Forums » Suggestions
Hey, that's actually where I got the idea. It's not that hard once you get used to the idiotic control scheme.
Alright, so I dug up the original thread with this concept. Here it is. a1k0n's statements confuse me.
I absolutely hate the type of control you describe, where the mouse position on the screen dictates the rotation inputs. I suppose some people could get used to it over time but I never could. One thing about our game that will make it really hard to aim at anything is that there's non-trivial rotational inertia, so the ship's rotation will always lag your inputs, and centering the mouse on the screen doesn't immediately stop your rotation.
The reason we don't do this is because we have a more Newtonian physics model than games that implement this do - assuming we did implement this, note that if you center the mouse on the screen in our game, it won't immediately change your angular velocity to 0! It will damp, and overshoot, and so forth, because there is a finite limit on the amount of reverse torque you can apply to stop the ship, which in this case would correspond to how fast you would be allowed to move your cursor on the screen. With most of the ships we have here in the game, it'd be very very difficult to aim at anything this way.
I don't understand how centering the cursor would ever cause wobbling like that. From what I can gleam, putting your cursor up to the left would freeze it in that position; it would do the exact same thing as holding the left arrow key, inputting the command "turn -1000", or pushing a joystick left. Likewise, putting it in the middle would do the same thing as letting go of the left arrow key, inputting "turn 0", or letting a joystick recenter. All of which slowly dampen your angular velocity yes, but none of which overshoot. I really don't see how this would be anymore difficult to navigate with than the other two systems, as they have to deal with the same intertia as well.
I absolutely hate the type of control you describe, where the mouse position on the screen dictates the rotation inputs. I suppose some people could get used to it over time but I never could. One thing about our game that will make it really hard to aim at anything is that there's non-trivial rotational inertia, so the ship's rotation will always lag your inputs, and centering the mouse on the screen doesn't immediately stop your rotation.
The reason we don't do this is because we have a more Newtonian physics model than games that implement this do - assuming we did implement this, note that if you center the mouse on the screen in our game, it won't immediately change your angular velocity to 0! It will damp, and overshoot, and so forth, because there is a finite limit on the amount of reverse torque you can apply to stop the ship, which in this case would correspond to how fast you would be allowed to move your cursor on the screen. With most of the ships we have here in the game, it'd be very very difficult to aim at anything this way.
I don't understand how centering the cursor would ever cause wobbling like that. From what I can gleam, putting your cursor up to the left would freeze it in that position; it would do the exact same thing as holding the left arrow key, inputting the command "turn -1000", or pushing a joystick left. Likewise, putting it in the middle would do the same thing as letting go of the left arrow key, inputting "turn 0", or letting a joystick recenter. All of which slowly dampen your angular velocity yes, but none of which overshoot. I really don't see how this would be anymore difficult to navigate with than the other two systems, as they have to deal with the same intertia as well.
Yes, to reiterate it would largely simulate the way a joystick functions. I envision a circle within the hud designating the maximum turning, and marking the boundary of your cursor movement. Then, a smaller circle within that circle as the deadzone. Positioning the cursor anywhere in that area would do nothing more than would holding a joystick would in that same position. While this game definitely does use non-trivial rotational inertia, this doesn't render using a joystick ineffective. I fail to see how this system would be any different.
bump*
i like this idea very much, if it isnt already in the please read before posting thread then please put it there.
i like this idea very much, if it isnt already in the please read before posting thread then please put it there.
a1k0n invented the current system. In contrast, every single last flight simulator in the great wide world, and some other space MMO's to boot, uses the system I've described here. I wonder which one new players would pick up faster?
"...there is a finite limit on the amount of reverse torque you can apply to stop the ship, which in this case would correspond to how fast you would be allowed to move your cursor on the screen...."
The inertial overshoot mostly depends on the ship; A light ship with spare torque will seem to line up with where you want almost instantly while a heavy ship will do the inertia dance unless you turn very, very slowly.
Joysticks do suffer from the inertia problem as well which is why over-controlling with them is so common so I see no real advantage to using one. In some cases it is more difficult to aim with a joystick because you have to constantly correct for the inertia while MouseLook does it for you automatically. Since the control scheme you propose simulates the behavior of a joystick, it would suffer from the same advantages and disadvantages as using a joystick.
You want a "go in the direction I'm looking" control scheme as opposed to the current "go to where I am looking" control scheme. It would be interesting to try but I don't think it will be as effective as you might think unless you get rid of inertia entirely when turning.
The inertial overshoot mostly depends on the ship; A light ship with spare torque will seem to line up with where you want almost instantly while a heavy ship will do the inertia dance unless you turn very, very slowly.
Joysticks do suffer from the inertia problem as well which is why over-controlling with them is so common so I see no real advantage to using one. In some cases it is more difficult to aim with a joystick because you have to constantly correct for the inertia while MouseLook does it for you automatically. Since the control scheme you propose simulates the behavior of a joystick, it would suffer from the same advantages and disadvantages as using a joystick.
You want a "go in the direction I'm looking" control scheme as opposed to the current "go to where I am looking" control scheme. It would be interesting to try but I don't think it will be as effective as you might think unless you get rid of inertia entirely when turning.
Okay, situations where 'aim assist - off' is more useful.
1) You're orbiting a target while firing at it. This can be achieved by moving the mouse to the left, and holding down your right strafe key. With a little practice, you can successfully aim at the target reticle the entire time. I know this, because I managed to make a bind that does so.
In contrast, with the current system, you would have to continually drag your mouse in a direction, and when you reached the edge of your mouse pad you would have to pick it up, and put it back a distance to the left and begin dragging at the *exact* same rate as before, inside a window of time so tiny that the game didn't register the moment in which your mouse wasn't being dragged. (I believe it might be 0.01 seconds.) Easy, right?
2) You're flying past a target while firing at it. To do so, you would need to slowly increase the degree of your turn, and then slowly decrease the degree of your turn, while maintaining a static velocity. With a little judgement, you can successfully aim at the targeting reticle the entire time. I know this, because I created a bind that does so.
In contrast, with the current system, you would need to increase the pace at which you drag the mouse, and pray that you have enough mouse pad to make it through the maneuver. You could turn down the mouse speed, but this requires a moment to fiddle around the menu, and quite frankly makes for a boring game.
3) You're rotating while strafing at a target, and firing at it the entire time. I've never fought someone who doesn't use this tactic. Doing this would require holding down two keys, and turning at a constant rate. It's tricky, but in the right conditions it can be done. I know this, because once again, I devised a bind which does so.
In contrast, using the current system, you'd have to continually drag the mouse, and when you reach the end of your arm's length, return it to a closer spot inside a fraction of a second to begin dragging it at precisely the same rate you were before. Incidentally, failing to do so turns your ship sideways, presenting a clear shot for your opponent. I can always spot a joystick user, because when he and I lock into these roll fights, after a minute I run out of mouse pad, and he does not, at which point I need to break to reset my mouse, or get fried.
Situations where the current system is better.
1) I've played this game 10 hours every day for a year, and now I've memorized the rate at which my ship's turns decay for every loadout I like to use, and I can go pwn n00bs who are unfamiliar with the secret, hidden variables the game forces everyone to use, i.e. a1k0ns very specialized, and personalized aiming system.
2) I went out and bought two $30 joysticks, because I have nothing better to spend my money on.
3) I am Dr. Lecter, an infinitely superior and better looking entity than mere mortals.
1) You're orbiting a target while firing at it. This can be achieved by moving the mouse to the left, and holding down your right strafe key. With a little practice, you can successfully aim at the target reticle the entire time. I know this, because I managed to make a bind that does so.
In contrast, with the current system, you would have to continually drag your mouse in a direction, and when you reached the edge of your mouse pad you would have to pick it up, and put it back a distance to the left and begin dragging at the *exact* same rate as before, inside a window of time so tiny that the game didn't register the moment in which your mouse wasn't being dragged. (I believe it might be 0.01 seconds.) Easy, right?
2) You're flying past a target while firing at it. To do so, you would need to slowly increase the degree of your turn, and then slowly decrease the degree of your turn, while maintaining a static velocity. With a little judgement, you can successfully aim at the targeting reticle the entire time. I know this, because I created a bind that does so.
In contrast, with the current system, you would need to increase the pace at which you drag the mouse, and pray that you have enough mouse pad to make it through the maneuver. You could turn down the mouse speed, but this requires a moment to fiddle around the menu, and quite frankly makes for a boring game.
3) You're rotating while strafing at a target, and firing at it the entire time. I've never fought someone who doesn't use this tactic. Doing this would require holding down two keys, and turning at a constant rate. It's tricky, but in the right conditions it can be done. I know this, because once again, I devised a bind which does so.
In contrast, using the current system, you'd have to continually drag the mouse, and when you reach the end of your arm's length, return it to a closer spot inside a fraction of a second to begin dragging it at precisely the same rate you were before. Incidentally, failing to do so turns your ship sideways, presenting a clear shot for your opponent. I can always spot a joystick user, because when he and I lock into these roll fights, after a minute I run out of mouse pad, and he does not, at which point I need to break to reset my mouse, or get fried.
Situations where the current system is better.
1) I've played this game 10 hours every day for a year, and now I've memorized the rate at which my ship's turns decay for every loadout I like to use, and I can go pwn n00bs who are unfamiliar with the secret, hidden variables the game forces everyone to use, i.e. a1k0ns very specialized, and personalized aiming system.
2) I went out and bought two $30 joysticks, because I have nothing better to spend my money on.
3) I am Dr. Lecter, an infinitely superior and better looking entity than mere mortals.
o_O?
EDIT: The above was toward the Figure 3 about Lecter.
Also, the strafe keys on the keyboard help with targeting your target. If you are using a mouse you should be logically using a keyboard to assist in 6 main directions of movement and any combination thereof. Allowing you to minimize mouse movement to preserve your ever so sacred mouse pad space.
EDIT: The above was toward the Figure 3 about Lecter.
Also, the strafe keys on the keyboard help with targeting your target. If you are using a mouse you should be logically using a keyboard to assist in 6 main directions of movement and any combination thereof. Allowing you to minimize mouse movement to preserve your ever so sacred mouse pad space.
Well, I normally use a trackball for everyday use and a joystick for VO but I can see where an alternative control scheme might be attractive if you use a mouse. Anyway, Mynt, I find it amusing that you are accusing players who have taken the time to practice to become good at something of somehow taking advantage of the game's secret inner workings while you admit to doing just that with your aiming binds.
That aside, if the mouse could be made to emulate a joystick in VO, I can have my joystick emulate a mouse which would allow me to use the mouse's custom response curve for my joystick. That would make me happy.
EDIT: Typing joystick over and over again suddenly made me feel dirty.
That aside, if the mouse could be made to emulate a joystick in VO, I can have my joystick emulate a mouse which would allow me to use the mouse's custom response curve for my joystick. That would make me happy.
EDIT: Typing joystick over and over again suddenly made me feel dirty.
Daare: If you set your joystick to mouse mode, are you going to pick it up and move it over when you run out of room to turn?
As far as making a mouse emulate a joystick, previous analysis of the situation lead me to conclude that a bind could be built to make a mouse emulate a joystick. Providing that there is sufficient demand for such a bind (and that an outstanding dissuasion from logging in is resolved) I will consider creating such a bind.
As far as making a mouse emulate a joystick, previous analysis of the situation lead me to conclude that a bind could be built to make a mouse emulate a joystick. Providing that there is sufficient demand for such a bind (and that an outstanding dissuasion from logging in is resolved) I will consider creating such a bind.
Roda Slane: Yes; it's not a very good joystick.
I have said this too many times to count. (I don't use a mouse, it doesn't work for 3D flight sims. I don't use a joystick, I find them too touchy. Trackpads irritate due to their size.)
USE A TRACKMAN MOUSE.
Made by Logitech, only $30 almost anywhere you go. You don't have to pick it up to move your cursor, the ball feels like it is designed for the 3D world. It allows for extreme precision and true feeling flight tactics. Joysticks are only used for flight because tradition planes used them with a physical connection to the control surfaces of the plane. Seriously, just try it. They are so comfortable, you can fly for hours upon hours.
USE A TRACKMAN MOUSE.
Made by Logitech, only $30 almost anywhere you go. You don't have to pick it up to move your cursor, the ball feels like it is designed for the 3D world. It allows for extreme precision and true feeling flight tactics. Joysticks are only used for flight because tradition planes used them with a physical connection to the control surfaces of the plane. Seriously, just try it. They are so comfortable, you can fly for hours upon hours.
How does it handle intense combat?
It does. I'm sure that someone with more talent than I could really put it through it's paces. I particularly like the ability to flick the ball with my thumb and mouselook a 180. The thumb is great for exacting precision in aiming. As far as intense combat, a significant portion of your performance comes from your ability to evade.