Jump To Lightspeed Archive
Thread: Attitude indicator...
Page 1 of 2
RankorCity
Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 pm
#1
I want one. Bad.
I realize an attitude indicator in "space" is a little redundant, but I would LOVE to put together a precision flying team a la the Blue Angels for space "air shows"....
I dunno...I was up flying around the other night, and was practicing specific maneuvers, and found it difficult to do certain things without a way to measure specifically the amount of roll i was inducing into the craft. Since there is no 'horizon' to gauge against, its kind of a pain. Its a little easier in third person view (outside the craft) as you have a clearer view of other objects to measure against.
I dunno...I just want one.
Starson
Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:54 pm
#3
I have found a work around for this problem. I am a rl private pilot, and about 20 some odd years ago I flew for the Air Force. When I am going against a gun boat or Corvette, I zoom out to 3rd person mode. This view helps me use evasive maneuvers more effectively because I can 'see' how I am moving. I think for the pilot of a mp ship, this view will allso be more effective because you can see what is flying around you better, thus allowing you to keep your turrents in a positive fireing arc. I haven't gotten certified for my mp ship, only got 3 missions left, but I got my A-wing so I am happy, maybe this weekend. Good luck and I hope this helps a little, it does for me.
RankorCity
Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:12 pm
#4
KenzoDarkron wrote:
did you mean "altitude"?
No.
An attitude indicator, as in RL planes and jets and helos, is a indicator using a gyro compass that shows the yaw/pitch of the aircraft...i.e. how much the aircraft has rolled to the starboard side vs the horizon....
Starson
Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:21 pm
#5
Yea it's funny when someone who doesn't know what they are talking about totaly makes a a** outta themself's. 
S-1-l2-H-C
Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:40 pm
#6
i dunno about an attitude indicator but a velocity vector would be nice so i could judge my angle of attack while turning.
i would also like for the target display to show your angle in relation to the target, not just show a graphic of the ship spinning around.
RankorCity
Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:42 pm
#7
Just to clarify...
Lets say I am with a group of 5 other pilots, and we decide we want to put on a little airshow....
I give everyone a wp to park their ship at, to give them a field of view as to where the "space show" will take place....
Everyone is at wp....
My group does a highspeed flyover in aDelta formation from behind the group and into their field of view.
Lets say the formation looks like this (hope it shows up when I post):
1
2 3
45 6
Ship 1 pulls straight up on the controls effectively doing a high speed climb. Ship 2 rolls 45 degrees left, pulls straight back, ship 3 rolls 45 degrees right and straight back. Ship 4 rolls 135 degrees left, then straight back, Ship 5 rolls 180 degrees and straight back...Ship 6 rolls 135 degrees then straight back. This effectively creates a big bloom......Then ships 4 and 6 could continue their pull back, then straighening once they are facing each other head on and passing each other while one rolls left, and the other rolls right at the last second.
This is my inspiration:
http://www.blueangels.navy.mil/geninfo/themepkg/delta.html
http://www.blueangels.navy.mil/geninfo/themepkg/diamond.html
http://www.blueangels.navy.mil/geninfo/themepkg/solos.html
I have seen these guys about 20 times, as I live within about 50 miles of the base they are stationed at.
wasj2004
Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:10 am
#8
I use a active waypoint as my atitude indicator. Even if your not faceing the waypoint, you still have the arrows that point you to it. Its not the best, but it works.
quadpers0n
Wed Jan 12, 2005 8:13 am
#9
this would be a huge help if not for stunt flying then just for knowing where the heck i'm going half the time, make it a choice in the menu, opaque on the radar or something. this can't be that hard to put in either, the option to automatically level your ship is in game.
ana-mo-cara
Wed Jan 12, 2005 8:51 am
#10
I have found that the radar itself is my major problem in the game. Its just way too hard to control leading to me wasteing five or six minutes just trying to find a bugger to shoot. I have found that I am just starting to ignore the radar entirely, and working in grid patterns. After a time you can get it somewhat useful, but I have to wonder why we couldnt get a more user friendly interface. Something that actually represents a three dimensional clobe with the horizon being horizontal in the center. If its ahead it cons green circle if forground if its yellow circle its behind you. This alone would give players more reference. Players could even chose to lock the plane in and move around in it.
Sadly the radar we got is near useless, and there are next to no frames of reference.
Asside from that I got to ask the people this why are the flight mechanics so futzed. On one hand we can go any direction, unlike a air simulation, and on the other we have limited acceleration. A plane is slowed by drag created by the air. According to newton in space if you keep applying the gas you keep accelerateing. Only until you get near light do relativistic forces come into play. It just struck me as kind of dumb when playing the game. That my vehicle has a locked in speed limit. When the devs did a decent job makeing a three dimensional space enviroment.
Sylow
Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:08 am
#11
[quote]Asside from that I got to ask the people this why are the flight mechanics so futzed. On one hand we can go any direction, unlike a air simulation, and on the other we have limited acceleration. A plane is slowed by drag created by the air. According to newton in space if you keep applying the gas you keep accelerateing. Only until you get near light do relativistic forces come into play. It just struck me as kind of dumb when playing the game. That my vehicle has a locked in speed limit. When the devs did a decent job makeing a three dimensional space enviroment.[/quote]
They had to make it like this because:
- the max speed is a common concept of other space games people are used to fly.
- this is Star Wars, the fights have to be at least somewhat like in the movies. Spaceship combat in a newtonistic setup would look completely different.
- there are too many gamers out there who would not be able to handle a spaceship in a newtonistic setup.
The last part deserves a bit more of information. As a few people know, there were some spacesims already which used a newtonic setup, the best known two of them being Elite- New Frontier and Independence Wars. Both had the same problem, many players saw the enemy, hit the truster button (as they are used to from other space games) to gain incredible speed, just manage to fire a few shots at the enemy and overshoot it by miles.
(If you accelerate at full thrusters for 2k, you'll again need 2k to decelerate at full speed to just stop... not to speak on reverting direction and engaging the target again.)
Many players never realized that in such a setup you have to revert thrust pretty early so you can match speeds when being close to the target. Due to this, they considered the games boring, broken and unplayable, although the real problem was that they were unable to adjust to the physics of the game or simply did not understand them. (Too much realism gives a bad game, it seems...)
Thus i'd say it's the wiser choice to stick with Star Wars realism and fun instead of an exact simulation.
They had to make it like this because:
- the max speed is a common concept of other space games people are used to fly.
- this is Star Wars, the fights have to be at least somewhat like in the movies. Spaceship combat in a newtonistic setup would look completely different.
- there are too many gamers out there who would not be able to handle a spaceship in a newtonistic setup.
The last part deserves a bit more of information. As a few people know, there were some spacesims already which used a newtonic setup, the best known two of them being Elite- New Frontier and Independence Wars. Both had the same problem, many players saw the enemy, hit the truster button (as they are used to from other space games) to gain incredible speed, just manage to fire a few shots at the enemy and overshoot it by miles.
(If you accelerate at full thrusters for 2k, you'll again need 2k to decelerate at full speed to just stop... not to speak on reverting direction and engaging the target again.)
Many players never realized that in such a setup you have to revert thrust pretty early so you can match speeds when being close to the target. Due to this, they considered the games boring, broken and unplayable, although the real problem was that they were unable to adjust to the physics of the game or simply did not understand them. (Too much realism gives a bad game, it seems...)
Thus i'd say it's the wiser choice to stick with Star Wars realism and fun instead of an exact simulation.
Ducimus
Wed Jan 12, 2005 5:12 pm
#12
S-1-l2-H-C wrote:i dunno about an attitude indicator but a velocity vector would be nice so i could judge my angle of attack while turning.
Word.
Kalano
Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:07 pm
#13
Starson wrote:
Yea it's funny when someone who doesn't know what they are talking about totaly makes a a** outta themself's.
After your statement, i see you making an arse out of yourself. kenzo made anormal nonrudequestion. Your an arse for calling him one without knowing why he asked. i never heared of an attitude gauge myself and would have asked the same question. It wasn't out of being rude but just questioning if he was asking the right thing.
so before you go calling everyone an arse, first consider why the person asked a question. But your expliation was good. Ifthat is all you had to say and i wouldn't consider you an arse for your first comment.
Page 1 of 2