Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,387
# 11
03-21-2013, 12:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by seraphantilles View Post
Please allow a checkbox in the game's preferences to allow for full vertical flight.
A checkbox would work well (assuming the NPCs couldn't select it)
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,328
# 12
03-21-2013, 02:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by boglejam73 View Post
Not that I wouldn't like up/down movement myself, but how are any of the reasons you yourself mentioned for not implementing this a load of bunk?

If the license holder says no, you have no options.

If the developer worries players would become disoriented, that seems like a valid (althou way too hand-holding-of-players) reason.

And yes, almost all of the TV and movie trek ship combat has been depicted as ship-at-sea type combat.

So while I would like up/down movement, the reasons stated for not implementing it aren't "a load of bunk."
There is no reason that the ships would ever have to be fully inverted. You could make it so that while they can be vertical that they would keep their top always facing "Up" so that if you tried to do a roll, for instance, you would automatically turn back upright.

Also; in DS9, which is reputed for its battle scenes, they clearly show the Defiant doing an aileron roll during its fight and other ships moving at vertical or near vertical trajectories.


Quite frankly the notion that you should be snapped to a plane in space is absolutely inane. Furthermore, the idea that you can blockade ships in open space (read: Not near a planet or any other specific location they may be attempting to reach) is absolutely insane when you take into account how massive a wall you would have to form to prevent them from going around it at warp speeds.


I have said this many many many times... Either A) Give us full 3D flight or B) NEVER EVER EVER allow anything to be on a lower or higher plane in missions. It frustrates me to no end having to spiral up or down in a mission created by the Devs to accomplish my objective when they are the ones who do not allow me to simply go UP or DOWN.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 96
# 13
03-23-2013, 07:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxvitor View Post
Get in line. You are not the 1st person to ask for this and it has been requested by people from day 1. The answer has always been no, CBS doesn't like the idea of upside down ships, some people claim players will get disoriented, Star Trek has always had a ships at sea look, etc. It's a load of bunk but there it is.
YOU'RE DAMN STRAIGHT it's a load of bunk. I'm just going to quote from Wrath of Khan:

Spock: "He's intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."

Kirk: "Full stop."

Sulu: "Full stop sir."

Kirk: "Z minus ten thousand meters. Standby photon torpedoes."

What ensued was one of the greatest examples of "full 3D" tactics in a space battle in all of cinema. OK so the ship doesn't "rotate" 90 degrees but it flies directly straight up and directly straight down.

---

Fast forward to the JJ Abrahms era, and of course with modern computer graphics now they can actually show ships flying inverted and at 90-degree angles to each other, etc.

Plus most current space games I play allow for this kind of movement, from Galaxy on Fire on my iPhone to Dark Star One on the XBox.

It just seems ridiculous for a major title like STO not to have THE basic defining feature of spaceflight. I get it that it might be disorienting to some players to have their ship rotate forever and never know which way is "up." For these noobs they would have a noob button that says "I'm scared of space" and they can keep it check-marked. But for those players Spock would call "experienced," they would uncheck it and live the real life experience.

Let me point out that if ships could not fly directly up WE WOULD NEVER HAVE GOTTEN INTO SPACE IN THE FIRST PLACE. Think of the message you're sending to children! These games should AT LEAST be somewhat educational about space. Puh-leeze!
Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,387
# 14
03-23-2013, 07:25 AM
Just as an example for the point of discussion: Freelancer has full 3D flight controls. You can control pitch, yaw and roll, you can barrel roll, aeleron roll, fly a loop, you can strafe the ship sideways (same as strafing in ground game here), and you can straafe the ship while doing any of the other stuff if you are able to get your fingers into the right kind of knot. And while you are doing this you have to keep the weapon cross hair on the target and pull the trigger yourself. Oh and different weapons have different ranges and munition speeds so you cant fire all the things at once and expect everything to hit. It's hard to learn, and everybody who has been doing it for a while has a massive advantage over the newbs who can barely figure out the 2D turning. So that is pretty much the opposite end of the spectrum from what we have here.

As for allowing vertical climbs... If you did do it you would have to rework a lot of stuff, things like NPCs would need to be able to fly vertically to keep you in their arcs, or else people would just fly under the target and point the forward arc up to shoot the NPC who cant shoot back. Then if you have NPCs flying vertically, you need EVERYBODY to fly vertically or else the NPCs will wtfpwn the newbs. For me, STO just not that kind of game. You'll never get to the point of full 3D combat anyway, with having to actually aim the guns, so its just incremental change at a lot of cost and very little gain.

Also, you can already manipulate firing arcs with reverse and corkscrew and a few other things that people are saying is too damned hard. This is about making it simpler, not making it more involved.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 96
# 15
03-23-2013, 07:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hasukurobi View Post
There is no reason that the ships would ever have to be fully inverted. You could make it so that while they can be vertical that they would keep their top always facing "Up" so that if you tried to do a roll, for instance, you would automatically turn back upright.

Also; in DS9, which is reputed for its battle scenes, they clearly show the Defiant doing an aileron roll during its fight and other ships moving at vertical or near vertical trajectories.


Quite frankly the notion that you should be snapped to a plane in space is absolutely inane. Furthermore, the idea that you can blockade ships in open space (read: Not near a planet or any other specific location they may be attempting to reach) is absolutely insane when you take into account how massive a wall you would have to form to prevent them from going around it at warp speeds.


I have said this many many many times... Either A) Give us full 3D flight or B) NEVER EVER EVER allow anything to be on a lower or higher plane in missions. It frustrates me to no end having to spiral up or down in a mission created by the Devs to accomplish my objective when they are the ones who do not allow me to simply go UP or DOWN.
AMEN TO EVERYTHING YOU JUST WROTE HERE.

This is EXACTLY correct, and thank you for being part of the choir. Maybe after enough years of asking they'll finally do the right thing with this.

Again I want to reiterate that I'm only asking for 3D flight as an [b]optional feature.[b] Is there really anyone among the devs or players that for some reason has a problem with the idea of some people enjoying the game this way? I can't see a down side to allowing people to enable this if they wish.

I think we should start a cross-faction player group called:

STO Sanity. Our overall goal is to act as a QA team to hone the "immersiveness" of the game. Like fixing 3D flight. Making your captain sit down in the captain's chair instead of beaming off his own bridge to enter Tactical View from Bridge View. Allowing a BOFF or two to accompany you in maps like ESD or Drozana. Let there be debris from exploding ships and have ships with parts that can get blown off permanently (like blowing someone's nacell off etc.) until they respawn. Etc.
Ensign
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 8
# 16
03-23-2013, 08:09 AM
I do find it odd that the game seems to have taken a step backwards in terms of gameplay. For a game made in 2000, Klingon Academy had full range of motion and much better damage modeling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7eqb2vVYU8

The mechanics to avoid player disorientation are already there in that the ship automatically rights itself when you let go of the controls. If the pitch and roll limits were removed to allow full freedom of movement but the self right ability was retained, you would have the best of both worlds.

The ability to pull the ship over onto its back for a tight turn and when you let go of the controls, the ship takes the shortest route to the right way up whilst facing in the current direction. If ye gets me drift.
Captain
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,319
# 17
03-23-2013, 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by halfbakedbean View Post
The mechanics to avoid player disorientation are already there in that the ship automatically rights itself when you let go of the controls. If the pitch and roll limits were removed to allow full freedom of movement but the self right ability was retained, you would have the best of both worlds.
all you need is to apply the astrometrics grid to the system maps, if that. a ''normalise orientation'' key would do the job just as well.

even a colony wars style minimap would do the job.
as it turns out, an intrepid would lose a fight with a connie.
and thats canon.
! the power of plot compels you.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 96
# 18
03-23-2013, 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ursusmorologus View Post
As for allowing vertical climbs... If you did do it you would have to rework a lot of stuff, things like NPCs would need to be able to fly vertically to keep you in their arcs, or else people would just fly under the target and point the forward arc up to shoot the NPC who cant shoot back.
This is simply wrong. You are totally misinterpreting this on many levels.

First of all, your statement assumes the NPCs are all using small-arc weapons like torps, cannons, or DBBs. Frankly most NPCs use beam arrays, mines, warp plasma, turrets, carrier-spam, and sci-spam that can already hit an enemy that is directly above or below them.

Furthermore, people already exploit the limited angle of attack of NPCs like Borg Cubes who use torps. My favorite strategy has been to fly directly under the cube and hit it from below with beams and mines. It seems like they've updated the Cubes however to have 360-degree torpedo attacks to counter this however.

So I have just shown how the problem of people exploiting the blind spot directly above or below NPCs is not a problem that's specific to whether or not we have 360 flight ship rotation for players. A beam user can exploit this blind spot of a cannon-using NPC easily enough now without needing the rotation ability.

And since an NPC who is angled up to the max degree possible can already hit you with cannons if you're almost directly over it, you currently have to be *exactly* on top of them to take advantage of this blind spot. But we all know what happens, they circle up to you and a one or two seconds later your advantage is gone. Space piloting *should* be like that -- you *should* be able to get an advantage on an enemy by coming directly down on them.

Enabling full 360-degree rotation would not really give you a significant advantage over enemy NPCs. The trouble to get right over them and then come straight down while they can't hit you with cannons... when you can already get the same advantage by just coming up from behind them... I don't see how that would be unbalancing at all.

But if you had to modify the game you could just expand the rotation of NPCs when they are attacked by a player who has full rotation. I don't think this would be necessary though.

If you are a beam boat, you can already fly directly under an NPC and target them when they can't target you due to their limited rotation arc.


Quote:
Then if you have NPCs flying vertically, you need EVERYBODY to fly vertically or else the NPCs will wtfpwn the newbs. For me, STO just not that kind of game. You'll never get to the point of full 3D combat anyway, with having to actually aim the guns, so its just incremental change at a lot of cost and very little gain.
No, no, this is so wrong. It's not that big of a difference from the current corkscrewing maneuvers. NPCs flying vertically would not be any harder to target. In fact it's already the case that you often get attacked by NPCs who are directly below you -- they use beams and other crap as I already said. And you already can't target them. You already get attacked by ships from behind you who you can't hit back at.

The rare case where an NPC happened to be directly below you and hitting you with cannons (where currently they can't), would be so rare as to not even be a factor. And even when it did happen, well, that's what Evasive Maneuvers is for!

Quote:
Also, you can already manipulate firing arcs with reverse and corkscrew and a few other things that people are saying is too damned hard. This is about making it simpler, not making it more involved.
You didn't even read my original post did you? My *whole point* is that it's very frustrating and unbalancing to be forced to use the corkscrew maneuver. It's not "too damned hard" (nobody said that). What it is, is stupid, lame, annoying, and frustrating.

The current system unbalances the advantage that escorts already have over cruisers. Escorts already have a huge advantage over cruisers in maneuverability. But because of the inability to go straight up, the escort with a tight turn radius escorts essentially goes up a thin "spiral staircase" to ascend while the cruiser chasing them has to go up a wide "parking garage spiral" to chase them (instead of being able to simply turn straight up and fly that way). An escort using the corkscrew maneuver vertically can widen their gap from a pursuing cruiser much faster that way than if they fly in a straight line away horizontally, because the pursuing cruiser will have to circle around such a wide radius that for the first part of the maneuver they are actually moving *away* from the escort they're chasing! That's frustrating, and it's indicative of a broken game that needs to be fixed.

Not even regular aerial flight has a limited turn radius. An airplane can go straight up and down. So can Mast Chief in a Banshee. STO needs to with the program!
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,223
# 19
03-23-2013, 12:54 PM
Star Trek has never, ever portrayed space in a truly 3-D way. You never see a warbird uncloaking directly above a starfleet ship at a 90 degree angle with disruptors pointed straight down at the saucer.

Roddenberry approached space from a very naval perspective: you *can* move on a Z-axis, but it's generally within a small range, and it's really not that different from operating on a flat surface. The Wrath of Khan scene above is a straight up basic naval submarine tactic. Not a real 3-D space environment tactic. And people who can't tell the difference aren't very good at math, to be honest.

It's much easier for the average person to follow that way.
--------------------------------------

"We are smart." - Grebnedlog

Member of Alliance Central Command/boq botlhra'ghom

Last edited by tsurutafan01; 03-23-2013 at 12:58 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,319
# 20
03-23-2013, 01:02 PM
if i can remember anything from colony wars, its not getting lost.
in fact, navigation was simple. even if it was thanks to a map that had a purpose beyond x,y objecting marker.

beyond that, 60s & 70s limited technical ability in displaying space combat with massive dangly studio models doesnt mean he wouldnt have done things differently if he could.
as it turns out, an intrepid would lose a fight with a connie.
and thats canon.
! the power of plot compels you.

Last edited by skollulfr; 03-23-2013 at 01:04 PM.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:59 AM.