to do about thrust and
afterburner.
> If we disagree, we're all just blind raving fanboys?
I didnīt say that, and I canīt tell, so it didnīt come to mind. Why do
you think you might?
> but a little background goes a long way.
How long would that be? Like 2 years or 3?
> targets behind you, as opposed to the one-forward one-backward
> arrangement we have at the moment).
Sorry, you are right. Itīs lazyness to call all the īflatī styles
WC-style and the 3D style Elite-style.
> I haven't found any difficulty seeing a fat red blob out of the
> corner of my eye in my lower-right radar.
The point is that I would like to see _where_ the enemies are. How do
you tell that from seeing only fat red blobs in the center of the
radar screen?
> It's entirely possible to dodge fire without looking straight at the
> ship firing at you.
Itīs either dodge or shoot, so dodging doesnīt help much. There is not
much that can be dodged, anyway.
> (If you're going on the armour of a Centurion, I'd suggesting having
> a look at other fighters that aren't simply a pair of big engines
> strapped to a cockpit.)
I do that --- some fighters have a little more armor and thus may take
a hit or two more, but that doesnīt really matter. Their only
advantage is that they provide more firepower (once you can finally
buy it) so that you may take down a bot or two before you are either
dead or have to run to repair.
> Also, I disagree with your assertion that you're killed "instantly".
Thatīs just my experience. It takes a second or less, so I call it
instantly.
I vote for shields and I think itīs important to decide if there will
be shields or not before discussing what to do about thrust and
afterburner.
> If we disagree, we're all just blind raving fanboys?
I didnīt say that, and I canīt tell, so it didnīt come to mind. Why do
you think you might?
> but a little background goes a long way.
How long would that be? Like 2 years or 3?
If you practice, you are able to dodge and shoot at the same time. It's not like the game is preventing you from shooting while dodging. Also, ships don't need shields, because if you dodge you won't get damaged, so dodging has the same effect as shields.
Thatīs what Iīm told often, but I donīt find it to be true.
I wonder why there is so much insistance on not having shields. Nobody would be forced to use them. One may dodge, the other may use shields, so both would be fine, and any of them had more options at hand.
Ships with shields may have different movement options than ships without, of course.
I wonder why there is so much insistance on not having shields. Nobody would be forced to use them. One may dodge, the other may use shields, so both would be fine, and any of them had more options at hand.
Ships with shields may have different movement options than ships without, of course.
I started playing in July. And fights vs decently skilled people usually last about 40secs-1 minute.
Against people like Ghost, about 5 seconds :) but that's because they are that good at it.
A 1 min fight is quite lots of time. the reason why you die so fast is either because you don't have the skills yet or you don't have the skills yet.
Ah and btw I haven't played any reasonnable amount of time since september, and I still can last a dencent 30 seconds in an energy fight.
In a flare fight it's much more variable.
And I am against shields because if they make you strong enough that instead of dying in 2 secs like you do now you die in say 20, it means that he would have to deliver 10x more damage. In other words 2 very skilled players would be at it for what 5-10 minutes? 5-10 minute fights would be WAAAAAAY to long.
Against people like Ghost, about 5 seconds :) but that's because they are that good at it.
A 1 min fight is quite lots of time. the reason why you die so fast is either because you don't have the skills yet or you don't have the skills yet.
Ah and btw I haven't played any reasonnable amount of time since september, and I still can last a dencent 30 seconds in an energy fight.
In a flare fight it's much more variable.
And I am against shields because if they make you strong enough that instead of dying in 2 secs like you do now you die in say 20, it means that he would have to deliver 10x more damage. In other words 2 very skilled players would be at it for what 5-10 minutes? 5-10 minute fights would be WAAAAAAY to long.
It's fun to bicker about details, but it doesn't do a whole lot of good when we don't even have a basic model to begin with.
Leberma- I mean... Lexicon had a great thing going back there, what with the curve and what not. These are the limits I feel are fairest to introduce:
*The greater the distance you hope to travel, the less speed you ought to have for the maximum efficiency. Think about it... if you need to run and get the phone, ya' can sprint for it, no problem. But if you're car broke down three miles from the nearest gas station (no, you're cell doesn't get service here) you walk, or jog.
*The more manuevers one pulls off, the more energy one drains. Because...
*Acceleration drains energy. This is an important distinction, as opposed to deciding your current energy drain is based on your current speed.
*Rotating doesn't drain energy, though.
*The cosmic rubber band is in effect; a constant drag will reduce your current speed over time.
*This drag will increase exponentionally; so, Zed1985 is flying his Centurion at 200 m/s. After X seconds, his speed is reduced by 50%, and so on continuously.
*Thrust is the rate of efficiency by which energy is required to move so much weight so fast. Thus, the greater the thrust of a ship, the more energy it has at it's disposal, and the quicker it can accelerate, thus attaining greater speeds.
***I'll write this all into an equation sometime soon.
So, some really cool things could be achieved here. Zooming in to fire at Capital Ships could get freakin' crazy. Blockades of pirates could more easily get the right angles to fire at, and likewise, traders could bust through said blockade with a nice burst of speed before the pirates knew what hit 'em. Duels would become more elegant, like a dance such as this site once described. One could more easily sneak away from a fight instead of jamming the turbo button, and praying that his/her opponent realizes it too late. Docking would become more dynamic, thus reducing the number of broken bone injuries in Sedina D-14. The entering and exiting of wormholes would get alot more interesting. Turboing across space would become far less of a chore, particularly for those low levels who haven't earned the licenses necessary for an infini-boost charge battery yet. And, the whole battery system could be, nay would have to be reworked, and given more personality. I mean seriously, who even uses anything besides Fast Charge power cells these days?
Leberma- I mean... Lexicon had a great thing going back there, what with the curve and what not. These are the limits I feel are fairest to introduce:
*The greater the distance you hope to travel, the less speed you ought to have for the maximum efficiency. Think about it... if you need to run and get the phone, ya' can sprint for it, no problem. But if you're car broke down three miles from the nearest gas station (no, you're cell doesn't get service here) you walk, or jog.
*The more manuevers one pulls off, the more energy one drains. Because...
*Acceleration drains energy. This is an important distinction, as opposed to deciding your current energy drain is based on your current speed.
*Rotating doesn't drain energy, though.
*The cosmic rubber band is in effect; a constant drag will reduce your current speed over time.
*This drag will increase exponentionally; so, Zed1985 is flying his Centurion at 200 m/s. After X seconds, his speed is reduced by 50%, and so on continuously.
*Thrust is the rate of efficiency by which energy is required to move so much weight so fast. Thus, the greater the thrust of a ship, the more energy it has at it's disposal, and the quicker it can accelerate, thus attaining greater speeds.
***I'll write this all into an equation sometime soon.
So, some really cool things could be achieved here. Zooming in to fire at Capital Ships could get freakin' crazy. Blockades of pirates could more easily get the right angles to fire at, and likewise, traders could bust through said blockade with a nice burst of speed before the pirates knew what hit 'em. Duels would become more elegant, like a dance such as this site once described. One could more easily sneak away from a fight instead of jamming the turbo button, and praying that his/her opponent realizes it too late. Docking would become more dynamic, thus reducing the number of broken bone injuries in Sedina D-14. The entering and exiting of wormholes would get alot more interesting. Turboing across space would become far less of a chore, particularly for those low levels who haven't earned the licenses necessary for an infini-boost charge battery yet. And, the whole battery system could be, nay would have to be reworked, and given more personality. I mean seriously, who even uses anything besides Fast Charge power cells these days?
Oh! I used a heavy cell when I was working as a repair bot :D
Yun, ships do not NEED shields in VO. It might be a nice add-on one day but is by no means necessary. We all have fun without them.
My PvP fights regularly last for more than 2 minutes against other fairly experienced players. I've seen fights last much longer than that too. My hands start to cramp. You just need to practice. It's a game of skill. I almost never die in less than 30 seconds against anyone. Eventually you'll be better and will also not die so quickly.
I know you've played lots of other space games that all have shields and you think we're all ingnorant and naïve about it. However, we've played those games too. We get it.
The answer is not to change this game so it's exactly like the other games you've played. If that's what you want, just go back and play those other games. What you need to do is accept this game and try to learn how to play it for what it is, instead of changing it so you don't have to learn anything.
The flight and combat model is the biggest thing that VO has going for it (obviously the turbo could use some work though). If you hate it that much, I'd say VO isn't for you, simply because the devs and players agree that it should never change and therefore won't. PvP is not something that will ever be "fixed" in VO.
My PvP fights regularly last for more than 2 minutes against other fairly experienced players. I've seen fights last much longer than that too. My hands start to cramp. You just need to practice. It's a game of skill. I almost never die in less than 30 seconds against anyone. Eventually you'll be better and will also not die so quickly.
I know you've played lots of other space games that all have shields and you think we're all ingnorant and naïve about it. However, we've played those games too. We get it.
The answer is not to change this game so it's exactly like the other games you've played. If that's what you want, just go back and play those other games. What you need to do is accept this game and try to learn how to play it for what it is, instead of changing it so you don't have to learn anything.
The flight and combat model is the biggest thing that VO has going for it (obviously the turbo could use some work though). If you hate it that much, I'd say VO isn't for you, simply because the devs and players agree that it should never change and therefore won't. PvP is not something that will ever be "fixed" in VO.
I like the idea of Conserving Momentum.
Once you hit top speed, there shouldn't be any need for using more turbo. Space isn't resistant to such things. Storms however, should be resistant because they have an atmosphere. Hitting tab is a bugger for keeping up speed, So once you hit it, you should be able to let go and stay at that speed. I know this poses an issue for battery recharge rate and jumping, but it just makes sense. Only pressing "S" will slow you down. Pressing "R", "F", "A", or "D" should not slow you down either, unless you press it in the opposite direction you're heading. Pressing "W" while pointing forward at a plus turbo speed should keep you at that speed longer. If anything is going to be done about turbo situation, at least make the "automatic turbo braking (when you let go of tab)" take longer than .25 seconds to from 220 to 65, Which by the way is completely unrealistic as the ENGINE cannot even accelerate that fast, let alone the MANUEVERING THRUSTERS in the front of the ship (where there aren't sufficient supportive force points on the ship to dispurse this kind of blunt force.
If anykind of massive vehicle did in "real life" what in VO is called "automatic turbo braking", it would literally be crushed, much like it hit a brick wall, and whoever was in it would die (or be dying).
So please, spread the blunt force trauma we constanly put on our ships everyday to a nice long curvy line we will call "turbo deceleration", or make everyone's ships blow up when they release tab, or just keep it the same and we'll all pretend it could happen in a game where we worry about other more important things like "Player Created ... anything".
In other words, hitting "W" should accelerate slower (manuevering thrusters aren't boosters), and the top speed (depending on the battery) should be higher overall and virtually unattainable.
For example: An EC-89 with the free battery should be able to do 100 non-turbo, but should take 2 minutes to get up to that, necessitating turboing more for acceleration purposes rather than top speed cruising.
The difference in acceleration for the ships overall should be more varied. The fighters should stay about the same,but the lower classes should be made worse, and the 220+ ships should be able to go faster, but in a longer amount of time currently as well. It should be very difficult getting any ship up to its top speed within a normal sector radius.
Realism is an important issue, as well as gameplay.
Don't get me wrong, I like the current set-up, I agree something should be done to make it possibly more fun, less irritating. Dogfights won't change too much as a result from this (aside from more running away because you don't have to boost to get up to decent speed anymore) and shooting behind you, while either maxed out or decelerating slowly.
= real life physics should help in this case...
-edited thanksgiving-
Once you hit top speed, there shouldn't be any need for using more turbo. Space isn't resistant to such things. Storms however, should be resistant because they have an atmosphere. Hitting tab is a bugger for keeping up speed, So once you hit it, you should be able to let go and stay at that speed. I know this poses an issue for battery recharge rate and jumping, but it just makes sense. Only pressing "S" will slow you down. Pressing "R", "F", "A", or "D" should not slow you down either, unless you press it in the opposite direction you're heading. Pressing "W" while pointing forward at a plus turbo speed should keep you at that speed longer. If anything is going to be done about turbo situation, at least make the "automatic turbo braking (when you let go of tab)" take longer than .25 seconds to from 220 to 65, Which by the way is completely unrealistic as the ENGINE cannot even accelerate that fast, let alone the MANUEVERING THRUSTERS in the front of the ship (where there aren't sufficient supportive force points on the ship to dispurse this kind of blunt force.
If anykind of massive vehicle did in "real life" what in VO is called "automatic turbo braking", it would literally be crushed, much like it hit a brick wall, and whoever was in it would die (or be dying).
So please, spread the blunt force trauma we constanly put on our ships everyday to a nice long curvy line we will call "turbo deceleration", or make everyone's ships blow up when they release tab, or just keep it the same and we'll all pretend it could happen in a game where we worry about other more important things like "Player Created ... anything".
In other words, hitting "W" should accelerate slower (manuevering thrusters aren't boosters), and the top speed (depending on the battery) should be higher overall and virtually unattainable.
For example: An EC-89 with the free battery should be able to do 100 non-turbo, but should take 2 minutes to get up to that, necessitating turboing more for acceleration purposes rather than top speed cruising.
The difference in acceleration for the ships overall should be more varied. The fighters should stay about the same,but the lower classes should be made worse, and the 220+ ships should be able to go faster, but in a longer amount of time currently as well. It should be very difficult getting any ship up to its top speed within a normal sector radius.
Realism is an important issue, as well as gameplay.
Don't get me wrong, I like the current set-up, I agree something should be done to make it possibly more fun, less irritating. Dogfights won't change too much as a result from this (aside from more running away because you don't have to boost to get up to decent speed anymore) and shooting behind you, while either maxed out or decelerating slowly.
= real life physics should help in this case...
-edited thanksgiving-
If you didn't slow down from turbo AND could maneuver it would e VERY VERY detrimental to pvp.
Or at least I think so... maybe we could do that on test and see how it works? would it be hard to do?
Or at least I think so... maybe we could do that on test and see how it works? would it be hard to do?
Well you could slow down from turbo automatically, but who would want to? That auto-momentum-screwer-upper-stuff belongs with the movement assistance settings. Noobie players should be playing the way we play now...
- Answering "FatStrat85" -
Yes, maneuvering while going incredibly fast is still all relative to you (the object). It would be great for Traders who happen to have a weapon other than mines to turn around and take a couple of pop-shots at their attackers, don't you think?
IMHO, the closer we (and I do say we because this game wouldn't exist without us paying for it) re-inact the workings of a space like environment (and motion physics), the more fun we would have pretending we're in space. Whether it be flying around shooting people, or trading virtual goods.
- Answering "FatStrat85" -
Yes, maneuvering while going incredibly fast is still all relative to you (the object). It would be great for Traders who happen to have a weapon other than mines to turn around and take a couple of pop-shots at their attackers, don't you think?
IMHO, the closer we (and I do say we because this game wouldn't exist without us paying for it) re-inact the workings of a space like environment (and motion physics), the more fun we would have pretending we're in space. Whether it be flying around shooting people, or trading virtual goods.
I think part of the reason for the slower maneuvering speed is due to the speed of the internet. Data can only be sent so often and 200+m/s dogfights would bring lag from the next dimension. The slower maneuvering speed we have is nicely within the latency of the average person's connection to the server.
You mean, lag will get worse the faster people have dogfights???
I don't really see how lag is an issue, please explain more fully...
I don't really see how lag is an issue, please explain more fully...