Star Citizen
I went one better and asked for it one the website. Answer was fairly promising.Terran wrote:QUOTE (Terran @ Oct 22 2012, 11:01 AM) not gonna touch it until i know what the combat mechanics are like. crossing my fingers for a real inertia environment
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
Terran sir,
One of the most exciting things is the capacity for true Newtonian physics. We have also designed the ships with a Fly-By-Wire system similar to an F35. In short, the computer will make the physical calculations in order to pull off what you want to do. The ship’s computer takes your input on the joystick, throttle and pedals, crunches it into the necessary vectors and velocities needed to achieve it then utilizes the appropriate thrusters and engine to execute it. The idea is that the ship’s computer is simplifying things because it’s just too complicated for you to figure it all out on your own. This means that the physics in the game are dynamic and procedural and not script or data-driven. It’s a full flight dynamic system that will work for bigger ship as well as the smaller ships.
is this what yer asking?
One of the most exciting things is the capacity for true Newtonian physics. We have also designed the ships with a Fly-By-Wire system similar to an F35. In short, the computer will make the physical calculations in order to pull off what you want to do. The ship’s computer takes your input on the joystick, throttle and pedals, crunches it into the necessary vectors and velocities needed to achieve it then utilizes the appropriate thrusters and engine to execute it. The idea is that the ship’s computer is simplifying things because it’s just too complicated for you to figure it all out on your own. This means that the physics in the game are dynamic and procedural and not script or data-driven. It’s a full flight dynamic system that will work for bigger ship as well as the smaller ships.
is this what yer asking?
Life is Funny, without it yer Dead.
I'll try to find it, the forum is a little horrible. No search function.Terran wrote:QUOTE (Terran @ Oct 22 2012, 11:40 AM) i'm curious. care to post the question and answer?
@Sunrodent
It's a part of the answer. Problem is that in the demo clips ships seem to fly on raila.
Last edited by Adept on Mon Oct 22, 2012 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
ahh by the way this is a quote too....hehehe
"Maybe I should have done a better job in the demo, but if you are flying at speed and you set your desired velocity to zero you WILL see the top front thrusters articulating and firing to slow your velocity. If you watch my demo you will notice there is some momentum with the Hornet when I slow down close to the bridge. It may not have been apparent on the screen, but I can assure the Hornet does not stop on a dime. if you load it up with more mass (like extra weapons) you feel the effect of this.
There is no drag modeled – everything is done as it would be in space.
Additionally there is actually counter thrust being applied inside the physics and if you had your hands on the controller you would feel it. If you look closely you will see the inertia of this – the ship doesn’t stop rolling or pitching on a dime. There is however a very good reason why you don’t actually see the thrusters fire entirely accurately.
The problem with visually depicting the proper thrust is that it would actually look pretty horrible (trust me this is how I first did it, and is still pretty easy to switch back to as I’m actually doing some extra work to make the visuals looks nicer).
The reason is because there is no drag in space, so even a micro amount of thrust starts the Hornet (or any spaceship) rotating until you apply counter thrust. So what is really happening is that the flight control system is always applying micro thrust and counter thrust to achieve the pilot’s inputs. This results in the thrusters flickering off and on in micro amounts and you actually not getting a good feel of the general application of thrust. I think you know I like things to look cool (come on, we all know you probably wouldn’t be engaging in space dogfights at WW2 speeds, but it’s so much more fun than what the reality would probably be), so what happens is that the system is still modeled accurately, but I use the angular /linear velocity delta to drive the visual representation of thrust. Here’s my code comment
//Note the thrustGoal is actually the linear velocity delta (desired vel – current vel of
//the vehicle & rotational vel rather than the actual linear & angular acceleration / thrust.
//This is because, while inaccurate its cooler to see more constant thrust that gives
//you a visual clue as to what correctional movement / velocity vectors the vehicle is using.
//If we just used the acceleration as opposed to the desired velocity correction, the thruster flames
//would flicker on and off – especially in the Wing Commander use case of Space, where
//there is no atmosphere to provide drag.
//
//Of course if you pass the actual accelerations to SetThrustGoal, then you’ll get an accurate //visual representation of what a thruster would really do"
i don't know wtf that means, but maybe you do.
sunrodent
"Maybe I should have done a better job in the demo, but if you are flying at speed and you set your desired velocity to zero you WILL see the top front thrusters articulating and firing to slow your velocity. If you watch my demo you will notice there is some momentum with the Hornet when I slow down close to the bridge. It may not have been apparent on the screen, but I can assure the Hornet does not stop on a dime. if you load it up with more mass (like extra weapons) you feel the effect of this.
There is no drag modeled – everything is done as it would be in space.
Additionally there is actually counter thrust being applied inside the physics and if you had your hands on the controller you would feel it. If you look closely you will see the inertia of this – the ship doesn’t stop rolling or pitching on a dime. There is however a very good reason why you don’t actually see the thrusters fire entirely accurately.
The problem with visually depicting the proper thrust is that it would actually look pretty horrible (trust me this is how I first did it, and is still pretty easy to switch back to as I’m actually doing some extra work to make the visuals looks nicer).
The reason is because there is no drag in space, so even a micro amount of thrust starts the Hornet (or any spaceship) rotating until you apply counter thrust. So what is really happening is that the flight control system is always applying micro thrust and counter thrust to achieve the pilot’s inputs. This results in the thrusters flickering off and on in micro amounts and you actually not getting a good feel of the general application of thrust. I think you know I like things to look cool (come on, we all know you probably wouldn’t be engaging in space dogfights at WW2 speeds, but it’s so much more fun than what the reality would probably be), so what happens is that the system is still modeled accurately, but I use the angular /linear velocity delta to drive the visual representation of thrust. Here’s my code comment
//Note the thrustGoal is actually the linear velocity delta (desired vel – current vel of
//the vehicle & rotational vel rather than the actual linear & angular acceleration / thrust.
//This is because, while inaccurate its cooler to see more constant thrust that gives
//you a visual clue as to what correctional movement / velocity vectors the vehicle is using.
//If we just used the acceleration as opposed to the desired velocity correction, the thruster flames
//would flicker on and off – especially in the Wing Commander use case of Space, where
//there is no atmosphere to provide drag.
//
//Of course if you pass the actual accelerations to SetThrustGoal, then you’ll get an accurate //visual representation of what a thruster would really do"
i don't know wtf that means, but maybe you do.
sunrodent
Life is Funny, without it yer Dead.
That still doesn't fully convince me that there is actual vector based movement. It may mean that velocity has momentum, and that there is inertia in turning the ship, but that the ship's vector will turn based on where the nose is pointed. That would suck, big time.
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
The physics part on the kickstarter seemed to suggest it does do proper physics. I think it looks like they're on rails because of those thrusters on gimbals are constantly side thrusting in various proportions and directions so that the ship goes where the player points it.
Last edited by madpeople on Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It's probably Wing Commander style. Very high thrust, and lowish max speed compared to acceleration. If that is the case, it gives a very nice feel for dog fighting. Not as good as Allegiance, but then what is? I am quite pessimistic about Roberts giving us Alleg-style sidethruster control, but I suppose we can't have everything.madpeople wrote:QUOTE (madpeople @ Oct 22 2012, 04:23 PM) The physics part on the kickstarter seemed to suggest it does do proper physics. I think it looks like they're on rails because of those thrusters on gimbals are constantly side thrusting in various proportions and directions so that the ship goes where the player points it.
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
