360 degrees means freedom..

[Archived Post]

alright, I cheated, and I didn't feel like searching the forums..

I've paid.. I've subscribed.. and I enjoy the game..


but....



come on!!..

a spaceship.. errm... in space.. and it can't barrel roll, and it can't flip end over end on it's axis.. while standing still... does cryptic, not know what a manuevering thruster is?

why do we fly like we are in atmosphere, while we are in space??? (even a bi-plane can do a barrel roll, and a loop da loop! )

anyhow.. could someone if anyone has read cryptic's reasoning for this, enlighten me. I'm truly curious.

[Archived Post]

Keep with the canon of the series. This is more like 2.5 dimensional space. Vertical movement controlled along a fixed ecliptic.

Maybe not 100% realistic, but keeps with the feel of Trek.

[Archived Post]

I'll accept that. your right, and I'm old enough to have watched star trek in second syndication. heh....

just couldn't put my finger on it.

felt odd, having to spiral in just to hit the base in the middle of a doughnut asteroid.

[Archived Post]

Who cares about cannon this is a friggen game. I may be playing this BECAUSE it's Star Trek, but that doesn't mean they can get away with **** poor design aspects. I mean, what kind of spaceship stops at 45 degrees up or down?

[Archived Post]

lol, I had the same thoughts exactly...

[Archived Post]

Who cares about cannon this is a friggen game. I may be playing this BECAUSE it's Star Trek, but that doesn't mean they can get away with **** poor design aspects. I mean, what kind of spaceship stops at 45 degrees up or down?

And you ****s accuse the fanbois of nerd rage....

There's so much irony in that post, its generating a sarcastic field.

[Archived Post]

--- err last being relative-- to which one I read ----

I think I get it.. after the last post...

I bet in alpha test we had six degrees of freedom.

man, I miss "Descent" the best ever!!! space ship fighter game.


anyhow... they couldn't render our instances, and devote enough processing to AI, if we could actually fly in circles.. the npc's always lost.

so they made us, unable to actually evade enemy fire. :)

ya thats the ticket.

[Archived Post]

--- err last being relative-- to which one I read ----

I think I get it.. after the last post...

I bet in alpha test we had six degrees of freedom.

man, I miss "Descent" the best ever!!! space ship fighter game.


anyhow... they couldn't render our instances, and devote enough processing to AI, if we could actually fly in circles.. the npc's always lost.

so they made us, unable to actually evade enemy fire. :)

ya thats the ticket.

SWG's space side was pure 360 on all three axis. Of course, that game was geared to single seater fighters, not capital ships.

[Archived Post]

althou your right i have never seen the enterprise bump into a romulan ship in space with the 2 being oposite one upside down to the other even thou it would of coarse happen if it where real

[Archived Post]

Yes it totally follows the cannon of Trek that all ships end up on the same level plane as they would in atmosphere. So few Sci-Fi franchises have done space flight & combat accurately. As close as it gets is Bab5, new Galactica, and some of Firefly. I mean it took those series to stop making big flaming space explosions or to accurately represent no sound in space (and even some of those got that wrong).

[Archived Post]

if he bumped a romulan ship (see title)


so why is it, I can't out manuever a borg cube.. the thing is 2km, by 2km and I still run into the thing.!! :)


heh

[Archived Post]

if he bumped a romulan ship (see title)


so why is it, I can't out manuever a borg cube.. the thing is 2km, by 2km and I still run into the thing.!! :)


heh

[Archived Post]

if he bumped a romulan ship (see title)


so why is it, I can't out manuever a borg cube.. the thing is 2km, by 2km and I still run into the thing.!! :)


heh


Double click the stop button and reverse. That's what Shinzon did. :P

[Archived Post]

alright, I cheated, and I didn't feel like searching the forums..

I've paid.. I've subscribed.. and I enjoy the game..


but....



come on!!..

a spaceship.. errm... in space.. and it can't barrel roll, and it can't flip end over end on it's axis.. while standing still... does cryptic, not know what a manuevering thruster is?

why do we fly like we are in atmosphere, while we are in space??? (even a bi-plane can do a barrel roll, and a loop da loop! )

anyhow.. could someone if anyone has read cryptic's reasoning for this, enlighten me. I'm truly curious.

1- Early bi-planes didn't handle turning upside down too well. They ran with a standard carburetor/piston engine and, well, when upside down the fuel didn't flow too well.

2- I can understand the "roll" issue to some extent since I always wondered in Star Trek "Why is it everything the Enterprise approachs another ship they are both facing "up" the same way?" But, would flying inverted REALLY add anything? No. Useless feature = useless code.

3- Have ya watched ANY Star Trek? Manuevering Thrusters are NOT instant boosters. Ships still have mass, which means those thrusters are going to have to exert <x> amount of force before movement is going to occur.

4- Ship's in Star Trek, despite all it's vaunted technology, are still held to laws of interia and structure stress. And please, do not bring up the "Interial Dampener" arguement. The operative word is "dampener, not "negation". You're talking aboout 1000s of tons of ship and you want them to manuerver like a Japanese Zero? It's not going to happen.

In geneeral, when it comes to movement of ships in Star Trek, stop THINKING of them as in "flight" combat, remember they are in "naval" combat. Asking to see a Galaxy Class pull a barrel roll or immelman is like asking to watch a Nimitz Class aircraft carrier to do donuts.

[Archived Post]

Who cares about cannon this is a friggen game. I may be playing this BECAUSE it's Star Trek, but that doesn't mean they can get away with **** poor design aspects. I mean, what kind of spaceship stops at 45 degrees up or down?

This should be addressed, I agree. Should pitch be the change? No, these aren't purely vectored thrust vessels. What SHOULD be added is the ability to move on a planar level. Dive and Rise like a submarine. Yes, a submarine CAN change plane to decrease or raise depth, but they could also blow or fill ballast and just rise and lower. Starships should be able to do the same.

[Archived Post]

1- Early bi-planes didn't handle turning upside down too well. They ran with a standard carburetor/piston engine and, well, when upside down the fuel didn't flow too well.

Alright, I didnt mean to imply a three hundred foot long or longer spaceship, should flip on a dime in two seconds. however, I'm in space there is no upside down. I should be able to flip ass over tea kettle, even if it takes five minutes. not go oh gee.. for some reason, I've hit this invisible forcefield. and have to fly 4 kilometers just to go back the way I came.

2- I can understand the "roll" issue to some extent since I always wondered in Star Trek "Why is it everything the Enterprise approachs another ship they are both facing "up" the same way?" But, would flying inverted REALLY add anything? No. Useless feature = useless code.

3- Have ya watched ANY Star Trek? Manuevering Thrusters are NOT instant boosters. Ships still have mass, which means those thrusters are going to have to exert <x> amount of force before movement is going to occur.
no where did I say instant anything.. but we can get to that 45 or so degree limit pretty quick.. just curious why the ship doesn't keep going.....

4- Ship's in Star Trek, despite all it's vaunted technology, are still held to laws of interia and structure stress. And please, do not bring up the "Interial Dampener" arguement. The operative word is "dampener, not "negation". You're talking aboout 1000s of tons of ship and you want them to manuerver like a Japanese Zero? It's not going to happen.
if I wanted them to manuever like a zero, I would have referenced a zero, no I referenced a ww1 bi-plane, which I've actually had the pleasure of being flown in, when I was 8 (long time ago) when on vacation.

In geneeral, when it comes to movement of ships in Star Trek, stop THINKING of them as in "flight" combat, remember they are in "naval" combat. Asking to see a Galaxy Class pull a barrel roll or immelman is like asking to watch a Nimitz Class aircraft carrier to do donuts.

I appreciate your comprehensive and thought out answer. However, why is it, do you think cryptic chose to go with Naval Style Combat in a Space Game???

[Archived Post]

This should be addressed, I agree. Should pitch be the change? No, these aren't purely vectored thrust vessels. What SHOULD be added is the ability to move on a planar level. Dive and Rise like a submarine. Yes, a submarine CAN change plane to decrease or raise depth, but they could also blow or fill ballast and just rise and lower. Starships should be able to do the same.



Ballast??? really.. in space????

[Archived Post]

I appreciate your comprehensive and thought out answer. However, why is it, do you think cryptic chose to go with Naval Style Combat in a Space Game???

Star Trek, in its own way, was based of WWII. The intent was alway a navel like battle system. Cloaking devices were like submarine warfare.

That isn't to say they they can't stay true to the idea and still offer wider range of motion.

Another poster mentioned about being able to go straight up while level, not unlike a submarine changing depths.

Cannon in Wrath of Khan supports star ships being able to move in such a way.

[Archived Post]

i have to agree we should at least be able to go "up" and "down" at least at 90 degress. having to circle in space is just plain stupid

[Archived Post]

i have to agree we should at least be able to go "up" and "down" at least at 90 degress. having to circle in space is just plain stupid

Bah you are clueless !

There is gravity in space so your idea is stupid =P

Note: you are ghay !

[Archived Post]

Who cares about cannon this is a friggen game. I may be playing this BECAUSE it's Star Trek, but that doesn't mean they can get away with **** poor design aspects. I mean, what kind of spaceship stops at 45 degrees up or down?

Please expand upon your experience in real spaceships. If OTOH, you have none, then you must be describing your experience in virtual space ships.

Programmed by people.

Who chose how you will play their game.

Their game.

Their choices.

See?

Not yours.

Get over yourself.

[Archived Post]

There are threads about this on the forum... mines called "why cant we fly straight up" :)

I would love to have real 3D movement rather than the crippled one we got atm.

[Archived Post]

Freedom is an illusion... You think u have a choice but you don't. Were all in the matrix.:)