TF and Dreg int scale

Spunkmeyer · Post by **Spunkmeyer** » Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:46 am

NightRychune wrote:QUOTE (NightRychune @ Feb 14 2011, 02:01 PM) By lowering fig thrust you can improve their boost performance, and tweaking their mass number to keep their acceleration roughly the same will give you a pretty big net performance increase.

I think you also need to be careful that you don't create fighters with a lower drag coefficient than ints. In other words the simplified (no area factored in) relative drag coefficients may need to hold for things to "feel right". (F/V^2 IIRC)

Cdfig~900/14400=0.0625
Cdint~300/8100=0.0370

So the Cd for figs is ~1.7 that of ints (while the ratio of empty masses is 1.8 and loaded ratio is about 2.4). So instead of just making a big change to their boosted speed, a little bit of all relevant factors (boost speed, mass and sideways accel) could be the right approach, so they all feel "right" with respect to each other. They all limit each other too.

Shizoku · Post by **Shizoku** » Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:13 am

Clay_Pigeon wrote:QUOTE (Clay_Pigeon @ Feb 14 2011, 05:57 PM) You heard the man. He threatened to turn this car around and take us back to zone_core!

Can we stop at dn instead?

DasSmiter · Post by **DasSmiter** » Tue Feb 15, 2011 5:02 am

Nope we're heading right back to A+ and I don't wanna hear any more complaints or we'll be going to 1.24

NightRychune · Post by **NightRychune** » Tue Feb 15, 2011 5:08 am

i'm actually pretty okay with ic vs rix forever on 1.25

NightRychune · Post by **NightRychune** » Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:34 pm

also back on the subject of TF ints, they have a $#@!ing MASSIVE fuel advantage compared to all of the other ints which is another portion of the problem with them

Mastametz · Post by **Mastametz** » Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:44 pm

BlackViper wrote:QUOTE (BlackViper @ Feb 14 2011, 04:54 PM) I get one more PM about this topic, I will do what I should have done months ago...

Ban everyone from the forum who draws attention to themselves then whine because they can't handle the attention?
Seems like a good idea to me.

Spunkmeyer · Post by **Spunkmeyer** » Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:45 pm

NightRychune wrote:QUOTE (NightRychune @ Feb 19 2011, 07:34 AM) also back on the subject of TF ints, they have a $#@!ing MASSIVE fuel advantage compared to all of the other ints which is another portion of the problem with them

Yeah, that's another WTF thing about them, we are already discussing to have that fixed.

Weedman · Post by **Weedman** » Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:57 pm

Raingriffin,

It is good work on your part and anyone else who contributed to the tf and dreg. I like the models and textures.

What I would like to see is the model run through the ms cvh generator and tweaking of some gun, cockpit mounts. My question to you is: would you be offended?

My 2 cents on Dreg: Dreg are fast as @#(!. The fact that they were the easiest int to land bullets on from the front/back/side is with good reason. They can outrun anything if they want to. To make them more difficult to fight is not a good idea. That is pretty much what is happening now with dreg. Correct?

Some good points were brought up. Elongated "flat" or "skinny" or "narrow" models don't work well with the ms cvh generator. Take a look at many ms models. They are spherical. I too made hull conforming boxes manually for omicron, but in the end, it did not work well in gameplay. They were too hard to hit, and they had to be scaled huge, and then in certain angles they were whales and just too easy to hit. I am by no means a game developer, but I am certain that in games what you see, and what registers as a "hit" are two different things completely and frankly I think that is good.

Adept · Post by **Adept** » Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:17 pm

NightRychune wrote:QUOTE (NightRychune @ Feb 19 2011, 03:34 PM) also back on the subject of TF ints, they have a $#@!ing MASSIVE fuel advantage compared to all of the other ints which is another portion of the problem with them

Yeah, we've been looking into normalising the masses and fuels. There will be a post about this soonish.

@Weed For most of the models being close mapped or bubble won't change much, they'll just need to be scaled down by 30% or so. We can well totally try it and see which is nicer.

There's just two models that I know of where it's really important. The GT and IC fighters. Both suffer an amazing nerf from the bubble hitboxes, and would need to be scaled tiny to compensate. Compellor's close mapped GT hitbox a few CC versions back has worked great, and I haven't seen a single complaint about it. The IC one seems to work very nicely as well, for what IC sup games (and DMs) I've seen.

raingriffin · Post by **raingriffin** » Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:12 pm

Weedman wrote:QUOTE (Weedman @ Feb 22 2011, 12:57 AM) Raingriffin,

It is good work on your part and anyone else who contributed to the tf and dreg. I like the models and textures.

What I would like to see is the model run through the ms cvh generator and tweaking of some gun, cockpit mounts. My question to you is: would you be offended?

Not at all, as i stated before, hull conforming hitboxes are something i've been asked to develop due to the original MS hitboxes being too much on the other side of the scale, aka being totally on the side of hitting invisible space. This doesn't necessarily mean we need skintight hitboxes, just that you should be able to hit what you see, at least. in some cases, or to be more precise in the dreg int case the original dreg int model was to blame: visually it was paper thin in any part not being the core. Practically its hitbox would include 90% of empty space.

That said, i am not a supporter of auto cvhing but at the same time i also think it's problematic for people with high pings or general lag (i count myself in) to hit very speedy and at the same time low profile ships.
I think a lot of the complaints about this topic have good foundations once you consider gameplay and that's why the very latest ships (miner for example) have undergone experiments of more approximate and bigger hitboxes, which include empty space to make the hitting easier like in ms times without being totally off track.

I too think somewhat bigger cvhs are, overall, a necessity, but going back to bubbles isn't the answer either.
This as everything else is just my opinion and being the absent player i am it doesn't count much in game terms. Really my main interest is in the model itself and yes, the more i work on this project the more i also think at how well it performs in game.
This more often than not calls for an adaptation of the very first release i do but that's ok.
Also I remind all of you that i haven't modelled the dregs. I only provided their hitboxes.

If you want to try going through autocvh i don't mind at all.
In a way if i didn't have to handle cvhs i'd be twice as happy as now, since its a boring, repetitive, buggy, and most times imprecise job.