3D Space

tubya88

Sorry Cryptic for bring this up. But i was watching Wraith of Kahn today. When are we gonna get to move in dimensional Space? Make the map boxes bigger for all maps give us some space to move in all axis. I really think this would enhance any PVP and make the PVE more enjoyable. Running into invisble walls when setting a course to another sector really defeats the illusion your warping through space.
I know I'm getting into no man's land on this next one. Institute a dmage system where things get blown up or off in combat. Sorry yet again. Watching Wraith of Kahn seeing the structual damage would be such a thrill in game
Oh well rambling again. What does everyone else think??

Thanks
Tubzuc

victorstella

I would like to see ships move up and down on the Z axis. Sometimes in patrol missions or combat zones, all of the action is happening above or below you and the only way to get to it is to start going in circles.

hayabusafury

Until they add dorsal and Venteral shields (top and bottom). Then full 3D space is a moot point.

But the current game engine for STO is far to simple for that level or detail.

tubya88

hayabusafury wrote: »

Until they add dorsal and Venteral shields (top and bottom). Then full 3D space is a moot point.

But the current game engine for STO is far to simple for that level or detail.

Your right about the space combat being moot at this point. But they could fine tune there maps to give the illusion of at least not hitting invisble walls while moving in or around different sectors

Thanks
Tubzuc

grtiggy

every other space game ive played where you actually control a single ship has 3 dimensional space combat and it gets incredibly annoying trying to aim dual heavy's at some guy and instead of just going up to get the guy you gotta corkscrew up to get him which just breaks immersion all the more and just annoys the hell outta you.

kintisho

Quite simply: KAAAAHHHNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!

I love that movie, best star trek movie ever period end of discussion. (and I was a next generation fan more that TOS)

istvaanshogaatsu

Ah, to play a true space game... one with no "up" or "down" or invisible walls...

wildchild8

the need for creating ventral and dorsal shielding is not actually the case....

When you look at how attacks from above or below are dealt with currently you'd see that theres little need.

the best way to illustrate my point is with a very large target, eg the final tac cube in ISE.

It is possible to attack this large cube from above and below. depending on which quarter you're attacking the shield drains from that facing. in this way you can imagine the current facings in a 3d plane. not just on the sides but arcing from pole to pole (centre vertical axis of the cube) much like the segments of an orange.... except theres only 4 segments....

on small targets where this might not be as pronounced or the surface area smaller and harder to determined which segment is being hit when firing from directly above or below.... it could easily determined as hitting all facings and spread out across all... (just as circling within the area of the tac cubes top facing drains all facings albeit less per facing as you move from quarter to quarter you're not focused on one particular)

this could even make sense as it would have the effect of meaning attacking directly above or below (perpendicular to enemy ship) would make it harder to penetrate any one facing. dont know about you but if my bridge is on the dorsal or ventral side of a saucer Id like the shielding spreading the damage away from over my head or under my TRIBBLE.

lan451

This was brought up a whole lot during the beta/early release. I remember Zinc (the EP back then) said that they actually did try to do full on 3D space movement at one point. If I remember, the devs said that people they let test it got confused or didn't like it. I seem to remember a comment about it making someone sick too. So basically it was a design decision to have the game play the way it does now. I think it would be neat to give it shot myself, but I wouldn't expect to see it ever.

josephdridgeway

This discussion, again?!?!

jonsills

It's been my experience that most people can't handle envisioning their position in three dimensions that well. In fact, back in the day I had to stop playing "Rogue Squadron" on the big TV in the living room because my fighter maneuvering in threespace was giving everyone else motion sickness.

If we did have full freedom of movement on three axes, a lot of people would get lost, get nauseous, and get headaches, and then stop playing.

lan451

jonsills wrote: »

It's been my experience that most people can't handle envisioning their position in three dimensions that well. In fact, back in the day I had to stop playing "Rogue Squadron" on the big TV in the living room because my fighter maneuvering in threespace was giving everyone else motion sickness.

If we did have full freedom of movement on three axes, a lot of people would get lost, get nauseous, and get headaches, and then stop playing.

Yeah, that is definitely a downside to full space movement. Did you ever try out the original Jump Gate? It had full 3D space flight with full newtonian physics. I had to put that game down it made me so sick lol.

heimdallw32

Plus, full 3D movement has been the exception, rather than the rule, when it comes to Star Trek combat. Majority of battle scenes have been more akin to 'tall ship' combat, i.e. on a limited plane (there's some vertical movement, but ships rarely do loops, or barrel rolls, unless they're things like the Delta Flyer or Defiant). I've only seen a Galaxy moving completely vertically once, and that was during a big battle scene.

It might be more realistic, but it would lose some of the traditional Star Trek 'feel', if there were no real 'up' in space and we could orient ourselves however we like. That sort of thing is more suited to other game series, and most likely other game genres (like the spaceflight sim genre).

I do agree that it's a pain for cannon-using ships, though, since they have that narrow cone of fire. Just think of it as a minor drawback to the incredible firepower that Escorts have. There aren't many drawbacks.

lan451

Oh I totally forgot. This came up so much in beta that a link to a rather amusing article began going around. I saved it and will post it up here for all of you.

Warning! The following link does contain some bad language.

http://cleverthingstosay.com/2010/01/28/space-and-the-y-axis/

No one can upside down the Borg. No one.

sirbismuth

I don't mind the axis issue (would be nice to have it done properly, but yeah, don't mind it as it currently stands). However, what I would like is the sector borders, your helm should automatically stop the ship when they announce "you have warp clearance to TRIBBLE".... come to think of it, they probably do, but at least make it not look like we bumped into something.

Same for going around ships, again, your helm (or your ship's anti-collision system, whatever does it) shouldn't "bump" into them, but rather take you in smooth curved flight path around them.

B

tubya88

Well early on i gave up the idea of "Threespace Combat". But I would still like to see better emmersion for space. Boxes that are bigger than your travel points seem to be the answer? I cannot stand hitting the edge of space when going to different sectors.

thecosmic1

tubya88 wrote: »

Well early on i gave up the idea of "Threespace Combat". But I would still like to see better emmersion for space. Boxes that are bigger than your travel points seem to be the answer? I cannot stand hitting the edge of space when going to different sectors.

Well they could just cut warp speed in half. Then it would take you twice as long to get to the edge. Unfortunately they've just increased speed in the LoR update so you'll hit the walls faster.

They have talked about getting rid of the walls. DStahls' talked about it in a recent podcast and it's been mentioned in a couple of Ask Cryptics. But it's a huge undertaking that has big system-wide ramifications. But it is something they're looking into for the future at some point.

smoovious

At the very least, give us more vertical space to move around in, particularly in warp space.

Space out the solar systems more vertically as well.

Let us use the deep space area for our fleet's starbases too.

Oh, and as for the walls... ok, if you need to keep the walls, then ok, keep them... but let our 'camera' view outside of those walls.

There is no reason why our viewpoint has to be hindered by the same wall our ship is hindered by. That's just rediculous.

-- Smoov

voicesdark

josephdridgeway wrote: »

This discussion, again?!?!

I know right, it only makes what the 3rd, 4th, or 5th thread on this topic this month alone. So much for the urban legend that the more active threads about a topic means more dev response lol

However, there is absolutely nothing confusing about adjusting the pitch to 75 degrees, it would just eliminate the need for corkscrewing.

This is STO, not the space shuttle...if we don't hold a 23% angle on reentry we're not gonna turn into crispy critters.

NOTE TO OP AND ALL NEW PLAYERS: If you're going to post in the forums make sure there isn't an active thread about the topic already and make sure you post it in the appropriate section. This should be in Controls and User Interface, and there are already active threads on this topic.

warpangel

The game doesn't need full 3D movement.

But it does need more range in the vertical angle limit. At least to 70-80 degrees if not straight vertical. The ridiculous corkscrew-maneuvers needed to reach targets above or below just aren't excusable in any way.

It would also be nice if, when the ship is tilted up or down, heavy plasma torpedoes and such wouldn't be fired from the position the launcher would be in if the ship were level. That is, from a point completely outside the ship.