Shipwright Archive
Thread: Is YPR completely useless?!
IIscandar wrote:
I use a trackball and I roll like it was going out of style.
Trackball. What's your keymap look like? Yaw/pitch on the ball, roll somewhere else?
idolatry wrote:
IIscandar wrote:
I use a trackball and I roll like it was going out of style.
Trackball. What's your keymap look like? Yaw/pitch on the ball, roll somewhere else?
Yeah, I use the Q and R for roll
IIscandar wrote:
Yeah, I use the Q and R for roll
idolatry wrote:
You use a flightstick?
I'd be interested to see the % of joystick users that use roll vs the % of mouse users. I'd be willing to bet credits that joystick users are more into their rolling banked turns.
I use a stick. I use all 3 axis at the same time usually.
W and S for accel/decell, A and D for rolling.
Message Edited by Ducimus on 07-28-2005 06:56 PM
Ducimus wrote:
I use a stick. I use all 3 axis at the same time usually.
W and S for accel/decell, A and D for rolling.
As quick as i tend to move the stick, id get alot of accidental roll input from the twist.
Diidnt like it there to begin with, felt akward to me. If i had foot pedals, it put the rolling control there. But im not geeky enough to buy foot pedals, so i use the keyboard instead
Yes folks, now you know why we require pilots of high-performance aircraft and space vehicles to have degrees in physics and aerospace engineering. A truly good pilot knows his ship, its limitations, and how it will behave. Brush the dust off those calculus and physics books and have some fun with this.
Dragon942 wrote:
Hey guys, here from the pilot forums.
First off, the posters above where correct. The chassis only determines the YPR accelerations, think of it as the responsiveness to stick inputs. Now it doesn't seem like this is a linear scale as the deifference between 600 and 300 (like JSF to TIE Advanced) is hardly noticable while the difference between 300 and 50 is huge, and is in factthe difference between and advanced fighter and a POB ship.
The physics of this dictates that your rotational displacement (i.e., how much you have turned on a given axis) increases with the square of time as long as you are accelerating. For example, if from a stand still you apply full roll for 3 seconds on a ship with a 600/600/300 "YPR" (i.e., it has a rotational acceleration about the roll axis of 300 tenths of a degree per second per second), then you will be have rolled 135 degrees. Now consider doing the same thing in a ship with a 100/100/50 "YPR"; you will only ahve rolled 22.5 degrees.
Second, in the face past 1-3 hit dogfights that we have these days, YPR of the engine is WAY more important to us pilots. The 119.x speed engines are still a cool novelty and might be just fine for PvE, but I'd never take one into PvP. The sad fact is I'd never take any player crafter engine into PvP because the reactor drain is so much higher than looted or RE'd engines and would be prohibitive to running my engine overloads (which increase speed and turning).
Finally, the speed modifier of the chassis (see the Pliot FAQ for a complete listing) really affectsthe YPR numbers in addition to the top speed. So the YPR x Speed Modifier = the real max YPR, and that max YPR is reached at the best throttle setting for the ship. This is why, no matter the throttle setting,an A-wing turns circles faster than a B-wing, but a Nova Courier turns just as fast as a B-wing, even if it takes longer to accelerate to that rate.
Realize this is your maximum rotational velocity, and I did not take this into account in the example I gave above. Thus, if you have an engine with a roll of 60, then the fastest you'll be able to roll is 60 degrees per second. You are correct, the engine's roll is damped by the speed index, and you will note that the ship display in space specifies your rotational velocity along the three axes of interest in tenths of radians per second (rather than degree per second; a radian is 180/pi or approximately 57.2 degrees).
Given this, you can see that the higher your engine's YPR, the better, as this caps how long you're going to accelerate about a given axis. After that, your ship reaches the cap, then the velocity stops increasing. Once your velocity stops increasing, your rotational displacement only increases linearly with time, rather than to the square of time--big difference.
Message Edited by Jagged-F3l on 07-29-2005 01:01 AM
).Message Edited by Oikaleek on 07-30-2005 07:54 AM
Just commenting on a couple of different (disjointed) points from throughout the thread...
First, to the OP:
PYR is very important (to me) and, like some other pilots, I would trade top speed for maneuverability. Top Speed is important when flying from point A to B. It's also important if your ship is a bomber that is taking on capital ships or gunships - where you're more likely using boom and zoom tactics as opposed to dogfighting. For fighters or interceptors that dogfight with guns and in most cases, even when just using a missle platform, maneuverability is key.
A TIE bomber can out-turn an A-wing at low speeds. The A is a pig at low throttle settings... it has a great turning ability, but onlywithin a very narrow (high)throttle range. The X is more maneuverable throughout a broader throttle range than the A, for example. But if a pilot can keep an A within it's turning performance envelope, then all bets are off.
Pilots that give up Roll in exchange for better Pitch and Yaw performance are flying according to their personal flight 'style'. A certain class of pilots will find a better (read: tighter) turn radius if using all 3 axes to their fullest in mostturn-in scenarios. My guess is that pilots that put more into P and Y are either 1) not using a joystick+rudder combo (or a joystick with built-in roll controls), 2) haven't truly started thinking in 3D, or 3) been told when they started out by another pilot or shipwright that P and Y are more important than R and, based on that (flawed?) advice, haven't ever looked back.
Different ships have different purposes. I don't think anyone can say there is one single 'best' ship from a given faction (or from all factions). Some ships will work acceptably in more scenarios, but I firmly believe in purpose-built platforms. That is, designing/fitting a given ship+weapons loadout for optimal (not just 'acceptable') performance for a given mission.But part of the decision about chassis/platform for a given mission is, in part, also determined by a pilot's ability to use a given chassis to it's fullest (and for it's purpose).