Inertia

Suggestions Controls
#1

So after only a brief foray into the game, I’ve noticed one thing that is fundamentally missing from it:  inertia.

 

Why in the hell do I need to keep my engines on to maintain top speed?  That’s just silly.  Also, why can’t I simply fire bursts of the engines, turning the ship between them?  Freelancer had very basic controls and physics but at least they accounted for the fact you were supposed to be in space.

 

It’s space, guys.  Think about it.

The physics are far too simple.  Unless you flesh them out, the game will remain fairly un-immersive and the combat will get stale really fast.

#2

that’s what you can normaly expect from a space simulator. You also hear explosions, lasers and plasma have a projectile speed and electro magnetic damage interferes with shields but affects no circuitry. This is and will be a very common thing in space simulators.

 

As to firing bursts of engines, you can.

 

Freelancer had a lot of illogical things too.

#3

You want good inertia, play Nexus the Jupiter Incident.

And (on expert anyway) after engines burn, you need to counter to slow down. Inertia is in the game, just not fully realistic.

#4

Oh I agree.  But at least they tried.  I’m not saying, make it a space simulator with our current level of actual space-faring technology.  That’d be kinda dull.

I’m saying the flight feels like acceleration/deceleration need some work to make this game actually feel like I’m flying through space rather than some curiously transparent and currentless water.

#5

game actually feel like I’m flying through space rather than some curiously transparent and currentless water.

Oh, there is a current. It is called the anti-disintegrator flow :slight_smile:

#6

“You want good inertia, play Nexus the Jupiter Incident.”

 

Well that’s hardly constructive.

I like the general idea of the game and the way it works.  I’m just pointing out what I feel is a flaw.

#7

True, that wasn’t very constructive, but my point stands… Barely.

I actually don’t want accel/deceleration inertia, imagine how easy it would be for fighters to run away in those cases. Maybe the main speed I can see, but still think it is better as it is now.

#8

Well that’s fair enough.

True, such a change would probably imballance fighters as far as the current numbers are now but I figure that’s nothing that can’t be tweaked (ie fighters would likely have to become a little flimsier or something).

 

A large part of the appeal of space combat to me is the idea of being able to pull off some cool Lando moves that I just don’t feel like I can do in the game at the moment.  For me, I just think the combat would be more rewarding if I had to think about how I actually fly rather than just where I shoot and how low my shields are etc.

#9

Good point. At least it isn’t family guy physics :slight_smile:

He’s drifting lazily to the left, man that guy knows some maneuvers.

#10

didn’t you notice that when you stop accelerating, your thrusters light up to slow you down ?

#11

lol, Draconas19!  Indeed he does.

 

I did not actually notice that, Benache.

Now if only I could turn that space ABS off, I think I’d be happy. :stuck_out_tongue:

#12

note, it’s only visible for strafe movements.

#13

ABS?

#14

A large part of the appeal of space combat to me is the idea of being able to pull off some cool Lando moves that I just don’t feel like I can do in the game at the moment.  For me, I just think the combat would be more rewarding if I had to think about how I actually fly rather than just where I shoot and how low my shields are etc.

 

Took the mouth out of my words. It would be so awesome if we could so do fancy maneuvers like that.

#15

I just noticed I never clearly stated my opinion on this. In the whole I agree, having inertia is also something I enjoy very much in a space or flight simulator. As it stand we do have some tho and frankly a higher level then what it is already might put off newer or unexperienced players and frankly the player base is low enough as it is. Changes such as these should wait until a later time when the player base has increased sufficiently.

#16

 

ABS = Anti-lock braking system.

 

I wish to have inertia as well. It don’t even have to be realistic to the extent Evochron or Independece War did it.

But ability to cut your engines completely and do a 180 flip while still moving in the direction you’ve been facing  earlier is an  essential  maneuver which makes space combat different from aerial combat.

 

As it is now all barrel flips, Immelmann turns and so on are possible but the way engines work don’t really allow any sharp movement vector changes - so basically in 1v1 dogfight it’s the slower moving ship which have more advantage (if the pilot can aim, that is). 

 

What’s more - due to lack of gravity - few maneuvers viable in aerial combat (like Pugachev’s Cobra or Tailslide) aren’t possible either, so flight model is not fully consistent. 

 

So basically to shake bandit from your tail - almost only thing to do is to thrust backwards and hoping that you opponent haven’t noticed that soon enough - but then he start hitting brakes too and all fight looses its momentum and dynamics.

 

I just noticed I never clearly stated my opinion on this. In the whole I agree, having inertia is also something I enjoy very much in a space or flight simulator. As it stand we do have some tho and frankly a higher level then what it is already might put off newer or unexperienced players and frankly the player base is low enough as it is. Changes such as these should wait until a later time when the player base has increased sufficiently.

 

No. There is no inertia whatsoever. You can’t turn around your own pitch or yaw axis without without making an arc turn - in other words you can’t cut your engines to 0 and do 180 flip without changing the vector of your movement. 

 

Also have to disagree with the last part - amount of inertia like it was in Freelancer for example would be just about right, and it’s actually easier for new player to learn such mechanics than typical aerial combat. Introducing such changes in the later stage of development would be even worst (unless it would be some special “realistic” combat mode separate from the rest of the game), as it would demand to change too many people flying tactics and behaviours. Now people come to the game without any expectations whatsoever and just learn how it works - so as well could learn that there is slight inertia in the works. Introducing inertia later would put off many people as it changes the feel of combat dramatically - imagine the uproar…

#17

except inertia has nothing to do with the ability of being able to do 180° flips or turning without moving your camera… Go in game, give a short booster burst and then just let the ship glide. Although your maneuvering thrusters slow you down gradually you’ll still glide for quite a while. That’s what inertia is. Total inertia (something freelancer didn’t have either) would mean cutting all engines but still flying in the same direction at the exact same speed for an infinite amount of time. That is a combat mechanic a lot of people would have too much trouble dealing with, even if it would make for an interesting game.

Also 180 flips are already possible, just take your mouse upward and fly on your head. 

 

As to introducing more intertia later on, gradually changing the game mechanics over several patches or making a simple test run with subsequent voting would not put people off and give them time to adjust.

#18

except inertia has nothing to do with the ability of being able to do 180° flips or turning without moving your camera… Go in game, give a short booster burst and then just let the ship glide. Although your maneuvering thrusters slow you down gradually you’ll still glide for quite a while. That’s what inertia is. Total inertia (something freelancer didn’t have either) would mean cutting all engines but still flying in the same direction at the exact same speed for an infinite amount of time. That is a combat mechanic a lot of people would have too much trouble dealing with, even if it would make for an interesting game.

Also 180 flips are already possible, just take your mouse upward and fly on your head. 

 

As to introducing more intertia later on, gradually changing the game mechanics over several patches or making a simple test run with subsequent voting would not put people off and give them time to adjust.

 

Reading comprehension fail.

 

I never said anything about “turning without moving camera” or similar idiocy.

Inertia let you turn around your (ship) center of gravity on pitch or yaw axis without changing the direction of movement (or, in other words, movement vector) after you cut your engines (or boosters) to 0.

 

I even went through the trouble of drawing a simple schematics, to explain you this basic concept a bit better.

 

Top is how even partial inertia should work and how it works in Freelancer or can be seen in “Battlestar Galactica” or “Firefly”.

Partial inertia = you gradually slow down. Full inertia = you drift infinitely in one direction until you don’t use your thrusters/engines to change direction/decrease speed = realistic Newtonian flight physics.

 

Bottom is how it works in Star Conflict - even if you cut your engines to 0, they are still “pushing you” forward for some time, hence if you turn around your pitch and yaw axis you make an arc - which can be wider or more tight depending on your speed. 

 

scf4ph.jpg

 

 

Example you gave is so called “Immelmann Turn” - you make arc tighter due to the fact that pitch turning speed is faster than yaw turning speed in air combat (which don’t apply that much in S.C. judging from the stats).  Only 180 flip you do in such case is on roll axis, so you won’t be “upside-down” in relation to imaginary horizon line. Only way to make it more tight is to slow down on turn, as described in my post above.

 

immelmann_401.jpg

#19

Now I finally understand what you want. As I stated before Star Conflict does have partial inertia but it is certainly true that the ship will always fly toward your mouse even without thruster activity (which is kind of illogical but meh) making turns the way you want them impossible. It is also true that I’d defineatly enjoy this type of combat (are you sure it was possible in Freelancer, I mean granted I haven’t played the game in almost 9 years but I don’t remember being able to do that. Might be mixing it up with all the other space simulators I have been playing tho.)

 

Also Babylon5 Starfuries are a much better example for this type of maneuver :wink:

#20

Now I finally understand what you want. As I stated before Star Conflict does have partial inertia but it is certainly true that the ship will always fly toward your mouse even without thruster activity (which is kind of illogical but meh) making turns the way you want them impossible. It is also true that I’d defineatly enjoy this type of combat (are you sure it was possible in Freelancer, I mean granted I haven’t played the game in almost 9 years but I don’t remember being able to do that. Might be mixing it up with all the other space simulators I have been playing tho.)

 

Also Babylon5 Starfuries are a much better example for this type of maneuver :wink:

 

Yeah, sorry if my explanations were not as clear as they should be - English is not my native language.

 

It was possible in Freelancer to some extent - you could  be piloting your ship with inertia by using only thrusters or fly it similar to how it is now in Star Conflict (except the “fly toward your mouse” thing) by using engines which would “counter” the inertia “automatically”. I’m very sure it’s working like that as I still have Freelancer installed on my HD. Free Space, Independence War and Evochron have full Newtonian physics with infinite inertia, while Black Prophecy had and BSGO have it to some extent (but also introduced bullcrap horizon auto-adjust mechanics which makes it unplayable for me).

 

Star Conflict have something what someone called very accurate as ABS - when you “break” (cut your engine power to 0) the engine is still “pushing” you forward while its power slowly fades.

 

[…]That is a combat mechanic a lot of people would have too much trouble dealing with[…]

 

I have to strongly disagree with this one. Firstly - major part of Star Conflict players are people who like playing space combat sims. Secondly - from the developer point of view - assuming that your players are too stupid to understand basic concepts (or in this case similar-to-real-world physics they teach in primary school) is what makes games dumbed down and is insulting for the customer. If BSGO could use it and still attract major audience we can safely assume that Star Conflict player base would have no problems whatsoever with introduction of such feature. Especially that there is many aspects of the game more complicated than this and yet more and more people play it.