The AI in STO isn't exactly mensa, and if you decide to hide in a cloud/nebula they don't usually fly close enough for you to sneak attack them. And if you're PVPing, it's not like the your opponents won't see you hiding. Not unless STO decides to actually blind you and your opponents like the Enterprise and Reliant were blind. Plus it would probably be another button to push like "ramming speed".
You are missing the total concept. In WoK , yes, they did use it to aid in hiding, but they also used it to change position. Changing the Z-axis can let people maneuver into terrain and block LOS, help maintain weapons arcs/ firing positions while moving through other axis, and most importantly, allow someone to change their vertical position without spending two minutes in upward/downward spirals.
Let's just say it one more time: the cryptic engine can do 3-D combat. You have flying characters in CO that attack people above and below themselves. That style of play was specifically not chosen for ship combat in STO. It's not a technical issue. It's a style issue.
Cryptic even increased the upward and downward angles of ship flight a couple of years ago, but said that was as far as they wished to take it due to how they envisioned most ship flight in Star Trek.
But they never fixed the spiraling insanity required to change elevation. Maneuvering doesn't need to be totally 3D, but allowing a Z axis change (while not altering other axis' position) would certainly remove the barf-bag educing upward/downward sprials that are currently required.
Let's just say it one more time: the cryptic engine can do 3-D combat. You have flying characters in CO that attack people above and below themselves. That style of play was specifically not chosen for ship combat in STO. It's not a technical issue. It's a style issue.
Cryptic even increased the upward and downward angles of ship flight a couple of years ago, but said that was as far as they wished to take it due to how they envisioned most ship flight in Star Trek.
and yet we are limited to a 2d concept of travel as mentioned several times about spiraling downward/upward. so not entirely 3d so in my books it is not 3d, but rather 2.5d.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
and yet we are limited to a 2d concept of travel as mentioned several times about spiraling downward/upward. so not entirely 3d so in my books it is not 3d, but rather 2.5d.
But it's not a limitation of the engine, never was.
It's the same engine as in "Champions Online".
Look at this video and go to 5 minutes in
you can fly vertically and do backflips while in the air.
The engine can do all this stuff and in theory it makes no difference whether you're in space or on the ground.
It's just different costumes to the engine.
ive played co for a number of months before f2p and it is still 2.5d as its still possible to be limited, you cant do a full dive, it has to be at an angle and ive used all its travel abilities that will allow and there are significant differences within the engine, there are fancy travel powers, gravity is in effect as well, but in STO in space there is no fancy travel powers and it placed on a 2d map, the engine when on ground is significantly heavier and clunkier with the gravity then it is with CO. if it were truly 3d your ship would start at a very odd angle and the ship vectors would be a lot different as well, play freespace and you will realize how silly your comment is, that is a 3d environment in space combat, you get the full range of abilities, all you get on trek is one direction, no special abilities and ita all on a single plane.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
actually not to knock cryptic or anything but the WoT team also just recently came out with a new game called WoW (world of warplanes) that feature ww2 aircraft that loop dive whatever you want. this isn't an impossible feat for cryptic. maybe even patch in an entirely different engine if necessary like WoT did.
Lyndon Brewer: 20% chance to capture enemy ship for 60 seconds on successful use of boarding party.
This subject has been discussed ad-nauseam many times before.
You are free to provide your feedback on the subject, with the understanding that the Devs have heard it all before. For about 3 years running.
The "tall ships" thing is simply a metaphor that was used by a Dev to describe the kind of feel they wanted. We can debate its' appropriateness, but it's not really all that relevant.
We have been told in no uncertain terms that the game engine itself, which is shared by Champs and Neverwinter, is capable of 3D movement. There is no engine limitation.
It is also true that we were told that 3D ship movement was tested in a pre-release version of the game and it was rejected. I can see their point. Even though I dislike corkscrewing, I get disoriented enough during some dogfights without full 3D.
Slow cruisers would also be at a significant disadvantage in a 3D environment, in my opinion. But that's just my thought. There are certainly pros and cons either way.
Be all of that as it may, please keep the discussion civil. The topic is not worth getting infractions over.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
This subject has been discussed ad-nauseam many times before.
You are free to provide your feedback on the subject, with the understanding that the Devs have heard it all before. For about 3 years running.
The "tall ships" thing is simply a metaphor that was used by a Dev to describe the kind of feel they wanted. We can debate its' appropriateness, but it's not really all that relevant.
We have been told in no uncertain terms that the game engine itself, which is shared by Champs and Neverwinter, is capable of 3D movement. There is no engine limitation.
It is also true that we were told that 3D ship movement was tested in a pre-release version of the game and it was rejected. I can see their point. Even though I dislike corkscrewing, I get disoriented enough during some dogfights without full 3D.
Slow cruisers would also be at a significant disadvantage in a 3D environment, in my opinion. But that's just my thought. There are certainly pros and cons either way.
Be all of that as it may, please keep the discussion civil. The topic is not worth getting infractions over.
While I understand the "tall ships" concept, have they looked into the changing z-axis without a ship going nose up/down? I'm not suggesting a rapid change in z-axis, but one that doesn't involve the corkscrew-O'-doom.
thank you blue geek, that was very insightful! however I am forced to keep arguing for full movement on the grounds that ship maneuver is drastically altered by this fact. I can't execute certain tactics. for instance if im taking damage and I see some debris/rock nearby that offers quick cover, I might not make it in some cases because the games engine won't let me. also I like tactics like diving out of the sun, or going straight up thru asteroid belts to assault the soft underbelly of my foe. these are the stories that could make STO the greatest game ever imagined in terms of Star Trek. never forget that time pirates shot up my Miranda and it took me 3 hours to limp home from the Klingon border, who are GENUINELY at war with us. all with just a few tweaks because STO is so close to perfect!!! that's what will make STO commercials on every TV channel! great stories!
also on a side note 10km to be in weapons range isn't enough it really should be about 15km or so with us being able to see out to 25-30km or so.
Lyndon Brewer: 20% chance to capture enemy ship for 60 seconds on successful use of boarding party.
Comments
In PvP, I would use it as much as I can, just as I do with other maneuvers.
You are missing the total concept. In WoK , yes, they did use it to aid in hiding, but they also used it to change position. Changing the Z-axis can let people maneuver into terrain and block LOS, help maintain weapons arcs/ firing positions while moving through other axis, and most importantly, allow someone to change their vertical position without spending two minutes in upward/downward spirals.
But they never fixed the spiraling insanity required to change elevation. Maneuvering doesn't need to be totally 3D, but allowing a Z axis change (while not altering other axis' position) would certainly remove the barf-bag educing upward/downward sprials that are currently required.
and yet we are limited to a 2d concept of travel as mentioned several times about spiraling downward/upward. so not entirely 3d so in my books it is not 3d, but rather 2.5d.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
But it's not a limitation of the engine, never was.
It's the same engine as in "Champions Online".
Look at this video and go to 5 minutes in
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBEvD5c2tU4
you can fly vertically and do backflips while in the air.
The engine can do all this stuff and in theory it makes no difference whether you're in space or on the ground.
It's just different costumes to the engine.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
cause sometimes its party time!
This subject has been discussed ad-nauseam many times before.
You are free to provide your feedback on the subject, with the understanding that the Devs have heard it all before. For about 3 years running.
The "tall ships" thing is simply a metaphor that was used by a Dev to describe the kind of feel they wanted. We can debate its' appropriateness, but it's not really all that relevant.
We have been told in no uncertain terms that the game engine itself, which is shared by Champs and Neverwinter, is capable of 3D movement. There is no engine limitation.
It is also true that we were told that 3D ship movement was tested in a pre-release version of the game and it was rejected. I can see their point. Even though I dislike corkscrewing, I get disoriented enough during some dogfights without full 3D.
Slow cruisers would also be at a significant disadvantage in a 3D environment, in my opinion. But that's just my thought. There are certainly pros and cons either way.
Be all of that as it may, please keep the discussion civil. The topic is not worth getting infractions over.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
While I understand the "tall ships" concept, have they looked into the changing z-axis without a ship going nose up/down? I'm not suggesting a rapid change in z-axis, but one that doesn't involve the corkscrew-O'-doom.
also on a side note 10km to be in weapons range isn't enough it really should be about 15km or so with us being able to see out to 25-30km or so.
cause sometimes its party time!