Pilot Archive
Thread: YPR on chassis vs engine
Page 1 of 2
Bermag
Wed Jun 22, 2005 6:29 am
#1
What does the numbers really mean and how do they interact with each other. Is the ypr on engine the speed you have when turning (well when doing yaw/pitch/roll) and the ypr on ship the rate you can turn. If that is the case would this be a good explanation:
- Theypr on chassis - turning rate is the radius thatyou will turn when doing a 360 deg turn. If you havehigher numberit means you will do a smaller circle than when you have a lower number?
- The ypr on engine is the speed you will do when you are actively turning.
Then we have the YPR hull stats which you see when examining the ship stats in space. Are these derived numbers?
I have not seen any explanation which really make sense (and at least not explaing the numbers).
I have seen some explanation that ypr on engine compared to max speed will give you the optimal throttle to give you best turning speed.
Please explain the maths behind this. I know how it work when flying but it would be nice to understand the numbers.
Rorenikibi
Wed Jun 22, 2005 6:41 am
#2
Its not even as simple as you make it sound.
Each engine has an inherent YPR value, as does each chassis. The simple version of this is that your overall maneuverability is a function of both values in concert, BUT there's an extra variable. Each chassis also comes with a "sweet spot" where its maneuverability is also affected by its current velocity.
So now the equation, roughly put, is a factor ofEngine YPR,Chassis YPR, Relative Velocity to Maximum, and Chassis Optimum Relative Velocity.
Good luck with that, none of the CORV numbers are published.
LeaphChausew
Wed Jun 22, 2005 7:21 am
#3
r,p,y acceleration on a chassis is the time rate of change that it takes for your fighter to respond to your reactions into a manouver. This is a fixed value on each different starfighter type. JSF, Greivous and the heavy starter ship variants have the highest value, POB ships have the lowest etc.
r,p,y (max) and r,p,y engine rate of manouverability is the maximum angle from the forward horizontal which a ship can manouver to. This is dependant on engine type and lvl. Higher the level usually means higher r,p,y and speed but at cost to increased mass. Crafted engines though better than they were, don't really cut it for pvp situations when flying against someone with a quality re'd engine no matter what the speed.
Both of these are to be taken into account along with the inertia that your fghter experiences when going into a manouver. I.E the inertia that a TIE Oppressor experiences when turning can cause it to 'fly sideways' because it has a low r,p,y acceleration so reacts slower, but due to it's high mass you can fit in a nice lvl 10 re'd engine with r,p,y rates in the high 70's, 80's range easy so in a turning fight can be very effective. With ships like the A-wing with a lower mass, a level 8 engine with r,p,y in the 70's/high 70's can be squeezed in so it's r,p,y rate will be lower than say a maxed out TIE Opressor so it'll turn at a lesser angle and due to it's lesser mass and therefore inertia, it won't 'turret' (fly sideways) as effectively but....it makes up for it with a way higher r,p,y acceleration so you can get your ship into that manouver quicker than say a TIE Oppressor.
IShips like the JSF, Greivous and heavy starter ship variants I think are a bit of a gey area. I mean they have the best r,p,y accelerations in the game and have a good mass so a high r,p,y rate lvl 10 engine will squeeze in comfortable with room for a half decent blaster or two but this is what I think.
1. with a high rate high acceleration they'd be unhittable because they outdo every other fighter in both fields of manouverability which'd be higly unbalanced or...
2. [and I'm inclined to think this even just as a saving grace so I don't go and cry in the corner about my A-wing being made obsolete] Ok...so a fighter with really high r,p,y acceleration and reeallly high r,p,y manouverability rates. Now consider a good pilot. A pilot with amazing reflexes etc. Put them in a turning fight in a pvp situation and you'd think they'd be unstoppable but lets look for a moment at inertia and the amount of actual space they'll displace whiel executing these moves...
High r,p,y rate + high r,p,y acceleration + high piloting reflexes + small amount of inertia so very little amount of flying sideways and turreting etc = VERY LITTLE ACTUAL SPACE THE FIGHTER DISPLACES NO MATTER WHAT THE MANOUVER. (as I see it)
So erm...ok...all these fancy moves but the thing isn't moving anywhere making it easier to hit them even if the green targetting reticle says otherwise. Please issue me with thoughts on this. Its just somthing which has crossed my mind but so far I only seen people using lower r,p,y rate engines in JSF etc so havn't experienced it really yet. From a distance, I think in a pvp situation, a fighter deomonstrating that kind of manouverability would be fairly easy to take out.
-Leaph
LeaphChausew
Wed Jun 22, 2005 7:24 am
#4
And yeh I forgot the sweet spot...each chassis turns best at different % throttle. In an A-wing it's somewhere between 90% and 95% throttle, with an X-wing around 65% etc so you're optimal turning velocity will be different with each ship so turning circle radius will vary greatly along with what I said above and oh the JSFseems to handle well at any throttle so erm..argh..complications.
But yeh. I stand by what I said until someone shows me I'm wrong in which case cool. 
SheenaBrelya
Wed Jun 22, 2005 10:29 am
#5
LeaphChausew wrote:
High r,p,y rate + high r,p,y acceleration + high piloting reflexes + small amount of inertia so very little amount of flying sideways and turreting etc = VERY LITTLE ACTUAL SPACE THE FIGHTER DISPLACES NO MATTER WHAT THE MANOUVER. (as I see it)
I disagree with your conclusion. I think you are failing to include one more modifier on the chassis side - ship acceleration.
If a B-Wing spins as fast as it can, it eally doesn't 'go' anywhere, because it is moving at such a low speed and trying to turn in a tight arc.
Now consider a JSF/Bel and do the same, with an RE'd L10 Engine running about 80 PYR and 100 speed. Yes, the turning arc is smaller, but the ship can actually keep up a decent speed while turning, since the ship acceleration is high enough to overcome the wild inertial modifiers. In essense, while you may be turning fast, you are moving fast at the same time, so the total distance traveled, or area displaced, during one complete turn does not end up varying all that much when compared to other ships using similar equipement, turning at their respective ideal turn speeds.
As for the thread's initial question, I've heard reports that, of the chassis numbers and Engine numbers, one was related to the 'max' turn speeds, while the other set was related to the 'acceleration' rate of turning (how fast you go from straight flight to max turning). I have nothing to back it up, it's just what I remember reading some time.
Shona
LeaphChausew
Wed Jun 22, 2005 4:04 pm
#6
the 'max' unit has nothing to do with speed. It is definitly an angle related quantity. As for what you just said...well I think you just verified my theory further. Yeh..a ship turning fast and moving fast kind of cancels the effect out as you'll be turning quickly around a fast axis so you won't in fact be displacing all that much space.
Chassis acceleration is a fixed quantity and the engine has no altering factor over it whatsoever. Acceleration of a chassis just allows you to react into whatever manouver quicker.
SheenaBrelya
Wed Jun 22, 2005 7:26 pm
#7
LeaphChausew wrote:
As for what you just said...well I think you just verified my theory further. Yeh..a ship turning fast and moving fast kind of cancels the effect out as you'll be turning quickly around a fast axis so you won't in fact be displacing all that much space.
What I intended to say was that a ship moving slowly and turning fast will not 'go' very far, while a ship moving fast and turning slow will be making a pretty wide circle. The slow turning/slow speed (B-Wing), the fast turning/fast speed (JSF/Bel), and anything properly scaled between them all have similar results (somewhere between fast/slow and slow/fast), just different frequencies.
Shona
LeaphChausew
Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:32 am
#8
Hmm yeh, I suppose actually. Plus I guess mytheory deals in absolutes..I mean, a pilot will not be using the same degree of motion all the time. If they did that, large amount of displacement or not..they'd be killed from the uniformity of their actions.
entrailsgalore2
Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:24 am
#9
I still dont understand the point of having the ship chassis having pyr stats and speed stats..it should be adjusted by the engine's stats and engine stats alone. but if your shipp is a pyr of 600/600/300 that would be .60% of yoru engine's PY stat and .30 of your engines role( I believe). So theoredically if ship chassis were 1.00% on PYR, an engine with a PYR of 50 would turn very nicely unoverloaded...and a PYR of 80 would just be too much to handle, I think lol.
Rorenikibi
Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:54 am
#10
entrailsgalore2 wrote:
I still dont understand the point of having the ship chassis having pyr stats and speed stats..it should be adjusted by the engine's stats and engine stats alone. but if your shipp is a pyr of 600/600/300 that would be .60% of yoru engine's PY stat and .30 of your engines role( I believe). So theoredically if ship chassis were 1.00% on PYR, an engine with a PYR of 50 would turn very nicely unoverloaded...and a PYR of 80 would just be too much to handle, I think lol.
They tried that in the early part of the Beta. We had a situation where a Y-Wing/B-Wing could fly like an A-Wing. VERY little distinction in the chassis when it was all on the engine.
No, chassis adjustment to performance makes sense, they just need to include defenses in the mix to fully balance the ships out.
entrailsgalore2
Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:29 pm
#11
to you it may. It doesnt make sense to me. My honda CRX will go faster with a faster engine, not because of teh faster chassis.
SheenaBrelya
Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:31 pm
#12
entrailsgalore2 wrote:
My honda CRX will go faster with a faster engine, not because of teh faster chassis.
Wow, what a perfect opportunity to take a post, add a few thoughts, and throw it back in to the poster's face. Not that I'm really spiteful, it's just fun sometimes, especially when the post is as weak as this one.
A faster engine makes your Honda go faster. A faster engine in an A-Wing makes an A-Wing go faster.
Take the engine out of your Honda and load it into a Mack truck with a loaded trailer being towed. Your engine might move that Mack truck, but not at the speed or acceleration that it moves your Honda.
Why the hell would you expect to be able to move your A-Wing engine into a B-Wing and get the same kind of speed, acceleration, or handling characteristics?
To say that the chassis should not affect speed or PYR is silly. To remove those modifiers, you would have to implement components that only work for specific chassis types - light fighter engines, medium fighter engines, bomber engines, freighter engines, etcetera. That would become the only way to keep heavy ships acting like heavy ships and light ships acting like light ships when being flown.
Shona
entrailsgalore2
Fri Jun 24, 2005 4:40 pm
#13
because in space, you arent limited by gravity. If I hold on to a ship thats 100000 times bigge rthan me, and I exhale...I will move that ship. Why? becaus etehr eis no friction in space or gravity, so there is no " weight". you could fit a lawnmower engine onto a shuttle and it would move the shuttle and teh shuttle would pick up momentum. Thats why in "sapce" I dont get why a chassislimits speed or PYR.
Message Edited by entrailsgalore2 on 06-24-2005 04:43 PM
Page 1 of 2