[Petrarch of the VBB]

Well that'll make the game all the more challenging, then, and more ture to Homeworld.
Alpha 1 will no longer be a one-man navy, but a mere insignificant pilot amongst many others, and will have to rely on strength in numbers to survive.

And as for afterburners, if we have all the ships travelling at Homeworld speed, we wont NEED afterburners.  The scout will be 1000m/s, for instance.

[Bishop Gantry]

Originally posted by GoDoFeViL
that seems to be the opinion of everyone...

but i still reckon that because afterburners r a key element in fs2, flying ships without them will be a severe hinderance to the pilot.

we will have to make the  weapons a bit weaker then, cause otherwise without shields and afterburners the player gets hit much more, and it is also more difficult to get out of the fireing path of an enemy fighter...

That wouldnt be a problem if the relocating energy to Weaps/Engines would be increased by 200%...

anyway HW fighters can take quit a beating... though not cap ship fire ...

[Grug]

hmm, iv been playing around with the accel speeds and max speeds etc, but realisticly to get straight to max speed you still need an afterburner to give that boost.

what if we called them something like "full throtel" or "gun engines" or "all energy to engines" and it only ever lasts for 1 or 2 secs, but enough to get u upto full speed when need be? and maybe it drains energy from ur guns as well?

or r u guys still content with sticking with the slow take off?

[Black Wolf]

*Just realized GoDoFeViL is an Aussie*

Wow - there are more of us than I thought...

[Bishop Gantry]

Originally posted by GoDoFeViL
hmm, iv been playing around with the accel speeds and max speeds etc, but realisticly to get straight to max speed you still need an afterburner to give that boost.

what if we called them something like "full throtel" or "gun engines" or "all energy to engines" and it only ever lasts for 1 or 2 secs, but enough to get u upto full speed when need be? and maybe it drains energy from ur guns as well?

or r u guys still content with sticking with the slow take off?

hmm have you asked in the modding forum as I recall near instant accell should be possible without afterburners....

[elorran]

I still think we should put after burners in.

I personally think being a direct alignment with homeworld will not be good for TAP.  This is a whole different style of game we are doing here and rebalancing will have to be done.

I think we should include missiles for combat as well as short burst after burners... but all in a controlled manner.  GoD had a nice point with the acceleration to max speed idea.  Make the fighters acceleration slower and give it a AB to short burst up to top speed.

These issues will be dealt with.  But I'm still curious to see what other people think and would like to see in TAP.

[Grug]

Black Wolf- hehe they can never stop us! -Its not in me info but Im from eastern Australia. good ol Queensland.

Bout ideas-

i do agree with elorran.

the key problem though is that although we are trying to implement a HW feel and atmosphere, there will still be, and always will be a strong sense of FS2 gameplay.

HW was a strategy game, FS2 is a simulation of space combat. Now although as much as we all wish that it could be exactly like HW, the best we can get is HW look, feel, but FS2 at heart, as with any other cross-game mod.

Everyone has to remember that FS2 flying doesnt exactly handle like HW fighters fly around. So unless we completely rip into the SCP and rewrite parts of the engine, we cant get exact transformations.
Now dont get me wrong, TAP will still be one of the best mods you will ever play (*10pts for inner-salesman*), but still dont go expecting something that we can't actually do.
Even if we were to rip into the SCP, you would be seeing another huge delay, and thats the last thing anyone wants...

Hopefully we can consider these other ideas insubstitution for exact replicas.


geez im starting to sound like a lecturer at uni
-------

but yes as i was suggesting, a small amount of AB to get the player upto full speed when required. Like when your trying to escape the fire of a multibeam frigate or something.

as for the missiles, realisticly i do believe they r a key element to FS2 gameplay. and when u r flying around in the acolyte and u only have 2...cmon.

how bout u fire 2, and it has a long wait time b/w firing? this could work. couldnt it?

and maybe other fighter missiles are really tiny so in HW u never would have seen them? yes / no?

but as elorran said i too am curious about what other peoples opinions r...

dont forget that people can make theyre own missions in a more true format of HW.
maybe we could demonstrate these points in the demo? have 2 replicas of a mission, 1 true to HW, and 1 based on adaptaions to FS2 gameplay?

iv rambled on long enough ...


----------------

ok i was playing around with the accel values, and realising that its backwards i managed to get them flying around at pretty fast rates.

now if we have the accel close to instant it handles pretty cool, but makes it difficult when ur surrounded by others doing the same...

didnt we release the acolyte not to long ago?
try making the accel in the tbl entry something like 0.5 and decel 2. with a max speed of 82 and and overclock of 123 it really flies when u put energy to the engines...

but this still doesnt fly realistic to HW. ie AB still may be the best bet...

[Flaser]

I believe ships should be just made a lot faster, with better acceleration/de- so it would "shrink" the battlefield and give a more HW-ish feel.
The top-speed idea is good.
I'm against the common use of missiles - they are a cornerstone of FS2, but in HW they were reserved for bigger ships.
The whole fighter idea was spoilt in HW though - in the end, you hadn't had too many of them.
Their roles and power should be rather based on what's seen in HW2 where the designers put a great effort on "making them useful during the entire game".
So they have to be in an entierly different legue than capships, so corvettes would have high, and frigates moderate chance to hit them.

Directional thrust is something that should be tried - in HW ships moved in all directions without regards to their engine setup, which is actually more realistic than the FS design.

It can already be done with FS_Open_3.5.
You just have to edit the table.

So you could strafe - around big ships, or strafe out of incoming fire while doing rolls and sharp turns.

If we insist on using missiles bear in mind that truly anti-cap missiles in HW are almost as big as a fighter, so they should be rather called torpedos.

[Thorn]

Very limited afterburners except on the scout...
Say about 2 seconds burn, slow recharge, enough to dodge a missile at the last second...

[Grug]

thats what i was thinking... (bout afterburners)

iv been playing around a bit with the ships manauverability...

if ur refering to the slide,im not sure how that works but i think it requires more controls to use strafe, this would mean the player having to bind and learn how to use these extra controls...

but i am intrigued by it. dont spose u have  a link to a description on how to use it.

TAP is already running ^3.5 so theres no prob there...

but if u can give us/point out the table entries so i can investigate what ur on about i would be much obliged.

[Bishop Gantry]

Like when your trying to escape the fire of a multibeam frigate or something.

Your not supposed to engage or even get remotley close to a Multibeam frigate as a fighter pilot...

Fighters should be helluva faster than Capships...

lets face it if we allow fighters to survive dedicated AA platforms it isnt HW anymore its Alpha1 flying with HW lookalike ships...

[Flaser]

Originally posted by GoDoFeViL
thats what i was thinking... (bout afterburners)

iv been playing around a bit with the ships manauverability...

if ur refering to the slide,im not sure how that works but i think it requires more controls to use strafe, this would mean the player having to bind and learn how to use these extra controls...

but i am intrigued by it. dont spose u have  a link to a description on how to use it.

TAP is already running ^3.5 so theres no prob there...

but if u can give us/point out the table entries so i can investigate what ur on about i would be much obliged.

In the ship's table the first two values in maximum velocity refer to slide velocity, while rear velocity refers to backwards velocity. The slide axceleration is quite obvious.
Check the Terran SF-Mara you'll see what I mean. Many Shivan fighters are like this.
BTW it can already be set in the 3.5 build to any key you want, as for changing styles, I believe TAP should be a HW-ish thing so people would have to accomodate it never the less.
A new kind of gamplay would be most refreshing.

[Grug]

iv already been playing with these values, though im not sure how one would go about binding it to a key...

do i need to do it in the source code or a .ini or in options

but yes, we will have to test each idea and then go with whatever turns out to be the best... so thanx for all the suggestions and tips guys

[Flaser]

Originally posted by GoDoFeViL
iv already been playing with these values, though im not sure how one would go about binding it to a key...

do i need to do it in the source code or a .ini or in options

but yes, we will have to test each idea and then go with whatever turns out to be the best... so thanx for all the suggestions and tips guys

...just download the fs351.vp from the source-code project's site.
Then simply go into options it's already there, I've tried it out with a Mara!

[Grug]

k i will check, like i mentioned before TAP is already using SCP...

btw= screeny?

here is a first look at a beta trail...



cool eh?

its still in beta but all i have to do is play with some values, and fix up the colour scheme etc...

[Jal-18]

Engine trails look kinda wierd, need the energy "bulb" at the engine outlet and the outer "transperant" enegery shell...

apart from that, it looks awsome!

[Flaser]

This project would definitly benefit from the support of transparent textures, though I doubt the SCP guys would be willing to deal with it separatly - on the other hand I guess that in the later phase the engine overhaul team could be bothered with such things.

[KevinPryde]

Originally posted by GoDoFeViL

didnt we release the acolyte not to long ago?

Yes.

...Oh, that wasn't supposed to be a question to reflect upon?

Oops.

[Grug]

har har...

anyway, a lot of the trails has was already changed, that was just a screenshot i had handy

but yes it gets the point across. engine glows will be my next endevour.

though im not sure if there will be colour matching glows with all the ship trails, cause i dont think u can select a ships engine glow... i think its all based on race...

but we will see how it comes up in the end...