CR's answer from today's WMH re: Newtonian physics

  • BREAK3R

    Posts: 4313

    Posted:
    Edited: by BREAK3R
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    What Baxter said is completely valid. If you are traveling forward at 300 mph and orient yourself in the opposite direction even a "flight computer" cannot instantaneously make your flight vector match your orientation. It takes time and acceleration and time to do so. And this is a space sim so things like this play out in the game. According to Chris, it was said that you will be able to use this to your advantage. For example I have a vector away from you but I can orient my weapons to face you even so, and I would be able to take your ship out in this manner, even while my velocity is pointed in a direction away from you.

    It would be valid if that was how the flight computer in Star Citizen worked. But that will not be the case. This exactly was the reason why I enumerated options on how to implement the flight computer.

    To do what you just wrote, you will have to actually DISABLE the flight computer. CR is going for the WW2 turning dogfight experience, which as you probably see is NOT what you described.

    Which also means, that players that do what you described will have a real huge advantage vs. players that play the turning dogfight game, which leaves a question mark in my mind if disabling the flight computer will work in combat at all, or if players are EXPECTED to fly newtonian in combat to stand a chance, which does not make sense with what CR said is the vision for his game (and also based on his prior games).

    So, really, we do not know yet how combat will be. We only know that the underlying base will be newtonian physics.

    Maybe newtonian can only be used out of combat, maybe it can only be used for 5 seconds every minute, maybe we can disable the flight computer forever... who knows. We will see.
    You are IN SPACE, No WW2 in atmo combat. No aerodynamics. Just raw power and maneuverings thrusters. This 'flight computer' you keep talking about is partly in you imagination. The avionics package will help the pilot coordinate gimbaled thrusters so that you can orient your craft on 3 axes (actually 4, it's a quaternion), but you will still control the main engine thrust and it doesn't change the laws of physics.

    I will be doing rapid end-over-end flips and sending a missile straight at you if you are stupid enough to WW2 dogfight me. See the episode "Scar" in the re-imagined "Battlestar Gallactica". Starbuck does exactly that type of manoeuvre.
    Azrael Bexter, CEO of Razed Earth Inc
  • BREAK3R

    Posts: 4313

    Posted:
    Edited: by BREAK3R
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    Everyone that says "fully Newtonian physics" forgets that in space, while there is a vacuum, there isn't only just one force acting on any single object at a time.

    Gravitational pulls from every object/mass are pulling every other object/mass... While at the same time thrusters are propelling the ships into one direction, the ship itself is attracting every object near it and being attracted by every object near it....

    So basically if you apply thrust to a ship in space in a straight line and cut the systems, the ship will deviate from the straight line just by the existence of space stations, moons, planets, stars...

    If you're in deep space far away from any other mass' gravitational pool, then I could see straight, energy persistent movement without thrusters.

    In terms of local combat, the fighters share the same frame of reference, gravity doesn't enter into it. We can both be in orbit around a planet and still have a battle. It's like being in a plane going 850km/hr and still being able to throw a ball in the air and catch it.

    As to orbital dynamics and gravity wells, there has been no word on this yet but I'm guessing they will be implemented. But the scale of these things dwarf fighters and battleships alike. They are on a totally different scale.
    Azrael Bexter, CEO of Razed Earth Inc
  • Remf

    Posts: 369

    Posted:
    Posted:
    So I still haven 't seen a concrete answer to the following three questions, given that there is a max velocity allowed in the game:

    1). is it a universal max velocity, or set by [hull/powerplant/something else]. i.e. can any ship accelerate to the "maximum", given enough time?
    2). will velocities add? e.g. shoot a missile/cannon/etc. from a "stationary" vessel, vs. from one at max velocity, will the projectiles have the same velocity?
    3). what is the reference frame that the maximum velocity will be relative to? Universal "space" coordinate? Other vessels in the same instance? Something else?

    The implementation of the above design features will have huge implications for how combat will take place, how weapons will balance, etc...
    AEGIS:Avenger|Retaliator|Gladius|Reclaimer|Redeemer XI'AN:Scout
    ANVIL:Hornet S R M|Gladi|Carrack ORIGIN:M50|315P|325A|350R|890J
    DRAKE:CutlassBlue|Caterpillar|Herald BANU:Merchantman
    RSI:AuroraLX|AuroraLN|ConniePHX|Orion MISC:FreelancerMIS|Starfarer +
  • BREAK3R

    Posts: 4313

    Posted:
    Edited: by BREAK3R
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    So I still haven 't seen a concrete answer to the following three questions, given that there is a max velocity allowed in the game:

    1). is it a universal max velocity, or set by [hull/powerplant/something else]. i.e. can any ship accelerate to the "maximum", given enough time?
    2). will velocities add? e.g. shoot a missile/cannon/etc. from a "stationary" vessel, vs. from one at max velocity, will the projectiles have the same velocity?
    3). what is the reference frame that the maximum velocity will be relative to? Universal "space" coordinate? Other vessels in the same instance? Something else?

    The implementation of the above design features will have huge implications for how combat will take place, how weapons will balance, etc...

    1. No, just for combat. Except the light speed barrier of course.
    2. Yes, of course.
    3. I assume the instance. Say, an orbital profile or local area of space.

    In fact, I would like to see the frame of reference slide, ie, the average of all of the velocity vectors is the frame velocity, and each object 's velocity in the frame is relative to the frame. It would allow for long pursuits and even frame merging and splitting.
    Azrael Bexter, CEO of Razed Earth Inc
  • Toast

    Moderator

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Man. I just hope that 'Newtonian lite' really does just mean classical mechanics with speed limits. I'm no physicist... if we have to understand thermodynamics to understand heat and stealth, I'm in trouble.
    Anything that I post as a moderator will appear in purple or orange. Otherwise, I'm posting as a backer, like you. I'm not part of the ship stats team, so I don't have answers to those!
  • BREAK3R

    Posts: 4313

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Man. I just hope that 'Newtonian lite' really does just mean classical mechanics with speed limits. I'm no physicist... if we have to understand thermodynamics to understand heat and stealth, I'm in trouble.

    I don't think it will come to that, and there will be mechanics and engineers that can solve emission problems or even overheating. Just like hiring a mechanic in the real world when your radiator goes south.
    Azrael Bexter, CEO of Razed Earth Inc
  • JazAero

    Posts: 1994

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Bexter:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    So I still haven 't seen a concrete answer to the following three questions, given that there is a max velocity allowed in the game:

    1). is it a universal max velocity, or set by [hull/powerplant/something else]. i.e. can any ship accelerate to the "maximum", given enough time?
    2). will velocities add? e.g. shoot a missile/cannon/etc. from a "stationary" vessel, vs. from one at max velocity, will the projectiles have the same velocity?
    3). what is the reference frame that the maximum velocity will be relative to? Universal "space" coordinate? Other vessels in the same instance? Something else?

    The implementation of the above design features will have huge implications for how combat will take place, how weapons will balance, etc...

    1. No, just for combat. Except the light speed barrier of course.
    2. Yes, of course.
    3. I assume the instance. Say, an orbital profile or local area of space.

    In fact, I would like to see the frame of reference slide, ie, the average of all of the velocity vectors is the frame velocity, and each object 's velocity in the frame is relative to the frame. It would allow for long pursuits and even frame merging and splitting.
    all I know is if I see a set of fins on a missile I am going to be very upset.
    Which makes me wonder, if he is going to apply the same Newtonian physics to the weapons? Because if he is, it is going to make things quite interesting to say the least.
    JDdetul.gif"A picture may be worth 1000 words, but a 3-D model is worth 1000 pictures." -- JaZaero
  • BREAK3R

    Posts: 4313

    Posted:
    Edited: by BREAK3R
    Posted:
    Edited:
    Everyone interested in this topic should watch episode 15, season 2 of the re-imagined "Battlestar Galactica", "Scar". It contains EVERYTHING we have been talking about here. BTW, Kara is flying a Viper Mk II and Kat a Viper Mk VII.
    Azrael Bexter, CEO of Razed Earth Inc
  • Nov8tr

    Posts: 1014

    Posted:
    Posted:
    IMO the game mechanics will allow ordinary people to play with their mouse and keyboard without too much trouble. But that combo in all likeliness will not work for heavy pirates or PVP. This is where it starts to get more complicated. A decent joystick setup will get you thru most PVE pirates/enemies but then it gets to the hardcore players the story changes. This will start requiring you to understand the game mechanics and have the appropiate setup. Personally I'm going to be running a Saitek X52. I would love a X65 or a Thrustmaster HOTAS, but to be honest. I don't have $400 to $600 to throw down. I'm on SSD so money isn't just tight, it doesn't just squeak, it screams and then sneaks month to month. :) To get that last little "umph" is going to require a little more than standard knowledge and skill to get. Well good luck! Fly safe and sleep well!!
    MG GuildThe CONVOY
  • croberts68

    Developer

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Nothing short of PvE vs PvP gets everyone riled up like the flight model!

    Here's some succinct answers to help put / remove my many "umms" and "ahhs" from the Forum Feedback section of Wing Man's Hangar.

    1) The physics simulation is Newtonian

    2) There is no drag.

    3) The IFCS (Intelligent Flight Control system) generally handles taking the pilot's inputs (desired pitch, yaw, roll and speed) and translates them into actions for the thrusters and ship to take to adjust the ship's velocity vector in the direction the pilot wishes to go. This system will do it within human acceptable tolerances (it will not change your velocity vector in such a way as it could cause harm to the pilot)

    4) Slowing down is caused by the pilot telling his IFCS that he wants to be traveling at a lower speed. The IFCS then communicates with the ships thrusters to adjust the ship's velocity accordingly.

    5) If you turn you engines and IFCS off you will continue to coast at the same velocity.

    6) Fuel is consumed by using your thrusters or main engines. If you coast you will not be using fuel, but making velocity vector changes will consume fuel.

    7) More advanced IFCS systems will allow you to turn of parts of its overrides or allow it to interpret you inputs differently - for instance you could tell it you want to go into an "orientation" not "vectoring" mode where it will take your joystick inputs as solely ship orientation inputs and not try to correct your ship's velocity vector to be aligned in the direction your ship is pointing (the famous Battlestar Galactica maneuver).

    8) We will limit the top speed of ships you can fly for technical issues (physics engines have problems when the numbers get too big) and fun - figuring out an intercept course for an opponent traveling at 0.2 speed of light (which is our fictional max for practical spaceflight in 2943) maybe be challenging if you're a mathematician or physicist but not what I call fun gameplay.

    9) This top speed will be less than the top speed of weapons.

    10) Top speed will probably be dependent on ship class but we haven't balanced this so it may be a matter of all ships having the same cap but the smaller faster ones can reach that limit much quicker (and therefore put some distance between them and their pursuers even if they go to max). This needs to be tuned so that people with the right kind of ships can run from a fight. The idea is that once you get enough separation between you and a hostile you can make the jump to autopilot / warp speed (using the Star Trek term), which is how you cover big distances in-system (essentially at that 0.2 lightspeed (c) number I mentioned). Just at these speeds you're not maneuvering - you're just accelerating and decelerating in a straight line. Think of it as human (player) controlled flight for the lower combat / docking speeds and then when wanting to warp to a destination (say a planet or a jump point) you hand control over to your ship's flight computer which handles plotting the trajectory and accelerating you to the 0.2 c speed that a RSI quantum drive can achieve.

    11) I do know what G-Force is :-) I use the term as a measure of acceleration on the human body as its good short hand for people to grasp the concept of forces acting on a body when accelerating and decelerating. You may be interested to know that "..The accelerations that are not produced by gravity are termed proper accelerations, and it is only these that are measured in g-force units. They cause stresses and strains on objects. Because of these strains, large g-forces may be destructive..." Occasionally people think it is only to do with gravity and earth bound flight but that's actually incorrect - its just that's the case we're most familiar with. And yes these forces come into play when accelerating and decelerating in space and until we develop some system to increase our tolerances to the effects of this acceleration they will be the limiting factor on how aggressively we could change the velocity vector of a ship, irregardless of whether we are in the atmosphere or not. Its also interesting to note that we're built to withstand much greater accelerations in certain directions - modern day pilots can withstand 9 G but much less negative Gs. Its why you see pilots rolling and pulling back on the stick when attempting aggressive maneuvers rather than pushing forward or yawing with a rudder. The same will be true in space. We're going to factor in G-Force in the simulation, and allow pilots to push the boundaries (or switch the IFCS safety off) in search for a little advantage, but beware if you back (or red) out in a dogfight you may come to floating in space next to the smoking wreck of your ship!

    -Chris
  • mald

    Posts: 374

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Nothing short of PvE vs PvP gets everyone riled up like the flight model!

    Here's some succinct answers to help put / remove my many "umms" and "ahhs" from the Forum Feedback section of Wing Man's Hangar.

    1) The physics simulation is Newtonian

    2) There is no drag.

    3) The IFCS (Intelligent Flight Control system) generally handles taking the pilot's inputs (desired pitch, yaw, roll and speed) and translates them into actions for the thrusters and ship to take to adjust the ship's velocity vector in the direction the pilot wishes to go. This system will do it within human acceptable tolerances (it will not change your velocity vector in such a way as it could cause harm to the pilot)

    4) Slowing down is caused by the pilot telling his IFCS that he wants to be traveling at a lower speed. The IFCS then communicates with the ships thrusters to adjust the ship's velocity accordingly.

    5) If you turn you engines and IFCS off you will continue to coast at the same velocity.

    6) Fuel is consumed by using your thrusters or main engines. If you coast you will not be using fuel, but making velocity vector changes will consume fuel.

    7) More advanced IFCS systems will allow you to turn of parts of its overrides or allow it to interpret you inputs differently - for instance you could tell it you want to go into an "orientation" not "vectoring" mode where it will take your joystick inputs as solely ship orientation inputs and not try to correct your ship's velocity vector to be aligned in the direction your ship is pointing (the famous Battlestar Galactica maneuver).

    8) We will limit the top speed of ships you can fly for technical issues (physics engines have problems when the numbers get too big) and fun - figuring out an intercept course for an opponent traveling at 0.2 speed of light (which is our fictional max for practical spaceflight in 2943) maybe be challenging if you're a mathematician or physicist but not what I call fun gameplay.

    9) This top speed will be less than the top speed of weapons.

    10) Top speed will probably be dependent on ship class but we haven't balanced this so it may be a matter of all ships having the same cap but the smaller faster ones can reach that limit much quicker (and therefore put some distance between them and their pursuers even if they go to max). This needs to be tuned so that people with the right kind of ships can run from a fight. The idea is that once you get enough separation between you and a hostile you can make the jump to autopilot / warp speed (using the Star Trek term), which is how you cover big distances in-system (essentially at that 0.2 lightspeed (c) number I mentioned). Just at these speeds you're not maneuvering - you're just accelerating and decelerating in a straight line. Think of it as human (player) controlled flight for the lower combat / docking speeds and then when wanting to warp to a destination (say a planet or a jump point) you hand control over to your ship's flight computer which handles plotting the trajectory and accelerating you to the 0.2 c speed that a RSI quantum drive can achieve.

    11) I do know what G-Force is :-) I use the term as a measure of acceleration on the human body as its good short hand for people to grasp the concept of forces acting on a body when accelerating and decelerating. You may be interested to know that "..The accelerations that are not produced by gravity are termed proper accelerations, and it is only these that are measured in g-force units. They cause stresses and strains on objects. Because of these strains, large g-forces may be destructive..." Occasionally people think it is only to do with gravity and earth bound flight but that's actually incorrect - its just that's the case we're most familiar with. And yes these forces come into play when accelerating and decelerating in space and until we develop some system to increase our tolerances to the effects of this acceleration they will be the limiting factor on how aggressively we could change the velocity vector of a ship, irregardless of whether we are in the atmosphere or not. Its also interesting to note that we're built to withstand much greater accelerations in certain directions - modern day pilots can withstand 9 G but much less negative Gs. Its why you see pilots rolling and pulling back on the stick when attempting aggressive maneuvers rather than pushing forward or yawing with a rudder. The same will be true in space. We're going to factor in G-Force in the simulation, and allow pilots to push the boundaries (or switch the IFCS safety off) in search for a little advantage, but beware if you back (or red) out in a dogfight you may come to floating in space next to the smoking wreck of your ship!

    -Chris

    thank you sir
  • JazAero

    Posts: 1994

    Posted:
    Posted:
    thank you very much Chris for clearing that up for all of us
    JDdetul.gif"A picture may be worth 1000 words, but a 3-D model is worth 1000 pictures." -- JaZaero
  • bongoau

    Posts: 1841

    Posted:
    Posted:
    This raises a couple of questions.

    - Will I need to select a destination to "go to warp" or can I just point my nose at the black and gun it?

    - If I disable a ship's thrusters will it continue at the same speed it was travelling forever? Can the tractor beam be used to slow a disabled but moving target without harming my ship?
  • Nov8tr

    Posts: 1014

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Thank you CR for a excellent description of the the games fighting info. So my idea of doing the IW2 EOC and Starlancer was right on. Mondo kewl. Between those and War Thunder I should do OK for a old buzzard. My daily battles of Hawken should keep up my eye hand coordination and my response times. :) Much appreciated Chris and take care!!
    MG GuildThe CONVOY
  • Shynobyn

    Posts: 100

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Yeah that answer wasn't very enlightening and not phisically correct at all, my thoughts on this is that we will get Newtonian flight with a speed limit just for the sake of doffighting but they still haven't figured an explanation for that.
  • Matrim

    Posts: 155

    Posted:
    Edited: by Matrim
    Posted:
    Edited:
    Thanks, Chris!

    So, from what I'm taking of this is we could set our speed and drift to a location. But to actually go anywhere pretty far in a reasonable/realistic amount of time (by the standard of "fun"), we will have to be burning fuel with the quantum drive to get us to the 0.2c speed. That sounds pretty cool to me, actually. I don't know...maybe I'm lazy. (I know I'm lazy.)
    Sa souvraya niende misain ye...
  • ChiSquared

    Posts: 130

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I'm really excited to see how the acceleration blackout mechanic will work. It will be great if rolling ship will actually be an important part of combat. Thanks for posting Mr. Roberts
  • Pym

    Posts: 319

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Thank you Chris for the explanation :)

    See you in ... The Verse :)
    11ihn28.jpgtmP2pvYnukBi
  • Zephyr

    Posts: 1562

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Bexter:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    So I still haven 't seen a concrete answer to the following three questions, given that there is a max velocity allowed in the game:

    1). is it a universal max velocity, or set by [hull/powerplant/something else]. i.e. can any ship accelerate to the "maximum", given enough time?
    2). will velocities add? e.g. shoot a missile/cannon/etc. from a "stationary" vessel, vs. from one at max velocity, will the projectiles have the same velocity?
    3). what is the reference frame that the maximum velocity will be relative to? Universal "space" coordinate? Other vessels in the same instance? Something else?

    The implementation of the above design features will have huge implications for how combat will take place, how weapons will balance, etc...

    1. No, just for combat. Except the light speed barrier of course.
    2. Yes, of course.
    3. I assume the instance. Say, an orbital profile or local area of space.

    In fact, I would like to see the frame of reference slide, ie, the average of all of the velocity vectors is the frame velocity, and each object 's velocity in the frame is relative to the frame. It would allow for long pursuits and even frame merging and splitting.
    If velocities are additive, shouldn't there be a physical limit to the G's the missile structural material can tolerate in terms of turning/maneuver?

    If fins wont guide the missiles anymore due to space/no airflow, wont the internal missile fuel be limiting to how much missiles can maneuver/change directions? Seems like they should incorporate this into missile defense maneuvers.

    Even though missiles can pull higher G's than the spaceship, constant direction changes may cause missile to deplete its fuel reserve. Im guessing though, it'll reach you before all that though.
    Qq0NcTk.jpg
  • SirScorpion

    Posts: 2479

    Posted:
    Edited: by SirScorpion
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    Nothing short of PvE vs PvP gets everyone riled up like the flight model!

    -Chris

    Thank you putting this together, sorta what i expected from collecting all the bits of information round but this is now great to have a single solid reference point.

    I do however hope that combat speeds are indeed high, and by high i mean world war 2 "late war" speeds will make it perfect 700kph as this adds smaller window to kill, ergo making armament more lethal instead of space pinata and bullet sponges.

    Another note will be how will Advanced IFCS be balanced, in a world where world war 2 style combat is the standard, being able to do the BSG maneuvers is a significant advantage which might render Normal IFCS obsolete. unless Armament is lethal enough to take out a target before it finishes its full AOA "angle of attack" rotation.

    Another way is basically turning all RCS thrusters into full manual control, "basicly" the player needs to manually compensate thrusters to maintain a good AOA, if that is the case then it becomes hard to maintain a good bead on the target past Very simple maneuvers.

    Either way cant wait for the real thing. and i do hope there is a " physical rules of engagement" document in the works which dictates the pillars of how combat would work. a document like this will make ships and equipment have specific and balanced roles using weapon evolution cycles of counter and counter measure, please CR i do hope that combat is does not simply revolve around the rule of cool, but a more cohesive battle space and objective/ role system.

    PS. More speed Must = Larger vector/AOA turn. please if anything this needs to be the rule in SC, soo many Space sims screw this up but it kinda woks for Single player. Mplayer is a different animal

    tMo1z4h.jpg
  • Matrim

    Posts: 155

    Posted:
    Edited: by Matrim
    Posted:
    Edited:
    @Zephyr, I would guess the limit in the game for a missile's turn rate will be some arbitrary number. Though, I would be happily surprised if it was based off of thrust/weight, g-forces (probably the least concern for what is basically just a small computer in a rocket), thrust vectoring with maneuvering thrusters, and/or speed.

    I assume increasing the Line-of-sight rate is optimal in trying to deal with guided missiles in game. This may make some ships, like the 350r, which I'm assuming to have a great thrust-to-weight ratio, as well as good turning capabilities, and great acceleration, a better option for out maneuvering an attack.
    Sa souvraya niende misain ye...
  • Tosk

    Posts: 2301

    Posted:
    Edited: by Tosk
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    Nothing short of PvE vs PvP gets everyone riled up like the flight model!

    [snipped for neatness]

    We're going to factor in G-Force in the simulation, and allow pilots to push the boundaries (or switch the IFCS safety off) in search for a little advantage, but beware if you black (or red) out in a dogfight you may come to floating in space next to the smoking wreck of your ship!

    -Chris

    A magnificent post. Thank you for weighing in on this issue.

    I'm actually excited to find out that you'll be simulating both black out and red outs. :-)

    Edit: for some reason your post doesn't register as a staff post, and isn't on the front page.
    Aurora // Avenger // M50 // 350R // Freelancer // F7A-M Super Hornet // Gladiator // Starfarer // Retaliator // Constellation // Vanduul Scythe // Idris-M // Xi'An Khartu // Gladius // Herald // Redeemer // Carrack // Mustang // Orion
  • Zabulon

    Posts: 4875

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Yeah that answer wasn't very enlightening and not phisically correct at all, my thoughts on this is that we will get Newtonian flight with a speed limit just for the sake of doffighting but they still haven't figured an explanation for that.

    wehastrouble07.jpg

  • Reach

    Posts: 2083

    Posted:
    Edited: by Reach
    Posted:
    Edited:
    I thought the answer on Wingman's Hangar was perfectly clear, it was just wrapped up in a nice story. I also think some people on here need to play some of Chris' old games.

    If they didn't do a nice story, Wingman's Hangar would end up like:

    Welcome to Wingman's Hangar, my weight is 210lbs, everyone is busy, the answers to the first 5 questions asked on the thread are 1. Yes, 2. Yes, 3. No, 4. Undecided, 5. Same as Wing Commander. This is Steve our new hire, he's an artist, 48, male, working on Avenger, loves Sim City, goodbye.

    Simon "SkyKiller" Reach

    F7C-M Super Hornet
    Aegis Retaliator - The Ellie Day
    Rogue Squadron | WWW.SC-ROGUES.COM
  • JazAero

    Posts: 1994

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Yeah that answer wasn't very enlightening and not phisically correct at all, my thoughts on this is that we will get Newtonian flight with a speed limit just for the sake of doffighting but they still haven't figured an explanation for that.

    Allow me to offer one.

    The way I see this working small ships has X amount of acceleration capacity. However, it only has Y amount of cooling capacity.

    Larger ships accelerate slower, but have a larger cooling capacity.

    Therefore all ships ultimately have the same top speed. Before the engines overheat and you cannot accelerate any further. The same goes for fuel.

    In this way they can maintain Newtonian physics and have a plausible explanation for top speed. Without breaking any physics rules.

    I hope Chris is doing it this way and if not, read this post and takes it under advisement.
    JDdetul.gif"A picture may be worth 1000 words, but a 3-D model is worth 1000 pictures." -- JaZaero
  • Trondster

    Posts: 1345

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    3) The IFCS (Intelligent Flight Control system) generally handles taking the pilot's inputs (desired pitch, yaw, roll and speed) and translates them into actions for the thrusters and ship to take to adjust the ship's velocity vector in the direction the pilot wishes to go. This system will do it within human acceptable tolerances (it will not change your velocity vector in such a way as it could cause harm to the pilot)

    (..)

    7) More advanced IFCS systems will allow you to turn of parts of its overrides or allow it to interpret you inputs differently - for instance you could tell it you want to go into an "orientation" not "vectoring" mode where it will take your joystick inputs as solely ship orientation inputs and not try to correct your ship's velocity vector to be aligned in the direction your ship is pointing (the famous Battlestar Galactica maneuver).

    Thanks for the great answers, Chris!

    I'm really excited about the more advanced IFCS systems you mention - that we can turn off parts of its overrides - hopefully I'd be able to "oversteer" if I wish, "skidding" around the turn sideways - this should allow me to keep my guns on the enemy, or maybe achieve tighter vector changes, as I can direct the more powerful thrusters causing g-forces in directions where the crew can withstand higher g-forces.

    I hope that the game will support multiple simultaneous control devices, so that I can use several different brand joysticks simultaneously.

    I also hope that the game will support "full" 6DoF - the manoeuvre thrusters will have to be quite powerful to allow "aircraft-like" turning using the IFCS, and it would be fun to be able to control those thrusters directly using multiple input devices.
    Good that you have implemented blackouts or redouts if the pilots try to pull off too creative manoeuvres.


    And - thank you for the information regarding the "warp" mode with higher speeds - I was wondering how you were going to implement that. I guess there will be a special "warp mode" to explain the acceleration to (and deceleration from) such speeds - after all it would take a week to accelerate to 0.2c with 10G. And another week to decelerate again. ;)


    Man, I'm looking forward to this game! :)
    Move Newtonian. For great justice.
    Drake Salvage co - It was burning when we found it
    Chris Roberts on the Aurora: ..and this is sort of the .. "Ford Escort" of space - I see what you did there, Chris! ;)
  • Tomas_MacMoragh

    Posts: 494

    Posted:
    Edited: by Tomas_MacMoragh
    Posted:
    Edited:
    I would like to point out a few things....
    1) there is no teractical limit to how fast we can go, up to just under the spead of light... (the how closer to the spead of light the more massive something becomes...)
    2) if you read harder sci you see that there are practical limits to how fast you can go, usually imposed by your particle and rad shields
    3) there is nothing in space that stops. every thing is moving... newton tells use that an object at rest... is not necessarily stationary, it is just that it is not accelerating or decelerating.
    4)to turn you must not only change your orientation but must apply thrust to overcome your old vector and start building a new one

    so when I look at my speed in games like this I tend to think about it as what my acceleration is. not how fast I am going... or maybe how fast I am going to the system primary.
    "Cannon to right of them,
    Cannon to left of them,
    Cannon in front of them
    Volley'd and thunder'd;
    Storm'd at with shot and shell,
    Boldly they rode and well,
    Into the jaws of Death,
    Into the mouth of Hell"

    The Charge of the Light Brigade
    Alfred, Lord Tenn
  • Trondster

    Posts: 1345

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Yeah that answer wasn't very enlightening and not phisically correct at all, my thoughts on this is that we will get Newtonian flight with a speed limit just for the sake of doffighting but they still haven't figured an explanation for that.

    Did you watch the transmission? At 11:50ish he states that they have a pseudo-science explanation that turning at such speeds would be bad for the pilot - this will be the in-game "explanation".
    Move Newtonian. For great justice.
    Drake Salvage co - It was burning when we found it
    Chris Roberts on the Aurora: ..and this is sort of the .. "Ford Escort" of space - I see what you did there, Chris! ;)
  • skyflash

    Posts: 824

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Nothing short of PvE vs PvP gets everyone riled up like the flight model!

    Here's some succinct answers to help put / remove my many "umms" and "ahhs" from the Forum Feedback section of Wing Man's Hangar.

    1) The physics simulation is Newtonian

    2) There is no drag.

    3) The IFCS (Intelligent Flight Control system) generally handles taking the pilot's inputs (desired pitch, yaw, roll and speed) and translates them into actions for the thrusters and ship to take to adjust the ship's velocity vector in the direction the pilot wishes to go. This system will do it within human acceptable tolerances (it will not change your velocity vector in such a way as it could cause harm to the pilot)

    4) Slowing down is caused by the pilot telling his IFCS that he wants to be traveling at a lower speed. The IFCS then communicates with the ships thrusters to adjust the ship's velocity accordingly.

    5) If you turn you engines and IFCS off you will continue to coast at the same velocity.

    6) Fuel is consumed by using your thrusters or main engines. If you coast you will not be using fuel, but making velocity vector changes will consume fuel.

    7) More advanced IFCS systems will allow you to turn of parts of its overrides or allow it to interpret you inputs differently - for instance you could tell it you want to go into an "orientation" not "vectoring" mode where it will take your joystick inputs as solely ship orientation inputs and not try to correct your ship's velocity vector to be aligned in the direction your ship is pointing (the famous Battlestar Galactica maneuver).

    8) We will limit the top speed of ships you can fly for technical issues (physics engines have problems when the numbers get too big) and fun - figuring out an intercept course for an opponent traveling at 0.2 speed of light (which is our fictional max for practical spaceflight in 2943) maybe be challenging if you're a mathematician or physicist but not what I call fun gameplay.

    9) This top speed will be less than the top speed of weapons.

    10) Top speed will probably be dependent on ship class but we haven't balanced this so it may be a matter of all ships having the same cap but the smaller faster ones can reach that limit much quicker (and therefore put some distance between them and their pursuers even if they go to max). This needs to be tuned so that people with the right kind of ships can run from a fight. The idea is that once you get enough separation between you and a hostile you can make the jump to autopilot / warp speed (using the Star Trek term), which is how you cover big distances in-system (essentially at that 0.2 lightspeed (c) number I mentioned). Just at these speeds you're not maneuvering - you're just accelerating and decelerating in a straight line. Think of it as human (player) controlled flight for the lower combat / docking speeds and then when wanting to warp to a destination (say a planet or a jump point) you hand control over to your ship's flight computer which handles plotting the trajectory and accelerating you to the 0.2 c speed that a RSI quantum drive can achieve.

    11) I do know what G-Force is :-) I use the term as a measure of acceleration on the human body as its good short hand for people to grasp the concept of forces acting on a body when accelerating and decelerating. You may be interested to know that "..The accelerations that are not produced by gravity are termed proper accelerations, and it is only these that are measured in g-force units. They cause stresses and strains on objects. Because of these strains, large g-forces may be destructive..." Occasionally people think it is only to do with gravity and earth bound flight but that's actually incorrect - its just that's the case we're most familiar with. And yes these forces come into play when accelerating and decelerating in space and until we develop some system to increase our tolerances to the effects of this acceleration they will be the limiting factor on how aggressively we could change the velocity vector of a ship, irregardless of whether we are in the atmosphere or not. Its also interesting to note that we're built to withstand much greater accelerations in certain directions - modern day pilots can withstand 9 G but much less negative Gs. Its why you see pilots rolling and pulling back on the stick when attempting aggressive maneuvers rather than pushing forward or yawing with a rudder. The same will be true in space. We're going to factor in G-Force in the simulation, and allow pilots to push the boundaries (or switch the IFCS safety off) in search for a little advantage, but beware if you back (or red) out in a dogfight you may come to floating in space next to the smoking wreck of your ship!

    -Chris

    Thank you!

    Finally!

    To add... please understand that G-FORCES are a unit of measurements. So saying "there are no g-forces in space" makes about much sense as to say "there are no centimeters in space". But that, what the casual hobbyist understands as "g-forces" (the thing with fighter aircraft and pulling the stick) obviously does not exist in space. There is a difference.

    Anyway, with that clarification, we will be able to do anything we want, but not with the cheap flight computer. So that really means this will NOT be a newbie game, and it most certainly will not be easy to learn (if you do PvP and want to win). This also means EQUIPMENT will be very very important, I personally dont see anyone winning fights without having that mode equipped.

    So I hope those advanced flight computers are either really really rare (so that I almost never meet someone that has them) or are very very cheap (so that anyone can afford one easily).

    Please. :P
    Signature
  • Tomas_MacMoragh

    Posts: 494

    Posted:
    Posted:
    yes G-force is a measure of force applauded though it could also be an acceleration.... ie 1G=32 feet per sec. squared or 9.9 meters per sec. squared
    "Cannon to right of them,
    Cannon to left of them,
    Cannon in front of them
    Volley'd and thunder'd;
    Storm'd at with shot and shell,
    Boldly they rode and well,
    Into the jaws of Death,
    Into the mouth of Hell"

    The Charge of the Light Brigade
    Alfred, Lord Tenn
Sign In or Register to comment.