The Z-Axis

darthwoo

I'm fully aware that we'll probably never get to have proper flight controls in space such that we can pitch to a completely vertical angle, but is it possible that we could get controls for just moving the ship up and down, a la Enterprise evading Reliant in the Mutara Nebula? There are so many instances when you find yourself directly above or below an objective, but just not quite close enough to trigger it. Then you have to fly a ridiculous ascending or descending spiral, which is completely dreadful for slow and/or unmaneuverable ships. I get that it couldn't be that zippy, but maybe just a 1/4 impulse climb or drop would be helpful.

hunteralpha84

Cryptic thinks in two dimensional terms.

(Can't remember the exact quote)

kjwashington

Honestly, I would settle for a [70] degree maximum climb/dive angle. I think its about 40 degrees right now. I don't see how slightly increasing this would cause problems to anything. Though I do understand why they can't increase it to more than 90 degrees.

hasukurobi

kjwashington wrote: »

Honestly, I would settle for a 60 degree maximum climb/dive angle. I think its about 40 degrees right now. I don't see how slightly increasing this would cause problems to anything. Though I do understand why they can't increase it to more than 90 degrees.

I do not see why it would be such a big deal.

Or as the OP is suggesting some way to simply rise and fall like a Submarine going up and down.


I have said many times and will say again: Either let us go STRAIGHT UP and STRAIGHT DOWN or do not put ANYTHING important anywhere above or below our plane.

kjwashington

hasukurobi wrote: »

I do not see why it would be such a big deal.

Or as the OP is suggesting some way to simply rise and fall like a Submarine going up and down.


I have said many times and will say again: Either let us go STRAIGHT UP and STRAIGHT DOWN or do not put ANYTHING important anywhere above or below our plane.

It really shouldn't be a big deal, I'm sure its not much more complex than changing a few numbers in the coding. (My knowledge about coding is limited, so if this is wrong feel free to tell me so.)

The only way a starship could rise/descend like a submarine is with its maneuvering thrusters. For an idea of how fast that is, take off your engines in-game and try to move.

Going straight up/down would be great! Though the ability to do loops would be impossible. (I don't think that's what this thread is about though. I just know someone will come along asking for it.) All I'm looking for is a compromise. For them to increase the maximum climbing angle 20 or 30 degrees.

galanis2814

Yeah I really dislike corkscrewing to change elevation, especially in beefier ships. I would like a straight raise/lower ability, maybe hit up and down on the arrow keys as it wouldn't be a key part of my everyday maneuvering, rather a situational utility.

As it stands now, climb rate is tied to turn rate, and that can be irritating, especially in the sphere where you have a lot of objectives on differing elevations.

blevok

I totally agree that we need an increase in the max pitch. Corkscrewing is illogical.

l30p4rd

Used to have it, could go vertical if you liked. BUT people complained it made them feel sick so they removed it ! So its in the game just turned off.

orangeitis

kjwashington wrote: »

Though I do understand why they can't increase it to more than 90 degrees.

Well I don't. Anyone care to explain?

And an answer like "The game engine simply can't support it" amounts to as much as "It's too hard/costly".

kjwashington

l30p4rd wrote: »

Used to have it, could go vertical if you liked. BUT people complained it made them feel sick so they removed it ! So its in the game just turned off.

I could see how going straight vertical could be disorienting, which is why I only recommended increasing the maximum climb/dive angle 20 to 30 degrees or so.

azurianstar

You know they could easily do it, after all the ground and space share the same mechanics. And we can go straight up and down in our Risan Floaters / Jetpacks.


Now the trick is, how would they implement it? A regular keybind? A BOFF power? A DOFF ability?

timezarg

Keep in mind, corkscrewing isn't the only way to change elevation, even if the objective is right below you. Just move forward/back and then angle your ship appropriately and move in the opposite direction.

I.E., move backward - stop/accelerate to 1/4 - angle ship upward/downward depending on what you're moving toward - accelerate to full speed. Just gotta back up or move forward sufficiently. It's a little tedious, but it's faster and less annoying than corkscrewing.

trueromnus

Spock: "He is intelligent but inexperienced. His pattern indicates two dimensional thinking."


I have wished this were in-game for quite some time now. A very easy way to implement it would be: Shift+throttle = go up Z axis, Shift+decrease throttle = go down Z axis.

phoenicius

kjwashington wrote: »

I could see how going straight vertical could be disorienting, which is why I only recommended increasing the maximum climb/dive angle 20 to 30 degrees or so.

what? that doesn't make any sense.

personally i still think full-on 3D combat a la bridge commander would be awesome(just add two buttons that allow rolling and you're set), and yes the corkscrewing is pretty silly.

misterde3

phoenicius wrote: »

what? that doesn't make any sense.

personally i still think full-on 3D combat a la bridge commander would be awesome(just add two buttons that allow rolling and you're set), and yes the corkscrewing is pretty silly.

DStahl once told us that we don't have full 3d because, among things already mentioned here, they don't want ships to face each other in different orientations.
However something that I could easily see working would be a mechanic similar to how fighters could be controlled in SW Battlefront.
It was possible to roll by tapping a special action button, similar to how we can roll in ground combat. Given space and ground use the same engine that should actually be rather easy to add. And combined with an increased up/down angle (say 85 deg) the game would still be as accessible as it is now but also feel more natural when flying around in your ship.

mightylepton

Once i dreamt of full 360 degree flight in STO. Now i couldnt care less no more. This game with its fixed weapon arcs and stuff simply doesnt require something as advanced as this.

with FAW/beams being king, all the Z-axis exploiting is over now anyway.

If you actually had to AIM your weapons at another ship, sure. In that case... but no. Game is too simplistic for this. Besides Cryptic cant implement something like this, they lost most of their competent developers to new ones that simply add new lockboxes, some ships, some traits, etc. Stuff thats a relative easy copy/paste job.


Bye.

phoenicius

misterde3 wrote: »

DStahl once told us that we don't have full 3d because, among things already mentioned here, they don't want ships to face each other in different orientations.
However something that I could easily see working would be a mechanic similar to how fighters could be controlled in SW Battlefront.
It was possible to roll by tapping a special action button, similar to how we can roll in ground combat. Given space and ground use the same engine that should actually be rather easy to add. And combined with an increased up/down angle (say 85 deg) the game would still be as accessible as it is now but also feel more natural when flying around in your ship.

oh i know they said it, i just don't get what is so bad about it.

is not like it never happened in the shows or anything.

oschw

azurianstar wrote: »

You know they could easily do it, after all the ground and space share the same mechanics. And we can go straight up and down in our Risan Floaters / Jetpacks.


Now the trick is, how would they implement it? A regular keybind? A BOFF power? A DOFF ability?

Yeah ON RISA because the other maps do not support it, and for them to do so, you would need to rework them from scratch.

rakija879

I get disoriented even now flying escorts with the limited z axis, so I prefer flying cruisers.
I don't see why ships is space need to be limited in moving especially escort because thats is the key for their function= outmaneuver a target however you can .:)
Btw this also opens the problem for ships not having dorsal and ventral shields.

misterde3

phoenicius wrote: »

oh i know they said it, i just don't get what is so bad about it.

is not like it never happened in the shows or anything.

To be fair: except for one or two instances where the effects department messed up it never did.
The ships were always on the same imaginary ecliptic plane...almost like they were mounted on a stand.;)

kamenriderzero1

The reason you don't see ships in the show doing it is it takes much more engery to redirect the ships motion at a higher angle of attack. If you were going along at a decent clip, and tried to angle up 90 degrees, you'd end up going off in a 45 degree skid till you could redirect your momentum.

When Kirk pulled that sneak attack in WoK, The Enterprise was almost at a stand-still, and was manuvering on RCS thrusters.

misterde3

kamenriderzero1 wrote: »

The reason you don't see ships in the show doing it is it takes much more engery to redirect the ships motion at a higher angle of attack. If you were going along at a decent clip, and tried to angle up 90 degrees, you'd end up going off in a 45 degree skid till you could redirect your momentum.

When Kirk pulled that sneak attack in WoK, The Enterprise was almost at a stand-still, and was manuvering on RCS thrusters.

Redirecting your ship "up" or "down" takes as much energy as it does to turn it sideways.
In space the direction itself is not important unlike with an aircraft which has to fight gravity.
Also the reason the Enterprise was so slow should have been obvious from the movie:
She was badly damaged and barely maneuverable.

maxvitor

We only need 2 keybinds, Ascend and Descend and if they want they can make it use auxiliary power like reverse does now. The game can support it, it's the same function as jump and crouch in ground mode.

anazonda

maxvitor wrote: »

We only need 2 keybinds, Ascend and Descend and if they want they can make it use auxiliary power like reverse does now. The game can support it, it's the same function as jump and crouch in ground mode.

I could almost live with this.

uss917019

You mean like this right http://youtu.be/BzawZfhWV4g?t=20s

hunteralpha84

I'm sorry but I don't want another half-assed solution to a simple problem.

Having two buttons to move up and down is all well and good but it should be in addition to flying straight up at a 90 degree angle. As others have said in space all directions are the same, there's no physics reason you can't point "up" and go forward.

I'm actually extremely annoyed to find out that we originally could go up at a 90 degree angle and it was removed because people complained. I honestly don't see how it can be disorienting! You have the camera behind your ship and you fly forward. I can understand if it was fully 360 and you end up upside down compared to everything else in the map (I've played other games like that and it is off putting) but something simple as going straight up is not confusing!!!

ARGH!!!

feordilagorge

blevok wrote: »

I totally agree that we need an increase in the max pitch. Corkscrewing is illogical.

Hey, and while they're at it, they could fix the pitch bindings which are backward. I said something about it in the game and got jumped on. They told me I had them set backwards. Haha!

I'm no pilot in real life, but I'm pretty sure "PITCH UP" means the front of the ship should rise.

And originally, I recall someone saying it's the way it is because of a limitation in the 3D graphics engine, which I say is baloney. If a toon can do a forward 360-degree roll, then a ship could too.

maxvitor

It's hardly a halfassed solution considering how completely unnatural it would look for a Star Trek starship to pull a 90 degree maneuver, in that respect I can understand why there are certain limitations because those kinds of flight capabilities would just look weird for ships that are supposedly that huge. Flight for Star Trek ships has always been somewhere between that of a ship at sea or a heavy aircraft with occasional actions resembling that of a submarine.

nikkojt

feordilagorge wrote: »

Hey, and while they're at it, they could fix the pitch bindings which are backward. I said something about it in the game and got jumped on. They told me I had them set backwards. Haha!

I'm no pilot in real life, but I'm pretty sure "PITCH UP" means the front of the ship should rise.

And originally, I recall someone saying it's the way it is because of a limitation in the 3D graphics engine, which I say is baloney. If a toon can do a forward 360-degree roll, then a ship could too.

To be fair your character doesn't really do a roll - the camera and actual orientation remain the same, it's just an animation set.

hunteralpha84

How would it be unnatural? Space has no orientation and the size of a ship makes absolutely no difference.

I'll leave this link here. It shows the future enterprise attacking from below. You cannot deny this is awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UspfD7SW5Ns

hasukurobi

kjwashington wrote: »

It really shouldn't be a big deal, I'm sure its not much more complex than changing a few numbers in the coding. (My knowledge about coding is limited, so if this is wrong feel free to tell me so.)

The only way a starship could rise/descend like a submarine is with its maneuvering thrusters. For an idea of how fast that is, take off your engines in-game and try to move.

Going straight up/down would be great! Though the ability to do loops would be impossible. (I don't think that's what this thread is about though. I just know someone will come along asking for it.) All I'm looking for is a compromise. For them to increase the maximum climbing angle 20 or 30 degrees.

There is no reason you could not do loops. The Defiant did it in DS9 but honestly I would be happy with just going straight up and straight down or not having things on any other plane but the one I am on.

maxvitor wrote: »

It's hardly a halfassed solution considering how completely unnatural it would look for a Star Trek starship to pull a 90 degree maneuver, in that respect I can understand why there are certain limitations because those kinds of flight capabilities would just look weird for ships that are supposedly that huge. Flight for Star Trek ships has always been somewhere between that of a ship at sea or a heavy aircraft with occasional actions resembling that of a submarine.

Not all Trek ships are that big. The Defiant is not all that large at all for instance. Keep in mind that in Space there is NO resistance to your movement other than the friction required to keep all of your ship moving in the same direction. In this sense hardly any Federation Vessel outside of the Defiant works because their single impulse engine would put way too much stress on a small part of the ship and cause it to break apart rather than moving the way we see.

However, we have massive internal forcefields and inertial dampeners that are supposed to fix that issue. So with that issue fixed by our science magic we should be able to just as easily pull a loop as we pull a turn. There is NO difference in doing a backflip in space than taking a right or left turn. The motions are absolutely the same.

So by the laws of physics saying that these ships can turn but not loop would be saying that the laws only apply when they turn but the moment they go along the Y Axis then suddenly the laws stop applying to them. That is both incongruous and disingenuous.