Elite: Dangerous

[dbx]

that's absolute 100% horseshit. other than the capped speed, with FA off it's as newtonian as pretty much every other newtonian game out there (if not more than most)

I've yet to hear a good explanation about why ships turn rate varies with their linear speed, and that's just the first thing that comes to mind.

 

[Bradylama]

I don't mind sci-fi tech that makes piloting space ships similar to airplanes

As soon as you said this you lost the right to complain about the flight model being non-newtonian.

not after seeing how the AI handles docking. plus, i've seen on the net how the docking computer fucks up just like the NPCs do so it's just as likely you'll get killed because of it 'cause it decided to loiter or other dumb shit

You can cancel docking request to stop the sequence, or turn off the module if things start looking hairy. It's not that complicated.

just another example of the dumbfuckery with ship balance: the best combat ship in the game right now (Python) has more cargo space than the medium transport ship and can fit on smaller pads (afaik)

I agree that the Python needs to be reclassified as a large vessel, but it's also a hell of a lot of credits to fly the damn thing. From what I've seen at capship instances, larger slower vessels like a Python are sitting ducks for capship weapons and they melt in no time at all, so there's still some situational need to fly a smaller ship.

It was also possible in the original Elite to do milk runs and make a straight bee line for the Python as well.

 

[J_C]

I've yet to hear a good explanation about why ships turn rate varies with their linear speed, and that's just the first thing that comes to mind.

It is called physics.

Because the ships fly in space, they don't turn using their wings, but their thrusters. And the faster the ship flies, the less capable the thrusters are to turn the ship.

 

[DraQ]

that's absolute 100% horseshit. other than the capped speed, with FA off it's as newtonian as pretty much every other newtonian game out there (if not more than most)

That's a pretty big "other than", don't you think?
Especially when this speed cap falls well within velocities achievable while dogfighting and is one of the main factors differentiating ships from one another, while also falling well below most velocities you might be specifically interested in achieving, like ones required to stay in stable orbit around most bodies.

It's almost like saying "other than the patients death the operation was successful".

I've yet to hear a good explanation about why ships turn rate varies with their linear speed, and that's just the first thing that comes to mind.

Also this.

I don't mind sci-fi tech that makes piloting space ships similar to airplanes
(it's still plausible with powerful sci-fi RCS and fly wheels)

Of course such tech should still be toggleable (because ship that can turn around without changing trajectory to blast attacker sitting on its tail beats a ship that can't) and work within bounds of actual physics (not doing anything ship otherwise couldn't).

 

[DraQ]

It is called physics.

Because the ships fly in space, they don't turn using their wings, but their thrusters. And the faster the ship flies, the less capable the thrusters are to turn the ship.

Ok, I'll bite, faster relative to what?

If I'm around 1AU from Sol matching velocities with Earth, I'm simultaneously accelerating (relative to Sol) and decelerating (relative to Earth) so should I be able to turn faster or slower?

Fucking physics how does it work?

 

[J_C]

Ok, I'll bite, faster relative to what?

What? This has nothing to do with relative speed.

If I'm around 1AU from Sol matching velocities with Earth, I'm simultaneously accelerating (relative to Sol) and decelerating (relative to Earth) so should I be able to turn faster or slower?

Fucking physics how does it work?

The basic thing is that if the ship has vertical thrusters which are capable to output 1 unit of thrust, then it is the forward momentum which decides how fast the ship can go in the new direction, after the thrust turns the ship's nose in that new direction. It is not that difficult to understand.

FA off is fucked up in a way that the ship should spin much faster, while it goes forward with the same momentum, but the basic principle is the same. The faster you go, the more force you need to turn. But since you can't output more force with the vertical thrusters (it is only capable to output the same thrust), then it is the forward momentum is the deciding factor.

 

[Runciter]

What? This has nothing to do with relative speed.

Mate, you need to go back to school. Or at least go play Kerbal Space Program if they don't let you in.

 

[DraQ]

What? This has nothing to do with relative speed.

Is there any other speed I wasn't, up until now, aware of?

Spoiler

out of

 

[Bradylama]

You guys still mad that this isn't Independence War 3?

 

[DraQ]

You guys still mad that this isn't Independence War 3?

Just Frontier 3: First Enconters 2: Elite 4.

Although some IW3 would be nice in the mix.

 

[J_C]

Mate, you need to go back to school. Or at least go play Kerbal Space Program if they don't let you in.

Is there any other speed I wasn't, up until now, aware of?

Spoiler

out of

If you wise guys know why it isn't realistic, please enlighten me. Otherwise just shut up and stop pretending you know something.

 

[Crispy]

Bitching about the realism of rotational thrusters or the lack thereof in this game as well as in any other space combat game is stupid. There are other games with more realistic physics models in them. Some semblance of a "game" still has to be maintained here.

If some of you had actually tried playing it, you'd realize there's a very nice balance of realism and gameplay to satisfy both camps for the most part. Look too far one way and you're in popamoler Wing Commander territory. Too far the other and you may as well just play Kerbal or whatever.

Elite: Dangerous forms an excellent basis for what could turn out to be an amazing game beyond what it is now. As it stands currently, it's just like Brady described it: fun to play, lots of potential. I'd rather enjoy it for what it is than fap to pics of SC ships.

 

[DraQ]

If you wise guys know why it isn't realistic, please enlighten me.

I tried already:
My velocity relative to Sol is increasing, my velocity relative to Earth is decreasing, should my rotation rate increase or decrease? Why?

 

[J_C]

I tried already:
My velocity relative to Sol is increasing, my velocity relative to Earth is decreasing, should my rotation rate increase or decrease? Why?

You are asking questions instead of explaining to me why speed doesn't matter when it comes to a turn rate of a ship? I'm waiting for your answer.

 

[Morkar Left]

I remember from school that F = m * a
Should help you guys getting your discussion going.

 

[DraQ]

You are asking questions instead of explaining to me why speed doesn't matter when it comes to a turn rate of a ship? I'm waiting for your answer.

Again, speed relative to what?
How can speed matter if it can assume completely arbitrary values depending on what you choose as your frame of reference?

 

[J_C]

Again, speed relative to what?
How can speed matter if it can assume completely arbitrary values depending on what you choose as your frame of reference?

What the fucking what? Why are you making this more complicated than it is? In this case the speed of your ship is shown on the HUD duuuuh... Ask David Braben what is the basis of the speed shown there.

What you are basicly saying that in space, it doesn't matter if a ship is flying with a speed of 500m/s or 5000 m/s, it can immediately change inertia in a blink of an eye.

Again, speed relative to what?

Oh, and kick yourself out:
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/33511/how-will-you-measure-speed-in-km-hr-in-space

 

[DraQ]

What the fucking what? Why are you making this more complicated than it is? In this case the speed of your ship is shown on the HUD duuuuh

Well, like you said:

It is called physics.

In physics you don't get HUD showing magically divined "right" value of speed.

You get infinity different velocity vectors relative to infinity different frames of reference and there is not a single one that would be in any way special.

.. Ask David Braben what is the basis of the speed shown there.

Why? I don't fucking care.

The choice of value displayed is a convention dictated by convenience, not physics.
According to physics it has and can have no bearing on ship's rotation.

change inertia in a blink of an eye.

Ok, what exactly do you mean by "change inertia" because I don't think it means what you think it means.

Oh, and kick yourself out:
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/33511/how-will-you-measure-speed-in-km-hr-in-space

Maybe you should try reading it first?

Because currently it looks like:

PHYSICS!!!!1

*calling J_C out on his bullshit and poorly concealed ignorance*

>9000 BHz

You reap what you sow.

 

[Crispy]

DraQ, even if J_C is wrong, you're the bigger faggot here because of your 'sperging out about physics in a space combat game.

DID LUKE EVER HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT TURN RADIUS RATE? NO.

 

[Stokowski]

You get infinity different velocity vectors relative to infinity different frames of reference and there is not a single one that would be in any way special relevant to the discussion.

FIFY.

 

[DraQ]

DraQ, even if J_C is wrong, you're the bigger faggot here because of your 'sperging out about physics in a space combat game.

And you're a creepy old virgin whiteknighting in said thread.

 

[Crispy]

Butthurt detected.

 

[TripJack]

DraQ, even if J_C is wrong, you're the bigger faggot here because of your 'sperging out about physics in a space combat game.

they are both equally wrong so i'd say they are equally faggots

 

[DraQ]

Butthurt detected.

Nah, it's just that your "WAAAH! ITS A GAEM!!!1" could be used as generic response to the Codex as whole.

Don't like it here?
Don't think bullshit should evoke nerdrage?
Then GTFO.

 

[Crispy]

Okay, that's a good response.

But aren't you taking it a bit far, even for... you?