Thoughts on Pilot Options

{NW}Rhino · 2013-12-07 02:47:08

Firstly, I LOVE the game - fast paced, made for a modern OS and to use with a mouse, and with a lot of annoying gameplay aspects removed due to mechanics. However, I thought I'd chime in with my .02 on the two pilot options, Field of View and Normalized Thrust Vectoring.

FoV settings, while nice, seem to be obvious: you set it to 180 (or whatever ends up being the max). Regardless of 'fishbowling', the ability to see more is just too good, so everyone will set this to max. It seems better to just create a default value and not allow players to change?

NTV is just hax - I think if a pilot wants the benefits, they should learn to tri chord! This is a huge aspect of the Descent games, and one that I don't think should be EZmoded in Talon.

Splotchie · 2013-12-07 04:09:00

I agree with your first point.

As to your second... Talon isn't Descent. It's not easymoding, it's lack of punishing you for just wanting to pick up the game and play. If you say trichording adds depth to the gameplay, Talon tries to let you have that depth without punishing those who prefer it to be simpler.
That's how I see it, anyhow.

Last edited by Splotchie (2013-12-07 04:19:48)

{NW}Rhino · 2013-12-08 05:52:18

Good point, the learning curve is what keeps 6dof games from taking off, so whatever keeps the players is a good thing.

Scott · 2013-12-24 23:37:05

I understand your point with regards to FOV. Some people will just set it as high as it will go in order to see more. Others however, will want to adjust it according to their display size/position in order to reduce distortion and properly "calibrate" for correct spacial positioning (some people get bad vertigo when this is not set comfortably for them). I am of the later group, preferring to set it for comfort (although vertigo is not an issue for me). I know that I am not getting as much visibility as I possibly could, but I am not bothered by this. I have the radar system to track ships around me, and it is more important to me to adjust the FOV so that it is comfortable for viewing. Plus, while setting a higher FOV means seeing more, it also means seeing less detail, because everything is smaller. Bottom line: I strongly believe this has to be an option, because there is great variety in personal preference, and for some it is a game-breaking issue when it cannot be adjusted to taste.

As for NTV/trichording, this was an issue which I considered long and hard. There was also some lively discussion on a few Descent boards when I first announced Talon. This is an issue for which there are strong opinions, and strong arguments to be made on both sides. Planet Descent hosted a very good discussion of the issue. I can trichord, very well in fact, but I never much liked it. It always felt awkward and uncomfortable flying everywhere at odd angles, and I feel like it limits my freedom of motion when I have to constrain myself to 8 diagonal vectors in order to keep my speed up. That said, I appreciate that the trichord mechanic allows to choose between multiple speeds, and some people find this beneficial. You can also make the case that trichording adds a degree of difficulty and rewards skill and practice, and that is quite true. Personally, I prefer the difficulty to come in terms of tactics, how best to move and position myself to attack my target while avoiding incoming fire, rather than needing to worry about mastery of a particular flight mechanic which makes it difficult to move quickly. Really though, there is no right or wrong here; both sides have merit, and Talon tries to bridge the gap between the two camps. With NTV on, you are not severely hindered by not trichording, you can be competitive, but if you wish to turn it off and utilize the trichord mechanic, you do get the benefit of better speed control, and you are rewarded with slightly a higher top speed along those chord vectors. Beyond the benefit of allowing players to choose what they prefer, I believe this system does benefit the community by making it a bit less discouraging to new players, which was a genuine problem for Descent. That said, I think you will find that Talon still has a fairly high skill ceiling, that there is plenty of depth to the flight mechanics, and that it is still a game which rewards practice.

Anyhow, I'm glad you're enjoying the game, and I appreciate hearing your thoughts on these issues.

Hypersonic · 2018-09-12 04:49:17

I suppose Talon had the choice of either allway or trichord 5 years before Overload https://playoverload.com/forums/topic/i … tri-chord/

I prefer allway as I'd rather focus on other things rather than the monotony of choosing 'chords', and it grants me more freedom. Also 'chords' is more of a keyboard thing, with a 6DOF joystick I'm not thinking about component chords, I'm just thinking of a 3D resultant direction and it's magnitude.

NVT normalized thrust vectors, so that's basically acceleration normalization. I suppose with air drag it would in affect also normalize the velocity vector.

Currently in Overload:
trichord unichord = ~83% allway anychord
trichord bichord = ~114% allway anychord
trichord trichord = ~135% allway anychord
I was wondering how they compared in Talon?

Scott · 2018-09-12 06:06:17

trichord = 102% anychord (NTV)
bichord = 83% anychord
unichord = 58% anychord

So mostly it just gives you more control over your speed (if you're using binary input ala keyboard). You pretty much have to multichord thrust to move quickly...

which is pretty much how I remember Descent. That's the problem with mechanics like this, at first it's an advantage; but once everyone's using it that's the new baseline and it becomes a must and a handicap if you don't. So I remember always flying around looking at the wall and the ground and the sky because I was always angled to trichord; and I didn't enjoy that. The initial thrill of going faster wore off and it just became an annoyance. Now, you can argue that it's a skill and that gives the game depth and you're not wrong; but I'd rather the skills to learn be about turning to line up your next shot while dodging the incoming missile or turning to get the best sight lines the instant you round the corner. I think there's enough depth to enjoy in 6DOF combat with projectile weapons that we don't need to impose additional mechanical complexity in the flight control mechanics.

Hypersonic · 2018-09-12 21:59:49

I agree. However after years of contentious discussion on the Overload development forum many swear by chording, which is fine, but I think balancing with allway is important.

I did some calculations on Overload's current allway to trichord speed comparisons

Current Overload 83, 114, 135 trichord to all-way:

‘All-Way’ always moving will move a distance of 100units/sec * 100sec=10000 (not factoring in accelerations)

Balanced chording: unichord 33% of the time, bichord 34% of the time, trichord 33% of the time
33*83+34*114+33*135 = 11070 distance for ‘tri-chord’
‘all way’ would cover 90% of ‘trichord’ distance

Mostly bichording: unichord 18% of the time, bichord 64% of the time, trichord 18% of the time
18*83+64*114+18*135 = 11220 distance for ‘trichord’
‘all way’ would cover 89% of ‘trichord’ distance

Rarely unichording: unichord 10% of the time, bichord 45% of the time, trichord 45% of the time
10*83+45*114+45*135 = 12005 distance for ‘trichord’
‘all way’ would cover 83% of ‘trichord’ distance

(I kinda doubt even trichording adicts trichord over half the time, but do correct me if I’m wrong!)

What I proposed as a good balance

Hypothetical 71, 100, 123 ‘trichord’ to ‘all-way’ (where ‘all way’ and ‘trichord’ have equal bichord speeds)

‘All-Way’ always moving will move a distance of 100units/sec *100sec=10000 (not factoring in accelerations)

Balanced chording: unichord 33% of the time, bichord 34% of the time, trichord 33% of the time
33*71+34*100+33*123 = 9802 distance for ‘tri-chord’
‘all way’ would cover 98% of ‘trichord’ distance

Mostly bichording: unichord 18% of the time, bichord 64% of the time, trichord 18% of the time
18*71+64*100+18*123 = 9892 distance for ‘trichord’
‘all way’ would cover 99% of ‘trichord’ distance

Rarely unichording: unichord 10% of the time, bichord 45% of the time, trichord 45% of the time
10*71+45*100+45*123 = 10745 distance for ‘trichord’
‘all way’ would cover 93% of ‘trichord’ distance

With bichords equal, distance traveled would always within 7%, while currently it’s 10% to 17% difference.

NVT

Seems that trichord-trichord about equals allway-anychord. While I wouldn't mind that, hardcore trichorders might go bonkers. Overload slightly favors trichorders while Talon slightly favors allway.

You know even allway folks trichord, meaning they use xyz all at the same time, normalize would be a better term.

Question: is drag the same going sideways and backwards as it is going forward through atmosphere?

Last edited by Hypersonic (2018-09-12 22:03:40)

Scott · 2018-09-13 00:07:08

Drag is the same in all directions for all ships... except the Stiletto as of the next release, where I've given the Stiletto +10% drag along local z, giving those big wings a bit of actual effect on flight dynamics.

Announcement

#1 2013-12-07 02:47:08

Thoughts on Pilot Options

#2 2013-12-07 04:09:00

Re: Thoughts on Pilot Options

#3 2013-12-08 05:52:18

Re: Thoughts on Pilot Options

#4 2013-12-24 23:37:05

Re: Thoughts on Pilot Options

#5 2018-09-12 04:49:17

Re: Thoughts on Pilot Options

#6 2018-09-12 06:06:17

Re: Thoughts on Pilot Options

#7 2018-09-12 21:59:49

Re: Thoughts on Pilot Options

#8 2018-09-13 00:07:08

Re: Thoughts on Pilot Options

Board footer