Inertia and Newton based physics (OR: there is [almost] no friction in free space)

Game Discussion Miscellaneous
1

While the physics engine is good and almost close to what it actually should be it still needs improvement.

Especially reverse is not good enough. How can it possible be, that I can fly revers with nothing more than 50units?

Physically one should be able to fly in any direction at any speed and - one of my favorites - you should be able to turn your ship in any direction without (!) losing inertia. Just think back to I-war or forward to Star Citizen ^^

While I can understand that devs might rather want to develop an easy game (really?) and omit some basic laws of physics (c’mon this game has potential!) - hence no inertia - I still believe ships should at least be able to fly in any direction with max speed.

A further adaption of the engine into this direction should also make it more obvious that something like composite shields and their free distribution around the ship is desirable

2

I would suggest a toggle for the thruster auto-correction so you can switch between a rotation only mode and counter-thrust + rotation mode.

Rotation only would only use thrusters to rotate the ship which will allow you to pivot and drift while still maintaining your original momentum. If you want to stop drifting you have to turn opposite of the direction you are drifting in and fire the main engines.

Counter-thrust + rotation is the current thruster control system we have which automatically fires thrusters to counter-act any momentum that is not the direction you are “intending” to go or pointing at.

3

The problem is that the ships still need to stay in balance. A to high mobility would lead to the problem that Interceptors would be the most overpowered class.

We already had it some time ago, some players could dodge 10 others with no problem.

4

I am not against interceptors being able to outmanouver any other ship - they are just dealing too much damage for that - or the durability of bigger ships is too low - which ever way you would like to see it

frigates should require a wingman (like an interceptor) to support them and focus on long range fight (as it is now) - this would increase the necessity for coordinated teamplay (two mates flying together one doing int other frigate, etc.) Anyways this is all beside the point.

The point is you can not justify a defect with another defect, like: having unrealistic/simple physics, because interceptors are too powerful. By changing the physics to be simple again you only hide the underlying problem by making the symptom go away. The correct way of software development should be to understand and then fix the problem.

Another problem might be that people need to learn to think in 3D then, which turns the question back to the product owner(s) and the stake holder(s) for who to develop this game

5

I am not against interceptors being able to outmanouver any other ship - they are just dealing too much damage for that - or the durability of bigger ships is too low - which ever way you would like to see it

frigates should require a wingman (like an interceptor) to support them and focus on long range fight (as it is now) - this would increase the necessity for coordinated teamplay (two mates flying together one doing int other frigate, etc.) Anyways this is all beside the point.

The point is you can not justify a defect with another defect, like: having unrealistic/simple physics, because interceptors are too powerful. By changing the physics to be simple again you only hide the underlying problem by making the symptom go away. The correct way of software development should be to understand and then fix the problem.

Another problem might be that people need to learn to think in 3D then, which turns the question back to the product owner(s) and the stake holder(s) for who to develop this game

The problem is, some people think that Interceptors deal to much damage and others think they are to weak.

I agree, frigates should require Interceptors for protection, but I think they should be more support ships than damage dealer.

Physics will be applied as far as possible, but it’s hard to keep it realistic and balanced at the same time,

but the devs will try their best.

The game is designed for causal gamers, but also for hardcore gamers.

6

I agree, frigates should require Interceptors for protection, but I think they should be more support ships than damage dealer.

I totally agree with that to, more support then damage, everyone wants to play damage, but its support and tank classes that make the battle progress.

the problem right now is that to much damage is being put out for the amount healing done.

This type of game concept is actually very good.

i think the game is very close to being where it needs to be, it just needs adjustments , and the biggest one of this is in the tanking area , (especially for frigates) Interceptors do to much damage for the mobility. In games like this, there is up to four types of tanking, the most common are the three, Speed tank, Armor tank, and shield tank (the last is hull tank for some games).

The problem is ceptors get a mix of speed and shield/armor tanking, which makes them very hard to target, and that gives them indirect effective-tank. if you can only do 2000 dmg every minute, and they heal for 2500 every minute, you will never kill them.

this is very difficult to deal with, because if you lower the ceptor speed, they become instant pop, and if you increase the turn rate of other ships, they become instant post. that keeps people from wanting to play them. So you are best off nerfing their damage alittle, so that solo they cant’d do anything to larger targets, and to smaller targets they have a fighting chance.

So the solution to ceptors is to lower their damage, but give them enuff to kill other similar sized ships. The best way to do this is NOT TO a balancing of the class-specific weapons. this is a big / rookie mistake for developers. adding effects like 10% Damage reduction to larger targets when flying an interceptor (internal mechanic) is the way to solve the problem.

this is because it will enable the more skilled and knowledgeable pilots to out build and perform the others, giving them a chance that maybe, just maybe after 2 hours they can kill that frigate.

it dawned on me the other day that and that we can use a various collection of smaller crafts, like fighters, attack ships, interceptors,and so on for the games ships, instead of even counter-part with various sizes. But i will say one thing, I would atleast like to see a heavy combat / tank based cruiser. something that has really good tank, but maybe only 1-2 active slots, and maybe like 4-5 passives.

I will say though, if ships had bonus’s to things in this game, it would be a lot better, because then we would see the rise of a lot of other kinda combo’s and building.

7

hmmm an intercepter is fine …its not like a F-18 couldnt sink a battle ship if he caught it alone…

battle ship do need a little more armor though …and better wing men :slight_smile:

but weaken the intercepter no way…

it would push the balance way to the big Ace sniper ships with there heavy lasers and 7000 meter range there ruining the game

we intercepter pilots are the only thing that striks fear in there camper hearts

further more i make the motion that there be a kind of buster rocket/torpiod nuke that intercepters can carrie like a divebomber ie thrustbomber

for the times when 5-8 Aces hide behinde some asteroids…

8

I think the ships in general all need modules changes and as a result any such direct nerf or buff to ships will break the game.

as i am looking into this on a more basic and mathamatical level, i an finding the game needs mechanical changes or additions, rather then flat buffs or nerfs. One such example is this

Damage to attack ships from interceptors reduced by 10%

Damage to frigates from interceptors reduced by 20%

Frigate weapon (projective) speed lower then attackship

Attackship lower then interceptor.

Interceptor rate of fighter is higher then all others.

These are all mechanic changes no direct nerfs or buffs.

mechanical changes are things in the game that apply after all such ship, mod combinations are met.

this is something that will take place in the battlefield after you have for example, optimized your damage etc.

The reason for the damage reduction is because ceptors are way to mobile, for attackships or frigates to turn and catch them (this might actually need a nerf or others need a buff) turn rates should be very close to each other, it shouldent feel like it does now, when you are in a frigate flying a brick through space. It should be something similar to attack ship, and attackship should feel something similar to interceptor (but slightly slower in both cases) this however is not the cast

ceptors have a 50mt weight

attackships have a 350-400mt weight

and frigates have a 1500-1750mt weight (if i recall right)

This rates are vastly to far off it should be something like

ceptor have a 75mt weight

attackships have a 125mt weight

frigates have a 250mt weight.

this would give a lot of issues. it would also make frigates more viable for close quarters combat

when you think about it, can you dog fight with a ceptor in a frigate? the answer is no, they are to mobile to keep them in your sight

so that is one of the factors adding to snipers.

sniping itself is not bad, though it needs to be ranged nerf to make it slightly better then melee, but not over powered.

sniping should only grant 10-15% more damage (in extreme cases 20%) and should shoot twice as slow as other weapons, however it should be fairly accurate and dependable. in order to have that we need rails to travel very quickly, or instantly. (personally i favor rails being instant travel time)

all i hear is “dont near my ship” but everyone complaining about the other, this is unrealistic, we need to address the problems, not the opinions (perse)

the problems are simple

ceptors do to much damage

repair is undependable

frigate and attackship need more mobility

sniping is to strong.

9

one last thing regarding this post.

i would like asteroids to have some sort of mass, and for the space mechanics to give the same sort of slingshot effect that

nasa uses on our planet, and jupiter to shoot probes into space.

it should be somewhere between another 50 and 150 ms for say 8-10 seconds. this will make dog fighting in asteroid belts much funner and will help give some escape mechanics to some skill players.

10

one last thing regarding this post.

i would like asteroids to have some sort of mass, and for the space mechanics to give the same sort of slingshot effect that

nasa uses on our planet, and jupiter to shoot probes into space.

it should be somewhere between another 50 and 150 ms for say 8-10 seconds. this will make dog fighting in asteroid belts much funner and will help give some escape mechanics to some skill players.

This could be a nice idea for the future. I really like it.

11

…why not create a map with a small blackhole / super dens star at the center - let’s call it maelstrom

the only gamemode is called JEF’s space racing league

however the asteroid idea sounds nice - i just see some problems with the asteroid filled maps such as s1338_pandora_anomaly or s1338_devilsjaw - your ship is literatly the nutshell on the ocean :smiley:

12

Sorry to dig this topic. But here is my feedback.

 

Has anyone played Evechron Mercenary? It has full newtonian physics. And it is NOT good; because it takes away all the dogfighting, and turns it into a jousting match.

 

So, please no. This is enough; it allows dogfights, it allows strafing, it is enough. Adapt full newtonian physics, and all you’ll have will be jousting matches.

13

so does this mean that unlike practically every space simulator i’ve ever played, there is no cruise control? I have to mash the “W” key all the time or else I glide to a stop? my finger will get tired

14

There is… Check key bindings. But if you rely on them, you’ll die more often I believe.

15

ah found it. “/” is full speed. i think the numpad keys are not included in the guide.

 

I was expecting that if i set it at full speed then press “S” or slowdown, the cruise control would cancel and reset to “off” but that doesnt happen, its still on.