test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

manuvering

2

Comments

  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    I would much prefer to have 3d flight capability as it would feel more natural and open up a lot of new potential manoeuvres that presently are impossible, for example in an escort to loop back over your pursuer and pursue them.

    Though to able of pull off some manoeuvres like the ones seem by the later ships in trek would be good for the game I think both in diversity and in fun.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • jockey1979jockey1979 Member Posts: 1,005 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    The excuse given back in the day was...

    "Tall ships feel, like in the show"

    So, because in the show, almost all of the time, all parties in a fight were on the same plane and the same way up - it was decided the game should be the same.

    We have asked about having movement like in Wrath of Khan with a direct up /down but alas, don't think it will ever happen.
  • fmgtorres1979fmgtorres1979 Member Posts: 1,327 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    adamkafei wrote: »
    I would much prefer to have 3d flight capability as it would feel more natural and open up a lot of new potential manoeuvres that presently are impossible, for example in an escort to loop back over your pursuer and pursue them.

    Though to able of pull off some manoeuvres like the ones seem by the later ships in trek would be good for the game I think both in diversity and in fun.

    Sorry to disagree with you there but space combat feels everything but natural. Everything you are used to do and every way you go about things is completely changed in space. Remember, there is no up and down, left or right, upside or downside. You need reference points all the time for the simplest maneuvers and there is no force pulling you down. That is an advantage in some situations, but a terrible thing in others. You don't loose speed unless you counter-act your momentum. Basically you move by directing power (energy) to propel you to where you want to go, and every move you make contrary to that impulse has to be done in the same manner but opposite.
    It does bring up a lot of new maneuvers, but for instance the "loop" maneuver you were pulling out could be easily countered by the pursuer halting it's forward momentum, and rotating stationary or semi-stationary as you "loop", keeping you in firing arc all the time, because there is no gravity pulling it down, and because there is no aerodinamic causing him a stall due to low speed, etc.

    I would also like 3D combat, but it's not a simple thing if a player begins thinking in all dimensions and it requires help by mechanisms in game (radar, reference points, etc, etc...)
  • senatorvreenaksenatorvreenak Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    A thing to remember (and yes, I've seen Nemesis) is that these are SHIPS, not fighters. They're meant to simulate NAVAL action, and I've never seen an Iowa class battleship do a barrel roll.

    Do Iowa class battleships fly through space? :rolleyes:
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    /Snip

    While your points about the science are valid, when in space it is unnatural to have limits to how you can move an object. as such removing said limits would make space combat "feel more natural" it's not like we're really stuck in a 2D world anyway, there is nothing to stop you jumping in a straight line or as a result of that falling in a straight line, gravity simply limits how far or fast you move in sad directions, the only difference with an object in space is that gravity isn't there and there is no floor.

    If a plane had thrusters instead of engines you could emulate space then.
    I would also like 3D combat, but it's not a simple thing if a player begins thinking in all dimensions and it requires help by mechanisms in game (radar, reference points, etc, etc...)

    As far as it plays in game... all you really need to make it possible is to remove the movement restrictions, add various shield mechanics and you may have to adjust weapon targeting behaviour.

    If it were a flight sim I would agree with you about reference points but as it is virtually an advanced 'shoot 'em up' the only points of reference you need are the locations of allies/enemies/objectives, if it's too much of a problem they can possibly add a mechanic such as the camera mechanic in MK8 whereby the player's craft is always right way up on their screen while being upside down on other player's screens though I would rather that was on an option rather than a permanent feature.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • edited June 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • vetteguy904vetteguy904 Member Posts: 3,941 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    Well, the data on the B'rel Retrofit is inaccurate.

    I just happened to see the B'rel do a 4g inverted dive.


    cough bullsh** :)
    sig.jpg
  • fmgtorres1979fmgtorres1979 Member Posts: 1,327 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    adamkafei wrote: »
    While your points about the science are valid, when in space it is unnatural to have limits to how you can move an object. as such removing said limits would make space combat "feel more natural" it's not like we're really stuck in a 2D world anyway, there is nothing to stop you jumping in a straight line or as a result of that falling in a straight line, gravity simply limits how far or fast you move in sad directions, the only difference with an object in space is that gravity isn't there and there is no floor.

    If a plane had thrusters instead of engines you could emulate space then.



    As far as it plays in game... all you really need to make it possible is to remove the movement restrictions, add various shield mechanics and you may have to adjust weapon targeting behaviour.

    If it were a flight sim I would agree with you about reference points but as it is virtually an advanced 'shoot 'em up' the only points of reference you need are the locations of allies/enemies/objectives, if it's too much of a problem they can possibly add a mechanic such as the camera mechanic in MK8 whereby the player's craft is always right way up on their screen while being upside down on other player's screens though I would rather that was on an option rather than a permanent feature.


    Oh by I agree, it is doable. And it would be fun. I just don't see your average player picking up the pace so fast, But as I said in one of my first posts in the topic, it's only a matter of getting used to it.
  • norobladnoroblad Member Posts: 2,624 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    capnmanx wrote: »
    No, it was just a design decision. The Defiant aside, ships in Star Trek usually faced each other more or less on the same plane and the same way up; the devs felt that STO should reflect that.


    This is a terrible reason. Camera angles for a show or movie are NOTHING like a video game. Its like saying that all movies have third person/birds-eye/chase cam/etc views of shootout scenes so first person shooters are therefore dumb and won't sell! The logic is beyond flawed.

    And elite plus (1991, dos 5 era..) still has better space physics and dogfighting than STO.
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    skollulfr wrote: »
    its the gui. the engine and controls can all be set to allow it, but the gui is not functional for a 6dof environment.
    specifically, the "map" is useless. it is literally a flat image with ZERO Z-axis information, and even the direction arrows it has for x/y directions are dodgy.

    in comparison:
    examples such as this map/radar from startrek invasion or even this one from g-police, are functionally what you functionally need for the player to know wth is going on in order to get orientation.

    even a brief look at those radar displays will make it clear they provide information much more clearly and effectively than the current one sto has.

    It isn't difficult to orient one's self as it is right now, considering everything is in a birds eye view.

    Weapon arcs already make correct use of side 2 side, as well as up and down, so the only things left are a correctly displayed shield radius, incorporating full 360* shielding, and full 360* space controls.
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

  • ender357ender357 Member Posts: 26 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    adamkafei wrote: »
    While your points about the science are valid, when in space it is unnatural to have limits to how you can move an object. as such removing said limits would make space combat "feel more natural" it's not like we're really stuck in a 2D world anyway, there is nothing to stop you jumping in a straight line or as a result of that falling in a straight line, gravity simply limits how far or fast you move in sad directions, the only difference with an object in space is that gravity isn't there and there is no floor.

    If a plane had thrusters instead of engines you could emulate space then.



    As far as it plays in game... all you really need to make it possible is to remove the movement restrictions, add various shield mechanics and you may have to adjust weapon targeting behaviour.

    If it were a flight sim I would agree with you about reference points but as it is virtually an advanced 'shoot 'em up' the only points of reference you need are the locations of allies/enemies/objectives, if it's too much of a problem they can possibly add a mechanic such as the camera mechanic in MK8 whereby the player's craft is always right way up on their screen while being upside down on other player's screens though I would rather that was on an option rather than a permanent feature.
    for the shields, all that would have to be done is to make the shield sections be like wedges of an apple

    it would be elongated, and the current look would be intergrated into the new look by making the top and bottom more see through


    its a little hard to describe.....
  • mhall85mhall85 Member Posts: 2,852 Arc User1
    edited June 2014
    A thing to remember (and yes, I've seen Nemesis) is that these are SHIPS, not fighters. They're meant to simulate NAVAL action, and I've never seen an Iowa class battleship do a barrel roll.

    My two cents: while, yes, we don't need to see large ships doing barrel rolls outside of ESD, it would be most helpful to get the full 1080-degree maneuvering that 3D flight allows. After all, the Enterprise only defeated Khan in TWOK by dropping *below* the Reliant before disabling it.

    There have been many times in this game where I have wished for the ability to fly straight up, especially if I find myself under my desired target.
    d87926bd02aaa4eb12e2bb0fbc1f7061.jpg
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Member Posts: 1,606 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    A thing to remember (and yes, I've seen Nemesis) is that these are SHIPS, not fighters. They're meant to simulate NAVAL action, and I've never seen an Iowa class battleship do a barrel roll.

    Most Iowa-class battleships don't travel in the vacuum of space.
  • neoakiraiineoakiraii Member Posts: 7,468 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    Most Iowa-class battleships don't travel in the vacuum of space.

    Only Yamato class Battleships can :D
    GwaoHAD.png
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Member Posts: 1,606 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    neoakiraii wrote: »
    Only Yamato class Battleships can :D

    And Spelljammers of course.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    ender357 wrote: »
    for the shields, all that would have to be done is to make the shield sections be like wedges of an apple

    it would be elongated, and the current look would be intergrated into the new look by making the top and bottom more see through


    its a little hard to describe.....

    I think I would rather just make it more Nemesis style myself, that shielding style appeals to me and it saves elongating the shield bubble which is so Voyager... That said though, I guess that would cause problems with visuals for Extend shields, Transfer shield strength and other such things.

    I mean, I only remember seeing the ripple effect on the hull tight shields, bubble shields just sort of flare up so with the visuals they have and the bleedthrough mechanic which again makes more sense with hull tights I think it's the best way to go anyway especially if we include 3D flight, the only problem I can imagine with it is that you would have to draw out shields for every ship part which would be a very long process, that and finding a place to put the health indicators for dorsal and ventral shields.

    The shield bubble is easier to draw and can just be slapped onto any ship, but the hull tight shields are better for gameplay in my opinion.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    adamkafei wrote: »
    I think I would rather just make it more Nemesis style myself, that shielding style appeals to me and it saves elongating the shield bubble which is so Voyager... That said though, I guess that would cause problems with visuals for Extend shields, Transfer shield strength and other such things.

    I mean, I only remember seeing the ripple effect on the hull tight shields, bubble shields just sort of flare up so with the visuals they have and the bleedthrough mechanic which again makes more sense with hull tights I think it's the best way to go anyway especially if we include 3D flight, the only problem I can imagine with it is that you would have to draw out shields for every ship part which would be a very long process, that and finding a place to put the health indicators for dorsal and ventral shields.

    The shield bubble is easier to draw and can just be slapped onto any ship, but the hull tight shields are better for gameplay in my opinion.

    Well the actual visuals already in game now, that depict shield impacts is fine, as for the actual ship ui showing shield facings, this would need an update to either have 2 ship ui displayed (current + side visual), as to allow dorsal and ventral shield facings to be displayed, or they would have to have a 3d ship ui to display the same information.
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    Well the actual visuals already in game now, that depict shield impacts is fine, as for the actual ship ui showing shield facings, this would need an update to either have 2 ship ui displayed (current + side visual), as to allow dorsal and ventral shield facings to be displayed, or they would have to have a 3d ship ui to display the same information.

    I know the visuals are there... I ended up having a debate with myself in that post... I'm not sure how shield HP would be implemented around the ship with bubble shields... With hull tight shields you can have facings flash when weakened and turn read when they are close to failing thus you can ditch the current coloured bars but adding two new coloured bars to maintain the bubble would have side-effects such as general cluttering of the play area.

    With regard to the UI though, that's sorted easily enough, if you swap the bird's eye view of the ship that is the hull metre and make it a side view then you can leave the horizontal shield UI as is and then add bars above and below the hull metre to show dorsal and ventral shields.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • mightybobcncmightybobcnc Member Posts: 3,354 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    Oh man I haven't seen this topic in a while. Back in the STO Beta days the forums were filled with full-3D request threads. The simple answer is that it was a design choice because they wanted "tall ships" naval-style combat.

    I still think they could keep their tall ship combat but do a few things to allow sort-of-3D maneuvers, like making a new batch of Attack Patterns with new Greek letters that involve actual ship animations like flips, loops, rolls quick 180s, etc. (brief autopilot). This wouldn't be true-3D player controlled maneuvering but the player could trigger it whenever they weren't on cooldown. They already have the Guramba animation and the Hirogen flip console (as well as pseudo-maneuvers like subspace jump) so the concept has already been proven and implemented, all they would have to do is put the pieces together.
    Um, about two meters.

    Actually, it was about one and a half. I've got a great tricorder scan of it. He's like right there. Must be one and a half.

    hehehehehe

    Joined January 2009
    Finger wrote:
    Nitpicking is a time-honored tradition of science fiction. Asking your readers not to worry about the "little things" is like asking a dog not to sniff at people's crotches. If there's something that appears to violate natural laws, then you can expect someone's going to point it out. That's just the way things are.
  • senatorvreenaksenatorvreenak Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    Sorry but STO does not even feel anything REMOTELY like "tall ship" combat, so its a poor and invalid reason/argument.
    The very fact that you can "vape" ships in a single barrage automatically invalidates anything that could be categorized as "tall ship" combat.

    Funny enough the one Star Trek game I have played that actually truly managed to capture the genuine feel of "capital ship" combat the best was Klingon Academy.... and guess what? Full 3D movement with newtonian physics!
    You wan't a Star Trek version of "tall ship" combat, Klingon Academy is the closest you get.
  • mightybobcncmightybobcnc Member Posts: 3,354 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    It's still the original reasoning for why flight is the way it is in STO, regardless of what has happened to power creep and vaping 4 years after the fact.

    Joined January 2009
    Finger wrote:
    Nitpicking is a time-honored tradition of science fiction. Asking your readers not to worry about the "little things" is like asking a dog not to sniff at people's crotches. If there's something that appears to violate natural laws, then you can expect someone's going to point it out. That's just the way things are.
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    adamkafei wrote: »
    I know the visuals are there... I ended up having a debate with myself in that post... I'm not sure how shield HP would be implemented around the ship with bubble shields... With hull tight shields you can have facings flash when weakened and turn read when they are close to failing thus you can ditch the current coloured bars but adding two new coloured bars to maintain the bubble would have side-effects such as general cluttering of the play area.

    With regard to the UI though, that's sorted easily enough, if you swap the bird's eye view of the ship that is the hull metre and make it a side view then you can leave the horizontal shield UI as is and then add bars above and below the hull metre to show dorsal and ventral shields.

    Well the current bubble shielding is a gfx display, as for the shield rings they would have to implement two more for the ventral, and dorsal sides.

    I myself do not play with the shield facing gfx on, I prefer an actual cleaner look from the actual shield fx.
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    Well the current bubble shielding is a gfx display, as for the shield rings they would have to implement two more for the ventral, and dorsal sides.

    You could but as I stated previously, that would lead to screen clutter.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • edited June 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • vesterengvestereng Member Posts: 2,252 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Starfleet_Academy_Starship_Bridge_Simulator

    Say hello to 3D piloting from the bridge in 1994.


    Of course far be it from me to say anything negative about game developers or the industry in general.


    What's that, 5 generations ago and games are only getting dumber
  • iconiansiconians Member Posts: 6,987 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    It is within the game's capabilities to give our ships (and characters) true 3D maneuvering as you would be able to in space.

    They have even increased the Z-axis limitations a very long time ago, and have said that's 'about as good as you're going to get'.

    The reason why is purely aesthetical.

    In Star Trek, ships were almost always depicted as being on the same plane. Outside of obvious exceptions such as Wrath of Khan (with the Enterprise and Reliant battling on a three-dimensional plane), ships have usually been depicted as they are in STO in terms of positioning and maneuvering -- despite the fact they too were in a three-dimensional plane.

    It was an aesthetic design decision because Cryptic felt it would be more Trek-like to have ships on the same plane, rather than having people flying their ships upside down across space or whatnot.

    It simply looks nicer.
    ExtxpTp.jpg
  • galanis2814galanis2814 Member Posts: 159 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    I think adding the ability to ascend/descend would be useful. Not many players seem to realize the advantages of positioning yourself above or below certain things, as firing arcs are valid in all directions, not just the X axis. Adding the ability to fire maneuvering jets and slowly ascend or descend would make it more viable, as well.

    I've gotten some messages saying "You can do that?!" Or something to that effect after pulling vertical "broadsides" in things like CCE. Plus it looks really cool.
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    adamkafei wrote: »
    You could but as I stated previously, that would lead to screen clutter.

    How would it lead to screen clutter, there is huge screen space as is, and the shield bubble fx currently only appear when hit.

    Even if you are mistaken what I am saying, as the shield rings, even those do not hog up really any space.
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    How would it lead to screen clutter, there is huge screen space as is, and the shield bubble fx currently only appear when hit.

    Even if you are mistaken what I am saying, as the shield rings, even those do not hog up really any space.

    I'm imagining the rings being curved above and below the ship, four sections look okay but adding another two would in a lot of cases obscure the ship and I feel would just look 'off' in general.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • spacebaronlinespacebaronline Member Posts: 1,103 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    The reason has been stated by Al Rivera before I believe. This is a super casual MMO and not a full on flight simulator. They want piloting your starship only a few minutes into the Tutorial to be intuitive and easy.
Sign In or Register to comment.