Hard Light Productions Forums
Hosted Projects - Standalone => Fate of the Galaxy => Topic started by: Dragon on March 09, 2009, 10:16:06 am
-
Do you want to make X-wings s-foils really moving?
Because i found a way to do it on IA model.
You need to have this in Sbanks
$Allowed SBanks: ( "Missile" "Adv Missile" "Torpedo" "Adv Torpedo" "Heavy Rocket" "Space Bomb" "Phoenix"
"Ion Pulse" "Mag Pulse" "HM4 Swarm" "Concussion Missile" "Discord Missile" "Proton Torpedo"
"Seismic Charge" "Intruder Rocket" "Proton Bomb" "Phoenix" "Ion Pulse" "Mag Pulse" "D-Boron" )
$Allowed Dogfight SBanks: ( "Missile" "Adv Missile" "Torpedo" "Adv Torpedo" "Heavy Rocket" "Space Bomb"
"Phoenix" "Ion Pulse" "Mag Pulse" ) ( "Missile" "Adv Missile" "Torpedo" "Adv Torpedo" "Heavy Rocket"
"Space Bomb" "Phoenix" "Ion Pulse" "Mag Pulse" ) ( "Nothing" ) ( "Nothing" )
$Default SBanks: ( "Torpedo" "Torpedo" "nothing" "nothing" )
$SBank Capacity: ( 15, 15, 1, 1 )
Second slot is needed when you run out of torpedoes ,if it wasn't there after firing all torpedoes s-foils will close and you will be unable to fire. Change loadout if you want. "Nothing" secondary was from TBP and is needed.
It's important to make nothing unfireable ("No dumbfire" and +Weapon range: 1 may do the trick) or you will be unable either to close or to open s-foils.
And then the animation:
$Subsystem: Engine01, 25, 0.0
$Subsystem: Engine02, 25, 0.0
$Subsystem: Engine03, 25, 0.0
$Subsystem: Engine04, 25, 0.0
$Subsystem: Sfoil01, 25, 0.0
$Flags: ( "Carry no damage" "Untargetable" )
$animation: triggered
$type: Secondary_bank
+sub_type: 2
+delay: 0
+relative_angle: 0,0,10
+velocity: 0,0,180
+acceleration: 0,0,90
+time: 2000
$Subsystem: Sfoil02, 25, 0.0
$Flags: ( "Carry no damage" "Untargetable" )
$animation: triggered
$type: Secondary_bank
+sub_type: 2
+delay: 0
+relative_angle: 0,0,-10
+velocity: 0,0,180
+acceleration: 0,0,90
+time: 2000
$Subsystem: Sfoil03, 25, 0.0
$Flags: ( "Carry no damage" "Untargetable" )
$animation: triggered
$type: Secondary_bank
+sub_type: 2
+delay: 0
+relative_angle: 0,0,10
+velocity: 0,0,180
+acceleration: 0,0,90
+time: 2000
$Subsystem: Sfoil04, 25, 0.0
$Flags: ( "Carry no damage" "Untargetable" )
$animation: triggered
$type: Secondary_bank
+sub_type: 2
+delay: 0
+relative_angle: 0,0,-10
+velocity: 0,0,180
+acceleration: 0,0,90
+time: 2000
"Engine0#" subsystems are for ion cannons ,because i don't want them to destroy submodels but there must be a way to disable a ship ,so when you destroy an s-foil its respective engine gets destroyed as well.
Anyway you will need this set of events in each mission (i also made a similar thing for B-wing).
$Formula: ( every-time
( and
( is-ship-class "X-Wing" "Alpha 1" )
( is-secondary-selected "Alpha 1" 2 )
)
( lock-primary-weapon "Alpha 1" )
( lock-secondary-weapon "Alpha 1" )
)
+Name: Sfoils
+Repeat Count: 1
+Interval: 1
+Team: 0
$Formula: ( every-time
( and
( is-ship-class "B-Wing" "Alpha 1" )
( is-secondary-selected "Alpha 1" 0 )
)
( lock-primary-weapon "Alpha 1" )
( lock-secondary-weapon "Alpha 1" )
)
+Name: Sfoils1
+Repeat Count: 1
+Interval: 1
+Team: 0
$Formula: ( every-time
( and
( is-ship-class "B-Wing" "Alpha 1" )
( not
( is-secondary-selected "Alpha 1" 0 )
)
)
( unlock-primary-weapon "Alpha 1" )
( unlock-secondary-weapon "Alpha 1" )
)
+Name: Unlock
+Repeat Count: 1
+Interval: 1
+Team: 0
$Formula: ( every-time
( and
( is-ship-class "X-Wing" "Alpha 1" )
( not
( is-secondary-selected "Alpha 1" 2 )
)
)
( unlock-primary-weapon "Alpha 1" )
( unlock-secondary-weapon "Alpha 1" )
)
+Name: Unlock1
+Repeat Count: 1
+Interval: 1
+Team: 0
$Formula: ( when
( and
( is-ship-class "X-Wing" "Alpha 1" )
( is-subsystem-destroyed-delay
"Alpha 1"
"Sfoil01"
0
)
)
( set-subsystem-strength
"Alpha 1"
"engine01"
0
)
)
+Name: Engines1
+Repeat Count: 1
+Interval: 1
+Team: 0
$Formula: ( when
( and
( is-ship-class "X-Wing" "Alpha 1" )
( is-subsystem-destroyed-delay
"Alpha 1"
"Sfoil02"
0
)
)
( set-subsystem-strength
"Alpha 1"
"engine02"
0
)
)
+Name: Engines2
+Repeat Count: 1
+Interval: 1
+Team: 0
$Formula: ( when
( and
( is-ship-class "X-Wing" "Alpha 1" )
( is-subsystem-destroyed-delay
"Alpha 1"
"Sfoil03"
0
)
)
( set-subsystem-strength
"Alpha 1"
"engine03"
0
)
)
+Name: Engines3
+Repeat Count: 1
+Interval: 1
+Team: 0
$Formula: ( when
( and
( is-ship-class "X-Wing" "Alpha 1" )
( is-subsystem-destroyed-delay
"Alpha 1"
"Sfoil04"
0
)
)
( set-subsystem-strength
"Alpha 1"
"engine04"
0
)
)
+Name: Engines4
+Repeat Count: 1
+Interval: 1
+Team: 0
Worked for me on 3.6.10 INF most recent at this time ( there was no test multiplayer INF build with nearly all features from the latest nightly).
Maybe you will find some use for this ,or maybe you already have something similar.
I also tried to get pair fire on X-wing ,but "Cycle" flag $Swarm: 2 and $Swarm wait: 0.000001 didn't worked for some reason. I wonder how you want to solve this problem.
Anyway ,i hope i just made FoTG a bit closer to release ,if not ,no problem.
I may also post my animations for B-wing if you want.
-
We'll keep that in mind. We're looking into a significant overhaul of the way the primaries system works, including a targeting lock for the autoaim and some other goodies.
So basically, it looks like you created a dummy set of hardpoints, that when selected cause the ship to engage its S-Foils. Pretty interesting hack. You might even consider calling that weapon "Close S-Foils" :)
Actually we probably weren't going to concern ourselves terribly much with the S-Foils, unless they became a useful game mechanic somehow. If the work's done though maybe we'll throw them in anyway.
-
Actually we probably weren't going to concern ourselves terribly much with the S-Foils, unless they became a useful game mechanic somehow.
Any possibility of a moderate speed boost while s-foils are closed? That seemed to me to be the reason they were used in the movies - closed for cruising speed, open to attack.
-
Well it's never really clear that they actually got a speed boost from that, it's been more of a mechanic in the Rogue Squadron line of games than anything that's actually definite in the movies. If it came down a need to give the X-wing a boost for balancing and we don't want to change it any other way, it might be worth considering.
-
Granted Rogue squadron exploited that mechanic pretty badly, but I remember having that distinct impression from the movies before Rogue Squadron ever came out. It just seemed to me that there aught to be a reason why they could open and close - maybe it was for atmospheric stability or something, but you see them travel in space enough with them closed (the fleet at the end of Empire, if I remember correctly) so there must be some reason for it.
I'm not advocating that we throw it in just because we can or for a goofy game mechanic, but as a way to explain the mechanic that's given to us in the movies.
And if it is a speed boost, it should be small enough that you don't see people opening and closing their s-foils all throughout battle to try and gain a tactical advantage. It should only really be noticeable while traveling larger distances.
-
:eek: Wow, that's not just an idea, that's an execution of it! Amazing to get some real, constructive input on this mechanic, excellent work.
I would suggest that, if you can work this into a LUA script instead of SEXPs, it will definitely get used.
-
As far as making closing the S-foils a useful game mechanic is concerned, if you could have a marginal power boost (like, 5% or less) to shield recharge rates and max speed for whatever levels they are set at to go along with the primary weapons lockout then you would have some reason for making long trips with them closed while avoiding the Rogue Squadron "closed foils=turbo afterburner" silliness. You could say that the extra bit of power comes from not having to keep the tibanna gas in the cannons superheated or something...Or you could forget about making it actually useful and have the feature just because Brand's X-wing looks awesome with the foils closed ;7.
Anyway, this is cool. :yes:
-
I always figured it would make them faster in a straight line (partially due to the weapons being off) but less maneuverable. That and they needed to be closed to jump. Never saw much of a need for them to be closed for any other reason especially in combat. Possibly a lower radar sig?
-
makes no sense that xwings would get a speed boost when sfoils are locked.
there is a performance decrease, because the cooling process is limited by the reduced surface area.
thats why "lock sfoils is attack position" means the opening of the sfoils.
-
When they took off from the Yavin base, they had to have the S-Foils closed for storage. Atmospheric departure/entrance might also require closed S-Foils. Perhaps they just left them that way until they were close to the battle. Might also increase your field of view when they are closed to help with formation flying. I could probably come up with any number of non-combat reasons why the S-Foils were closed. There's probably as many combat ones but neither one can be proven. I just don't want the reason for them to seem forced, it would have to serve some decent purpose.
-
Rule of cool.
-
I would suggest that, if you can work this into a LUA script instead of SEXPs, it will definitely get used.
I don't know how to make LUA scripts ,but i can make tables or work on POF.
I think SEXPs are enough just because they are working fine and can be put in a template mission ,but if you want LUA script there may be a compatibility problem because I'm using INF build and I don't know if it's scripting compatible or not.
I can also try to make complete B-wing s-foil system ,but i don't have model which can use this animation (IA B-wing has only moving pylons) so if i can get B-wing with model hierarchy set like that:
Cabin>Wing>Pylons
I think i can make its wing AND pylons rotate ,of course if it is possible.
I'm not a modeller so if somebody will tell me I'm wrong in my hierarchy idea I will not argue with him.
I can work on POF so if you want to send me your B-wing ,it can be just mesh with texture ,i can do everything that PCS2 can do. Also i think so the standard thruster glows cannot be used ,because they won't move with
s-foils. Glowpoints might solve the problem (i seen them moving with EA Omega habitat in TBP ,so i think they will also move with s-foils).
It's a code for pylons only ,if somebody wants to use it.
$Subsystem: Sfoil1,15,0
$animation: triggered
$type: Secondary_bank
+sub_type: 1
+delay: 0
+relative_angle: 0,0,90
+velocity: 0,0,180
+acceleration: 0,0,90
+time: 2000
$Subsystem: Sfoil2,15,0
$animation: triggered
$type: Secondary_bank
+sub_type: 1
+delay: 0
+relative_angle: 0,0,-90
+velocity: 0,0,180
+acceleration: 0,0,90
+time: 2000
For this secondary set:
$Allowed SBanks: ( "Concussion Missile" "Discord Missile" "Proton Torpedo" "Adv Torpedo"
"intruder Rocket" "proton Bomb" "Phoenix" "Missile" "Adv Missile" "Torpedo" "Adv Torpedo" "Heavy Rocket"
"Space Bomb" "Phoenix" "Ion Pulse" "Mag Pulse" "Nothing" ) ( "Nothing" )
$Allowed Dogfight SBanks: ( )
$Default SBanks: ( "Proton Torpedo" "Nothing" )
$SBank Capacity: ( 80 1 )
As for usefulness i think they may be closed for hyperspacing.
I made XWA style jump with SEXPs only ,can easily be linked with SEXP s-foils.
I hope you will find some use for this.
-
Karajorma's recent Inferno test build (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,61418.0.html) is essentially an inferno nightly build with a few other features in it too, so it has the scripting. It also has a multiplayer Inferno fix. I'd give it a shot.
-
I know about new inferno build ,so now i just need to learn scripting.
I still think the SEXP solution is much easier.
Also ,do you want to make Headhunter with moving wings (Revenge of the Sith) ?
Because i can try to set animation also for it.
Soon I will make a test mission where you can test wings ,along with hyperspacing and few other innovations.
It will include IA models.
I only don't know where to upload it ,i think FSMods will be good but it going to mean that mission ,along with minimod (few IA models and blasters) will be available for public. I don't know if you want this.
-
Well technically, since you're working on it yourself you could do whatever you want with it. If you want to transfer it privately you can upload to RapidShare, etc. and then PM me a link to it.
-
...Also ,do you want to make Headhunter with moving wings (Revenge of the Sith)?...
There's no Z-95 in Revenge of the Sith. The fighter that you saw in the Battle of Coruscant aren't Z-95s.
-
If I may interject... www.filedropper.com is easier than say rapidshare and does the same thing.
-
I see your filedropper and raise you mediafire (http://mediafire.com).
The more the merrier anyway as far as good file sharing sites are concerned... with mediafire you can use download accelerators and there are no waiting times or retarded captchas that are night impossible for humans to interpret (anyone remember tha cats and dogs of RapidShare??), and it generally tends to work well for both upload and download, so... I can recommend it.
Aaand... I don't really have anything constructive to add to the topic aside from that. :warp:
-
Unfortunately I was aware of both of those options but could not recall their names at the moment, thanks for bringing them up.
-
I don't know how to make LUA scripts ,but i can make tables or work on POF.
I think SEXPs are enough just because they are working fine and can be put in a template mission ,but if you want LUA script there may be a compatibility problem because I'm using INF build and I don't know if it's scripting compatible or not.
The problem with the code you posted is that it only works for Alpha 1. If this is to be a game 'feature' we would want it turned on, all the time, for all players.
-
Well, unless it functions like a similar existing game mechanic (such as afterburner), the AI wouldn't even know what to do with it, so it would at least be relegated to human player only.
-
I had suggested that exact same thing, actually, way back when in the scripting forum--have the Afterburner key close s-foils, lock weapons, give a small speed boost, and have unlimited fuel.
-
I'm not saying I suggest it, that was just an example. In fact I really don't think the S-Foils make much sense acting like an afterburner. The same key could be used to do it but without similar functionality the AI would do it for no apparent reason in the middle of a fight.
-
S-foils would add to the authenticity of the environment, having X-wings, B-wings, and any other craft where they apply fly with them closed while on patrol and before entering and while leaving hyperspace and hangars, and Lambda shuttles, gunboats, Sentinel landing craft unfolding their wings as they enter and leave hangars if possible. I believe there was a discussion about this already.
Can't think of any other examples, but if nothing else, like Galemp said, it just looks cool!
-
Using the effect when entering and exiting a mission would be pretty cool, I don't know how much we'll be using hangars though, but if we do that would probably also qualify as entering/exiting a mission, so we might be able to work something out there.
-
I think hangars should be used just because all fighters need to land somewhere and i never liked FS concept of jumping to carrier and off-screen landing. I think landing with open s-foils is going to be hard if not impossible in "real life" and you can safely make them impossible in game ,at least for human players ( i don't know how to trigger animation for AI in mission ).
As for Headhunter faux pas ,according to "The Essential guide to vehicles and vessels" headhunter is old an had moving wings in recent version ,so when i saw x-wing-ish fighters with moving wings in old republic era i thought they were recent Headhunters. Also ,what was those fighters ,if not Headhunters? And do you want to include these? (Headhunters or not i can try animating them). And what was the way the wings moved on Z-95?
-
There is no single source for what the Headhunter can and can't do. It seems throughout Star Wars literature there are about 6 different fighters named "Z-95 Headhunter" built by Incom and Subpro... Some have X-Wings, some have swing wings, some have straight wings, some have swept wings, and anywhere between 1 and 4 engines...
There are so many conflicting sources on the Headhunter that you can pretty much say it's whatever you want.
As for the fighters in Ep3, they're ARC-170s (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Aggressive_ReConnaissance-170_starfighter)
-
It's Headhunter cousin ,and i could have mistaken in the heat of battle.
I hope you want to include it.
I can try to make ARC-170's wings move like in movie if they movement isn't too complicated for animation code to handle ,but i think they are awesome even without moving wings.
Your Headhunter will be most likely a more recent version without moving wings anyway.
I can also animate Lambda and Sentinel imperial shuttles though i had no chance to try because IA lambda is a single object and only Lambda available for me.Same for escort shuttle. I have no sentinel.
-
Hey, your're doing a SW game. Shouldn't you know a bit about SW Technology before? :lol:
No, seriously. I don't know that much about it, but judging from three books I have, that AFAIK aren't available anymore (one from an old SW game, a "tech giude" and one that came out when SW - ROTJ hit the big screens):
- The main reason for the folding wings was obviously to look sexy on the screen (just like the shuttle). ;)
The two reasons the model makers came up with:
- The wings have to be closed for atmospheric flight to they work as real "wings".
- The wings have to be open for combat, because the two lasers on each side are too close together, when the wings are closed. Because of the radiation they would simply overheat. So the wings are opened to cool the weapons. And as a security measure the weapons can't be fired when the wings are closed.
That still doesn't explain, why they would be closed during space flight, but that are the two "facts" I know.
-
Yet, in some SW books, some atmo fights took place with X-Wings. I know some don't consider the books to be canon, but I felt I had to add this.
-
Yet, in some SW books, some atmo fights took place with X-Wings. I know some don't consider the books to be canon, but I felt I had to add this.
Yeah, I remembered that too after posting.
My "wild guess" is that it with the wings closed, the X-Wing is able to fly like a plane, while with wings open it has to "hover" using its engines, resulting in way higher power consumption. But that's just my 2cents... ;)
-
If you don't want people to use the s-foils as cheap afterburners, you could have the ship become a flying brick during conversion, making anybody who uses it during a combat situation much more likely to get shot down as they wallow about like a legless duck.
-
There is no single source for what the Headhunter can and can't do. It seems throughout Star Wars literature there are about 6 different fighters named "Z-95 Headhunter" built by Incom and Subpro... Some have X-Wings, some have swing wings, some have straight wings, some have swept wings, and anywhere between 1 and 4 engines...
There are so many conflicting sources on the Headhunter that you can pretty much say it's whatever you want.
As for the fighters in Ep3, they're ARC-170s (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Aggressive_ReConnaissance-170_starfighter)
The Z-95s many iterations have been explained as a number of models over a long time, so depending on the model, you can have a very different craft. Theoretically, you can make quite a few different Z-95 models for the project based on this.
Hey, your're doing a SW game. Shouldn't you know a bit about SW Technology before? :lol:
No, seriously. I don't know that much about it, but judging from three books I have, that AFAIK aren't available anymore (one from an old SW game, a "tech giude" and one that came out when SW - ROTJ hit the big screens):
- The main reason for the folding wings was obviously to look sexy on the screen (just like the shuttle). ;)
The two reasons the model makers came up with:
- The wings have to be closed for atmospheric flight to they work as real "wings".
- The wings have to be open for combat, because the two lasers on each side are too close together, when the wings are closed. Because of the radiation they would simply overheat. So the wings are opened to cool the weapons. And as a security measure the weapons can't be fired when the wings are closed.
That still doesn't explain, why they would be closed during space flight, but that are the two "facts" I know.
Probably the best explanation is laser power is diverted to the engines for "cruise mode," but not that BS Rogue Squadron afterburner feature. This would also act is a safeguard against accidental fire as well. I doubt they work as actual wings because they're not airfoils. They are straight-edged. No way they'll create any lift, but I guess with repulsorlifts, aerodynamic wings aren't as big of an issue, plus you have deflector shields, so if you have them on, the air would never push on the craft. Of course, I don't think there's need for a cruise mode in this conversion. I doubt FS2 can include those kinds of distances in missions.
-
I doubt they work as actual wings because they're not airfoils. They are straight-edged. No way they'll create any lift, but I guess with repulsorlifts, aerodynamic wings aren't as big of an issue, plus you have deflector shields, so if you have them on, the air would never push on the craft. Of course, I don't think there's need for a cruise mode in this conversion. I doubt FS2 can include those kinds of distances in missions.
Of course they are aerofoils. Crudely shaped and unoptimized, but with some angle of attack they would provide lift just as any piece of plate traveling through air does... Symmetric aerofoil can provide lift with angle of attack (the key is of course that angle of attack makes it unsymmetric in relation to the airflow), otherwise aerobatic planes wouldn't be able to fly at all. Moreover I think the crudeness of the wings is more related to the designers not bothering to make them look like aerofoils, not that they wouldn't be aerofoils. Shape of the wing in airplanes is designed the way it is to minimize drag and maximize the lift, and an unsymmetric drop shape is thus most often used as basic aerofoil profile since the unsymmetry (or curve or whatever) means it will now generate lift without any angle of attack, which is good since increasing angle of attack increases drag much more than designing the wing to produce lift while traveling through the air at zero AoA.*
The problem with X-Wings and Z-95s is that they would be longitudinally overstabile darts at least without canards, and there's also some doubts about lateral stability since they don't have anything to provide aerodynamic vertical stabilization except maybe the X-Wing in open-winged mode since the wings point not only to sides but a bit up and down as well... With using repulsor technology aka magic (or pufferjets even) for active stabilization, they could both fly, it's not a question of lacking wing area to generate lift...
*As a more technical description of the problem of lift: It could be said that any aerofoil that forces an action to the air that passes it gains an opposite reaction (also called lift). Much like putting a spoon on the water fall coming out of a tap, the spoon will bend the waterflow to one direction and be pulled to opposite direction. However, since air can be treated as uncompressable fluid in most atmospheric questions, there's nowhere for the air to bend as the water does; there's air everywhere to prevent it from bending so the airflow doesn't really change it's "direction" as it passes the aerofoil. The wing does try to change the direction of airflow, but can't, and instead the attempt to divert the airflow manifests as pressure zones around the wing (higher pressure below, lower pressure above) and analyzing this pressure differential to define the amount of lift is easier than the raw analysis of the immediate reactions to the airflow so many explanations of lift oversimplify the problem to either direction - "just" the generation of pressure zones without explaining why the pressure zones are generated and how, or "just" the action-reaction principle of changing the direction of the airflow... which creates a lot of confusion from a fundamentally simple principle of fluid dynamics and newtonian laws of kinetics.
</physics debate bait>
-
The problem with X-Wings and Z-95s is that they would be longitudinally overstabile darts at least without canards, and there's also some doubts about lateral stability since they don't have anything to provide aerodynamic vertical stabilization except maybe the X-Wing in open-winged mode since the wings point not only to sides but a bit up and down as well... With using repulsor technology aka magic (or pufferjets even) for active stabilization, they could both fly, it's not a question of lacking wing area to generate lift...
Unstable, yes, but not unflyable, as proven even with today's technology:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/DarkStar_Tier_III.jpg/300px-DarkStar_Tier_III.jpg)
Granted that project (RQ-3 Darkstar) was cancelled because the aerodynamic instabilites became too much of a problem, but would hardly be a problem for Star Wars technology levels.
I'll take that physics bait and raise you one random aviation trivia
-
I just read up on the real reason for lift and the top-longer-than-bottom fallacy the other day. Good stuff to know.
-
Yeah, we had a long and vivacious discussion about it with Snagger on GameWarden back in the day when BtRL was all the rage (I'm starting to feel old when I say stuff like that). At that time I was not as good as I am now in explaining my point of view on the matter which pretty much served to lengthen the debate at that point...
Buggula - X-Wing and Z-95 wouldn't be unstable, they would be overstable at least as long as pitch is concerned, since the center of gravity would be way ahead of the center of lift without any kind of aerofoils on the nose to counter the pitch-down tendency. A good example of an aerodynamically overstable object would be a dart, or an arrow. With a canard setup both the T-65 and Z-95 would be viable planes actually, with yaw being dealt with by spoilers. Or Star Wars handwavium/magic. Or if you assume that the nose of the hull is built so that it can produce some lift, that would work as well I guess (though it doesn't look like it would be a viable explanation). Like that example seems to have leading edge extensions combining to a semi-lifting body design (Ironically it looks like a Naboo spaceship from the prequels, in a way).
A-Wing is just a dead ringer for lifting body design, and B-Wing would work beautifully as an unsymmetric airplane - the main wing would probably be horizontal in atmospheric flight mode with the cockpit turned 90 degrees to the right (or left) although it's a really bad place to put a cockpit on since the pilot would probably become disoriented by being so far off the center of gravity (around which the ship would pivot), but it would fly all right.
The question of Star Wars ships being atmospheric capable is pretty void nonetheless since all the ships in Star Wars (excluding the big capital ships which can't enter atmosphere) are capable of hovering seemingly without any significant limits on fuel/energy consumption, and have more than ample amount of thrust to simply propel them into orbit ballistically if necessary. So debating about stability is more or less a curiosity - obviously Star Wars ships can fly in atmosphere. So discussing about that would actually have more merit on an RC airplane board where someone was asking about the viability of Star Wars designs as strictly aerodynamic fliers. And to that question, the answer is - with small modifications (some kind of control surfaces/canards on the nose, or perhaps leading edge extensions) and gyro controlled pitch and yaw stability X-Wing and Z-95 would probably be viable, B-Wing definitely although controlling it would be a bit exotic due to unsymmetry (and pitch stability might be a bit problematic), A-Wing probably with powerful enough engines and some modifications on the hull design (to actually make it generate lift), TIE's would be all but hopeless along with the Y-Wing.
-
feasible reasons for X split:
-all fighters in SW have an inertial compensator, so "split" the IC probably draws a bit more power to expanding the field to relieve stress at the wing joint.
-the engines are mounted on the wings so they put a great deal of stress on the joints, when in cruise mode these stresses are shared through both joints, reducing the overall stress. also, when split, the engines are spread farther apart, allowing thrust vectoring systems to produce greater agility in the craft. this is real 3D combat, remember? not encumbered by the need for lift and the lack of anything to react against, TV would be nessesary
-from what i know (read almost all post-prequel EU novels), the wing lasers can be fired in cruising position. however the split allows a greater targeting area and greater chance to hit your target.
1)cruise : {} :
2)combat . .
{}
. .
in conclusion: greater firing spread+greater maneuverability+reducing power consumption long range+reducing stress on the "air frame" during long range flights
-
I think, from a gameplay perspective, there are a few things we can all agree on:
1) S-foils are cool when they open and close
2) In the movies and games, the only times S-foils open or close are at the beginning or end of missions (flying to the Death Star was just getting to the mission)
3) An automated SEXP/Script (both combined? I'll leave that to people who know about stuff) should be sufficient for every theoretical purpose.
4) While it would be cool if players could open and close S-foils at will, it would probably be too much work to be worth all the pain. Unless it's already done, then I won't bring you down.
From a tech nerd perspective: I always figured there were just tiny, invisible manuvering thrusters or etheric rudders mounted on the trailing edge of all wings/wing-like structures.
So, moving the wings further apart would improve manuverability much more than if they were together on all craft with S-foils, and would explain the need for those vertical fins on the A-Wing, and why the Y-Wing turned like a drunken manatee
-
better ether resistance.
the entire SW galaxy is encassed in ether.
simple.
-
Random hypothesis:
S-Foils open as a heat dispersion method. It can't be to give better maneuvering characteristics due to engine spread, nor weapon spread for firing characteristics, as none of the early models of fighter incorporating S-Foils (the Eta-2 Actis and the ARC-170) had engines or weapons mounted on their S-Foils. The answer must be heat dispersion, hence why they open for combat, situations which are necessarily going to generate more heat than normal cruising operation.
So why wouldn't they be open all the time then? Perhaps the heat level generated in a cruising scenario is beneficial to the workings of the engine. It could be possible that the fuel used in some of these fighters would have a relatively high flash point, or may be stored supercooled to reduce flammability in storage, and may need to be heated before combustion in the engine can occur. By not dispersing as much heat through radiators, this waste heat could be used to pre-heat the fuel before injection into the engine, saving on other more energy consuming methods, which in turn would require a greater fuel consumption.
However in highly strenuous situations, higher waste heat could possibly overheat the fuel mixture, causing premature ignition which could destroy the fighter outright without any enemy fire needed. Thus, in high performance scenarios, the extra heat radiation caused by the S-Foils would be needed (admittedly, however, for optimal radiation of heat, the radiators should not be placed so that the heat dispersed through them would be radiated into another radiator pylon, but we'll ignore that...)
In the same sense, the disabling of weapons during S-Foils closed mode would be a safety feature, as the extra heat caused by the firing of weapons could be dangerous.
So, S-Foils closed = fuel/energy savings, S-Foils open = optimal heat dispersion for combat scenarios.
Just a thought
Also note that I haven't touched physics, chemistry or mechanics since high school, and have only a passing familiarity with combustion methods. It may show, but hey, we all know the real reason S-Foils exist: The rule of cool.
-
That's in line with what Wookieepedia says, and furthermore it makes sense visually because the ships that have s-foils (X&B) have wingtip cannons that are freaking enormous compared to the A and Y-wings' more modestly sized armaments and the TIE ball cockpits' puny stubs. You could definitely imagine the heat from those monsters melting the wiring for their own power supply. To the tech room!
-
hadn't considered arc-170 and stuff, but yeah, those were probably heat sinks.
the x/b wing split does give a shot spread.
and in continuing the rule of cool:
we all know why ep1-3 suck: George Lucas is a Fool.
...say, would you guys like a Star Viper
id be willing to work on it, though the only program i have that i really know how to use is anim8or, but it can export/import objects as vtx, 3ds, obj.
my only condition is that someone add the pwnage that is the nebulon-beta frigate. or i could do that too, though it would be alot more difficult(i dont have a model of one :P)
-
Hmm...this one (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Image:StarViper-EaWFoC.jpg)? Actually it looks a lot like EVE's Tristan (http://www.eveonlineships.com/eve-online-ship.php?navicrip=Z2FsbGVudGUtdHJpc3Rhbi0xLmpwZw==). Can't stop ya from making it, if you can get it LOD'd all that much the better. No guarantees it'd be in any campaign we've discussed up to this point but generally, with ships it's the more the merrier :)
-
lod'd? you mean a high res model as well as a low res model?
-
Yeah otherwise someone else has to do that before it goes in game, so it's something to keep in mind as you model. And actually Freespace works well with 3, 4, or even 5 LODs sometimes I think. 2 is probably not enough to really take advantage of them.
-
what should my poly targets be, and does the mesh have to be vertex sewn, or can i use separate meshes for detail, greebles, etc
-
It can have multiple subobjects, but for a small ship you probably don't need them unless there's a chance they will move. But a single subobject doesn't have to be sewn either, it can be disconnected parts I believe.
-
They don't have to be welded together, but be careful, at least until pixel shading becomes the norm, since specularity is calculated on a per-polygon basis, and that can lead for a really weird effect when non-welded polygons meet, since the lighting will not take it into account.
-
The interesting, age-old discussion of what the purpose of the S-Foil could actually serve... Hopefully such a late post in the discussion won't bother anyone...
This site in my opinion is the best reference to the X-Wing I've ever seen: http://saxman.xwlegacy.net/
You'll need to find the link to the X-Wing, of course, but the author has "done his research" so-to-say (via novels, the films, etc.).
In terms of maneuverability, the operation of the S-Foils might warrent slightly different handling characteristics. As mentioned in the article above, the closed position of the foils yields a slightly greater "thrust footprint" to the lateral portion of the craft. Given that the fighter has some degree of thrust vectoring or differential thrust (any ship like this would require it... heck, even the Y-Wing has thrust vectoring!), this would enable slightly greater yaw authority. This would not be much, but there you go.
When the foils are opened, the engines separate to a much greater extent above and below the center of mass on the xy or yz-plane, thus enabling greater pitch authority via a greater moment. If we are to believe thruster banks are installed on the trailing edge of the foils, then this would also serve to improve pitch authority when the the foils were opened in the sense that the thrusters might be able to act in a similar manner as differential thrust in the engines as described in the scenario above. Thus, overall maneuverability is greater when the foils are opened, as everyone should figure naturally. Supposedly this act also increases the effectiveness of the deflector shields by augmenting their coverage area.
In terms of gameplay, implementing S-Foils would require a shifting of table values for the X-Wing when the system was engaged. How the table shifting could be done, I have no idea. However, as someone already suggested, this transitional prompt would most effectively be done by using a "primary weapon" called "safe" or something like that. The next part would involve making sure only one primary weapon could EVER be selected at one time. This would serve the dual function of disarming the cannons when the S-Foils were engaged ("safe") as well as actually moving the physical wings/shifting flight model tables. Obviously, this process would go both ways. Also, entering subspace/hyperspace/somethingspace would need to cause the S-Foils to close as well.
If the argument is attempted that closing the foils has some sort of performance boost, it is mostly out of the scope of FotG UNLESS you make an argument for a specific case, which I will cover shortly. If there were atmospheric missions, closing the foils could indeed bring about a greater sustainable speed. The X-Wing obviously does not really have good aerodynamics. However, with the foils open, the aerodynamics become worse at speed. This would be due to the fact that a great deal of airflow is trundling about between the split wing surface (making the S-Foils act a little like an airbrake). For the Rogue Squadron games, this is acceptable as a game dynamic as most missions took place in an atmosphere. In the case of FotG however, what could be argued is that closing the foils disarms the cannons and thus means an automatic transfer of power from the weapon energy to both shields and engines. This change would be gradual in actually occuring, and would be likewise in reversing. Thus it might take a minute for the effects to be realized. This would mean that the pilot would have to coose well when he/she would employ the foils, thus denying any stupid "gamey" trick in simulation. The application of the foils could be as follows: (1.) on a patrol, you want to move through waypoints faster. Thus you close the foils. Also works great for triggers/ mission situations. (2.) entering the hangar and landing perhaps. Diaspora will have landing ops. It would be really cool to see Fate of the Galaxy have this as well. Heck, even TBP had recoveries aboard a vessel to an extent.
Of course, this is all just brainstorming and speculation. I have faith in the experts to develop something worthwhile :D
-Thaeris