Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Kestrellius on June 01, 2015, 01:42:07 pm
-
It seems like wherever I go, the thing gets glowing reviews. For me...it's just not maneuverable enough. I need something on the level of a Pegasus, or more firepower to make up for it. I mean, sure, it gets the job done, but it's not any fun to fly.
peggy best ship btw
-
Dont treat the Perseus as a replacement Valkyrie, stat wise it is a replacement Apollo and compared to what you have at that stage of the game it is massively better than anything else in the roster as a general purpose fighter, which is sad as there is no real interceptor in FS2
-
Well I mean sure, it's loads better than, say, the Myrmidon. I just prefer things like the Loki, for example. The Perseus doesn't have that extra edge of turn speed that I need for the ship to feel right.
Of course, if you just want to be effective, you grab a heavy fighter and all the missiles you can hold. That's pretty much what the game was build for.
-
I'm happy with my small Loki.
-
Once you start playing against Fury AI the battlespace optima moves away from heavy fighters and missiles towards agile gunfighters, turrets, and interceptors with linear speed. As the AI's capabilities approach human capabilities, shields and hull stop being effective defenses.
Target profile also becomes a big deal.
-
The Loki would be a great fighter if it could carry appreciable amounts of missiles. It has good speed, good agility, tough shields (400!), and a big capacitor for its primaries.
Perseus not agile enough? Go for the Ulysses. It has always been my favorite fighter on higher difficulties. Nothing can touch it...you can hit afterburners and do a corkscrew maneuver and be untouched even on head-on passes.
Target profile also becomes a big deal.
When facing ships with wide gunpoints like the Thoth, you can orient your Ulysses s.t. your ship's thin hull is perpendicular to the Thoth's thin hull (like a "+" symbol) and its primaries will miss you.
-
It seems like wherever I go, the thing gets glowing reviews. For me...it's just not maneuverable enough. I need something on the level of a Pegasus, or more firepower to make up for it. I mean, sure, it gets the job done, but it's not any fun to fly.
peggy best ship btw
Enemy number one spotted! Launch a wing of Perseus, and blast him to pieces!
-
Well I mean sure, it's loads better than, say, the Myrmidon. I just prefer things like the Loki, for example. The Perseus doesn't have that extra edge of turn speed that I need for the ship to feel right.
The Loki's only a hair more manoeuvrable than the Perseus in the tables.
The Perseus is probably the only retail fighter I really enjoy flying, except maybe the Pegasus.
-
Why no Ulysses appreciation?
The Ulysses has had a tough life, culminating in the ultimate indignity: replacement by the Myrmidon.
The Ulysses will rise again!
edit: soon I will release my campaign, "THE ULYSSES RERISES" in which the only playable ship is the Ulysses
-
I ain't so much of a fan of the Perseus either,I'm more of a heavy fighter fan,so Hercs,Erinyes and Ares are my thing,just load them with trebs,harpoons or tornadoes and blast anything you see.I don't mind taking a Loki,Pegasus,Perseus or Myrmidon,but they ain't really my thing,as they don't have good enough armament to satisfy my needs.As for Ulysses...piece of junk,I'd rather take something that turns as good as
TSJ Icanus,but at least has armor,shields and weapons.
-
Ulysses is good. To be honest, I'm not terribly fond of 2-2 gun mounts in general. They just don't hit very hard. It's all so underwhelming. I'd prefer a setup like the Thoth's, but the Thoth's hardpoints are so wide...
-
I like the Perseus. I also like a lot of the other fighters mentioned here. I don't like the Ulysses or the Thoth, which can't take very much punishment, especially in FS2.
-
Ulysses' four guns are ok,they can be used,however armor,shields and secondaries are way too bad for my liking,if it had,say Valkrye's speed and missile capacity and Herc's armor and shielding it would be a good space superiority and interceptor.
-
Well yes, if you had a ship that was fast, durable and heavily-armed it'd be good at everything.
-
The Nyx isn't good at not getting Slammered :smugdog:
-
You have the Tauret and the Erynies...not so fast,but durable and heavily armed.
-
The Nyx isn't good at not getting Slammered :smugdog:
Nothing's good at that except corvettes, and that's only because you buffed their armour!
-
I don't like the Uly because its missiles points are too wide to use tempests (or any other dumbfire missile), which is fairly crippling.
The Perseus is a fine space superiority fighter (it's a "strictly-better" Apollo by TCG definitions), but if its pushed into interception it doesn't quite have have the speed.
-
I find that the Apollo is more one step away from "Space Superiority" in the direction of "Assault", while the Perseus is one step away from the "Interceptor" role in the direction of "Space Superiority", which is why it's called an "Interceptor Fighter". The fact that the Herc. II is faster, more agile and carries more missiles than the Herc.I but is durable, I feel puts it also one stop towards the "Space Superiority" class from its listed "Heavy Assault" class. The Erinyes' greater speed but lower hitpoints and missile capacity might classify it as something like a "Strike Fighter", meant to get in fast, hit hard, and then get out before it takes too much damage.
-
Yes, you are!
I don't like the Ulysses because it is literally too responsive for small targets like Dragons. My hit ratio drops because I can't track them smoothly.
-
Are we counting the Terran Mara in this discussion? Because it has the speed, maneuverability, and 2-2 gunpoints of the Apollo and Perseus, while having the armor, shielding, missile capacity, and primary recharge rate of the Ares. By far the best fighter in the GTVA.
-
The Uly was my absolute favorite in FS1. I used it to the exclusion of all else when available. I absolutely loved the turning rate. That was back before my accuracy went to **** for whatever reason. I can't use it effectively anymore. Maybe it's the joystick (currently on x45, where before I had a Cyborg 3D gold), or this fuzzy direct input thing I've heard mentioned a couple of times. I just can't nail down what's different. But I was so good with the uly because I could stay on target for a long time and just eat away the fighters with a Prom-Avenger combo. Now I have to do deflection shots so I favor high-powered bursts, or missile spam.
As to the original question, no, I never liked the Perseus either. I'd even take the Myrmidon over it for its quad primary bank in the early game. Once available, the Erinyes was my new Ulysses for the octo primaries. At least until I got off of easy difficulty where the short energy reserves didn't matter. Kayser/Maxim combo could eat fighters in microseconds.
-
That was back before my accuracy went to **** for whatever reason. I can't use it effectively anymore. Maybe it's the joystick (currently on x45, where before I had a Cyborg 3D gold), or this fuzzy direct input thing I've heard mentioned a couple of times. I just can't nail down what's different.
On a few other message boards they had an explanation for this phenomenon. From the days of Windows 9x to now, the way Direct Input reacts to joystick movement has changed. It used to use absolute values from the joystick which would translate to instant movement in whatever direction (X,Y) away from 0 (zero - center) the joystick was moved. Whether you moved the joystick 25, 50, or 100% away from center and no matter how quickly or slowly you moved it, your ship would change direction based on input instantaneously. Conversely, releasing the joystick to center would instantly snap the ship to straight. This method actually made the joystick act more like a mouse.
Later, in order to make turning seem more "realistic" (and unfortunately, it really is), there was a delay added (attitude acceleration/deceleration) since it was felt that, realistically, it took time for a aircraft/starship/whatever to respond to input from its pilot based on the craft's speed, weight, drag, etc. The net effect is: if you were to slam the joystick 100% in any direction using the old Direct Input method, the ship would almost instantly turn in that direction whereas now it has to accelerate to full turn speed (which can take up to 1 second to accomplish) before reaching its maximum. Bottom line: this makes the joystick less responsive and has the effect of causing overcompensation when targeting - often overshooting the target you're trying to get a fix on (the ship has to accelerate into the turn but then has to decelerate when the target nears the reticle - the deceleration causing the overshoot). Clear as mud? :D
On topic - Perseus? Just ok. But I'm a heavy-assault kind of guy: Herc, Herc II and especially the Ares. :yes:
-
On topic - Perseus? Just ok. But I'm a heavy-assault kind of guy: Herc, Herc II and especially the Ares. :yes:
I thought that I was alone...
-
"Am I the only one who"
You can always answer that question with 'no'
-
That was back before my accuracy went to **** for whatever reason. I can't use it effectively anymore. Maybe it's the joystick (currently on x45, where before I had a Cyborg 3D gold), or this fuzzy direct input thing I've heard mentioned a couple of times. I just can't nail down what's different.
On a few other message boards they had an explanation of this phenomenon. From the days of Windows 9x to now, the way Direct Input reacts to joystick movement has changed. It use to deal with absolute values from the joystick which would translate to instant movement in whatever direction (X,Y) away from 0 (zero - center) the joystick was moved. Whether you moved the joystick 25, 50, or 100% away from center and no matter how quickly or slowly you moved it, your ship would change direction based on input instantaneously. Conversely, releasing the joystick to center would instantly snap the ship to straight. This method actually made the joystick act more like a mouse.
Later, in order to make turning seem more "realistic" (and unfortunately, this effect really is), there was a delay added (attitude acceleration/deceleration) since it was felt that, realistically, it took time for a aircraft/starship/whatever to respond to input from its pilot based on the craft's speed, weight, drag, etc. The net effect is: if you were to slam the joystick 100% in any direction using the old Direct Input method, the ship would almost instantly turn in that direction whereas now it has to accelerate to full turn speed (which can take up to 1 second to accomplish) before reaching its maximum. Bottom line: this makes the joystick less responsive and has the effect of causing overcompensation when targeting - often overshooting the target you're trying to get a fix (the ship has to accelerate into the turn but then has to decelerate the turn to get a fix - the deceleration causing the overshoot). Clear as mud? :D
On topic - Perseus? Just ok. But I'm a heavy-assault kind of guy: Herc, Herc II and especially the Ares. :yes:
Huh. That would fit. But why the **** was that decision not left to the game designers?
-
Microsoft called the shots (no pun intended) with the development of DirectX and the game developers just followed suit, I suppose. I mean, who doesn't want a more realistic gaming experience - even if it is to the detriment of playability? lol :rolleyes:
Although, it would be nice if game developers could override DirectX and implement their own input API, thus allowing the choice of either the more accurate absolute value input or the more realistic delayed acceleration/deceleration input for joysticks.
Maybe the SCP team can add a couple of more command line options.... ;)
-
On topic - Perseus? Just ok. But I'm a heavy-assault kind of guy: Herc, Herc II and especially the Ares. :yes:
I thought that I was alone...
You have heavily-armed and shielded brethren, my friend. :cool:
-
Microsoft called the shots (no pun intended) with the development of DirectX and the game developers just followed suit, I suppose. I mean, who doesn't want a more realistic gaming experience - even if it is to the detriment of playability? lol :rolleyes:
Although, it would be nice if game developers could override DirectX and implement their own input API, thus allowing the choice of either the more accurate absolute value input or the more realistic delayed acceleration/deceleration input for joysticks.
Maybe the SCP team can add a couple of more command line options.... ;)
We're just switching to SDL instead.
-
On a few other message boards they had an explanation for this phenomenon. From the days of Windows 9x to now, the way Direct Input reacts to joystick movement has changed. It used to use absolute values from the joystick which would translate to instant movement in whatever direction (X,Y) away from 0 (zero - center) the joystick was moved. Whether you moved the joystick 25, 50, or 100% away from center and no matter how quickly or slowly you moved it, your ship would change direction based on input instantaneously. Conversely, releasing the joystick to center would instantly snap the ship to straight. This method actually made the joystick act more like a mouse.
Later, in order to make turning seem more "realistic" (and unfortunately, it really is), there was a delay added (attitude acceleration/deceleration) since it was felt that, realistically, it took time for a aircraft/starship/whatever to respond to input from its pilot based on the craft's speed, weight, drag, etc. The net effect is: if you were to slam the joystick 100% in any direction using the old Direct Input method, the ship would almost instantly turn in that direction whereas now it has to accelerate to full turn speed (which can take up to 1 second to accomplish) before reaching its maximum. Bottom line: this makes the joystick less responsive and has the effect of causing overcompensation when targeting - often overshooting the target you're trying to get a fix on (the ship has to accelerate into the turn but then has to decelerate when the target nears the reticle - the deceleration causing the overshoot). Clear as mud? :D
Good initiative, bad judgment / implementation.
-
We're just switching to SDL instead.
And what, pray tell, is SDL and how does it affect input?
-
In the scope of this conversation it's a replacement for DirectInput's joystick interface.
-
Any word on how far away that is? Because if it makes it like the olden days again, that would be the single biggest thing that would make me return to active FS2 playing. It's been years, even though everything is installed and my joysticks are right next to me as I type this.
-
Does everyone else use joysticks? Because I literally use the arrow keys.
Works pretty well too.
-
Does everyone else use joysticks? Because I literally use the arrow keys.
Works pretty well too.
I use WSADQE for turning to face the general direction of that enemy directly behind me, and then the mouse for precise aiming. It works nice.
-
I use WSADQE for turning to face the general direction of that enemy directly behind me, and then the mouse for precise aiming. It works nice.
Me too.
I miss the twist axis of my joystick, but you can't beat the precision aim of the mouse.
-
Regardless of what I'm using, I always have a basic setup (provided I can remap the controls, of course), which dates back to when I used to play this model plane simulator called Realflight as a kid. Right "stick" -- in this case, arrow keys -- controls pitch and roll. Left "stick" -- in this case, WASD -- controls throttle and yaw.
It always annoys me when standard control setups get it wrong, and put the rudder on the right stick and roll on the left. It's just not intuitive that way.
-
Any word on how far away that is?
It's in Antipodes and it may or may not be in the next major release of FSO (unless we make a release solely for the new renderer, which we might, in which case it'll be the major release after that).