Will PVP Jousting be Common?

[Tribbler]

In Air and in Space, there is a term called Jousting as in the tournaments of Medievel Times.

2 opponents coming at each other, firing, then turning around and firing again, so-on and so-forth.

The ship with the faster turning radius is the one that can usually win with an opponet of equal size and strength.

The smaller ships will sure be able to out turn a larger ship if the dynamics are within the norms, but a larger ship will have stronger shields and stronger phasers with a longer reach due to the size of their warp core.

How do you think Cryptic is going to resolve constant jousting scenarios?

After so many passes, you may discover that the shields are recharging faster than the damage from each pass is making.

[IanD967]

ahh yes this term is also used for fighting in Freelancer (discovery mod) and its pretty much the only way to fight in the fighter craft.


fortunatly star trek ships are not fighter craft and therfore the combat will be completly different :D
its like Bridge Commander in terms of combat (didnt really like Legacy due to the buggyness so i didnt play it much) which was great

[Tribbler]

ahh yes this term is also used for fighting in Freelancer (discovery mod) and its pretty much the only way to fight in the fighter craft.


fortunatly star trek ships are not fighter craft and therfore the combat will be completly different :D
its like Bridge Commander in terms of combat (didnt really like Legacy due to the buggyness so i didnt play it much) which was great

Well if for instance that STO emulates Legacy, the interface is horrible let alone the bugginess, so your lucky.

Something about convenience in the UI that had things fouled up for me mostly.

If, STO had some manipulations with the UI for convenience (a see through HUD, lower or increase size of your warnings, speed acceleration and deceleration by using the mouse wheel, or using a joystick etc.) would help alot.

[Kinjiru]

Honestly, I think we'll see jousting more often as a tactic in one on one ship to ship fights than you think. Depending of course on any terrain features that may change the battle area, but when you see an enemy ship, and you're not fighting current or wind like an oceangoing ship, you'll both end up approaching each other, either playing chicken, and attempting to "cross the T", or running toward each other sightly off center, basically doing the same thing.

Ass you add more ships to the mix, the tactics will have to change accordingly. :)

[Loekii]

I think it will be very common, and I don't see Cryptic 'fixing it'.

From what we know, the Z-Axis means nothing in combat (other than the distance).

So jousting you from up high, down low, will not make any Tactical Difference.

[Commander_Nate]

No, I expect it to be more like a ship battle from a naval game but in three dimensions.

[Koboldfodder]

Well, they are taking out the Z axis in space combat. That is confirmed. So you ONLY have distance to worry about, and that means whoever has the longest range will usually win.

[IanD967]

Well, they are taking out the Z axis in space combat. That is confirmed. So you ONLY have distance to worry about, and that means whoever has the longest range will usually win.

could you possible link the source to this please? :)

[Awarkle]

as long as i odnt see the following words in pvp "dont add we are dueling" those 4 words will send me in to a rage of gankign all duelers and ganging up and ganking duelers.

[Kinjiru]

Well, they are taking out the Z axis in space combat. That is confirmed. So you ONLY have distance to worry about, and that means whoever has the longest range will usually win.

They're not taking out the Z axis, in fact, it's been confirmed that there will be a Z axis. You will be able to move in 3 axes, but you won't be able to maneuver your ship on it's full 3 axes.

In other words, space has 3 axes, but your movement does not. No roll, no loop, but you can go forward and back, side to side and up and down.

[IanD967]

as long as i odnt see the following words in pvp "dont add we are dueling" those 4 words will send me in to a rage of gankign all duelers and ganging up and ganking duelers.

well i wouldent mind hearing those 4 words within a more RP-way such as "<insert ship name>! do you require assistance??" "negative! i have it all under control thank you"

[Loekii]

I think it was a 'joke'. :D

However, the Z axis seems to just be for 'show', as in your Z Position does not seem to affect anything (same shields, same weapons, same targets, etc).

It is not like you can disable the upper or Starboard Phasers on a ship, forcing him to attack only from Port and from above you.

[Commander_Nate]

I think it was a 'joke'. :D

However, the Z axis seems to just be for 'show', as in your Z Position does not seem to affect anything (same shields, same weapons, same targets, etc).

It is not like you can disable the upper or Starboard Phasers on a ship, forcing him to attack only from Port and from above you.


Maybe not, but attacking from a different angle above or below would at least make you harder to hit and harder to dodge.

[Loekii]

Maybe not, but attacking from a different angle above or below would at least make you harder to hit and harder to dodge.

I disagree.

I have not seen anything to suggest that, nor what the difference is between say 1:00, 3:00, and 5:00 positions.

[Tribbler]

They're not taking out the Z axis, in fact, it's been confirmed that there will be a Z axis. You will be able to move in 3 axes, but you won't be able to maneuver your ship on it's full 3 axes.

In other words, space has 3 axes, but your movement does not. No roll, no loop, but you can go forward and back, side to side and up and down.

I was never quite clear on the explanation Kinjiru,

Will you be able to elevate up and down keeping the same horizontal position, or can you rotate 90 degrees upward/downward and fly in that direction, not actually being able to perform a loop?

[Commander_Nate]

If you have to aim your own weapons, then being approaching from different angles can give you advantages.

Take torpedoes for instance, those are usually only mounted forward, and sometimes aft, and generally only fire in straight lines. A strafing run from high and behind automatically negates your enemy's torpedoes and whatever foward firing phasers/disruptors they have for the pass.

I know there hasn't been a whole lot said about this but in a space based game, these are fairly basic ideas.

[Tribbler]

If you have to aim your own weapons, then being approaching from different angles can give you advantages.

Take torpedoes for instance, those are usually only mounted forward, and sometimes aft, and generally only fire in straight lines. A strafing run from high and behind automatically negates your enemy's torpedoes and whatever foward firing phasers/disruptors they have for the pass.

I know there hasn't been a whole lot said about this but in a space based game, these are fairly basic ideas.

It was discussed in length in some of the previous threads that even though the torpedoes are limited in their launch locations, in 2409, they should all be able to home in on the target.

Reference the Star Trek 6 movie Undiscovered Country...

Quote "What about the torpedoes that we have to analyze gaseous anomolies, well the things got to have a tailpipe".

The Enterprise fires and homes in on the cloaked BoP.

We are not sure about the mechanics of STO, but we know that the technology exists.

[Kinjiru]

I was never quite clear on the explanation Kinjiru,

Will you be able to elevate up and down keeping the same horizontal position, or can you rotate 90 degrees upward/downward and fly in that direction, not actually being able to perform a loop?

From what I've read of their answers in the Ask Cryptics and some interviews, I equated it to something like this in a different thread:

Picture combat in STO like zeppelins or airships but a bit faster, more maneuverable. Cryptic's said that there is a Z axis, so we know that elevation (which may be the best word to describe it) or "altitude" is present, in addition to port/starboard and forward/back movement.

In essence, your ship will probably pitch the nose up or down to "climb" or "descend", and will probably roll a bit (probably no more than 25-30 degrees) left or right for a port or starboard turn, just like the Enterprise and the Reliant in the first ship to ship combat scene in the Wrath of Khan.

Anyway, I don't know this for certain, having not gotten to try it yet, but I'd put down money on it. In fact, I'll bet you my 5 Cryptic Bucks. :D

[Tribbler]

From what I've read of their answers in the Ask Cryptics and some interviews, I equated it to something like this in a different thread:

Picture combat in STO like zeppelins or airships but a bit faster, more maneuverable. Cryptic's said that there is a Z axis, so we know that elevation (which may be the best word to describe it) or "altitude" is present, in addition to port/starboard and forward/back movement.

In essence, your ship will probably pitch the nose up or down to "climb" or "descend", and will probably roll a bit (probably no more than 25-30 degrees) left or right for a port or starboard turn, just like the Enterprise and the Reliant in the first ship to ship combat scene in the Wrath of Khan.

Anyway, I don't know this for certain, having not gotten to try it yet, but I'd put down money on it. In fact, I'll bet you my 5 Cryptic Bucks. :D

So if, I was to have to get to another players fighting level, I would have to z minus or z plus my elevation without actually looking down or looking up?

If I was to get to him from a distance, I would have to hit the + or - keys as i was getting closer to him to start off at the same level?

Or does it automatically level you out as you get closer to fighting range.

Thanks for clarifying rotation on the Z axis though.

[Loekii]

So if, I was to have to get to another players fighting level, I would have to z minus or z plus my elevation without actually looking down or looking up?

If I was to get to him from a distance, I would have to hit the + or - keys as i was getting closer to him to start off at the same level?

Or does it automatically level you out as you get closer to fighting range.



Per Zinc, you will always be moving forward when you move.

You will NOT 'elevator/float/etc Up/Down'

You also will NOT beable to go backwards/Reverse. The only thing you can do is 'back out' of a stuck spot, but that is not for use in normal flight operations.

Basically, it is like driving a car in a Parking Structure.

You can drive forward
You can turn left or right (I think you might be able to pivot if stationary)
You can Drive up/down the slope


That's about it.

Oh, and no Warp Combat. Its all impulse speed.


So you would be 'driving' below your target, you would have to 'drive up the ramp' (no floating or elevatoring) until you were level with him.

However, this is basically only for Aesthetic reasons, because attacking him from below, on the same level, or above him, nets the same effect.

[Commander_Nate]

It was discussed in length in some of the previous threads that even though the torpedoes are limited in their launch locations, in 2409, they should all be able to home in on the target.

Reference the Star Trek 6 movie Undiscovered Country...

Quote "What about the torpedoes that we have to analyze gaseous anomolies, well the things got to have a tailpipe".

The Enterprise fires and homes in on the cloaked BoP.

We are not sure about the mechanics of STO, but we know that the technology exists.

Yeah I know that, but that was a special case. Think of all the movies and episodes since then where we've seen torpedoes miss. First Contact, Nemesis and pretty much the entire Dominion War come to mind.

[Kinjiru]

So if, I was to have to get to another players fighting level, I would have to z minus or z plus my elevation without actually looking down or looking up?

If I was to get to him from a distance, I would have to hit the + or - keys as i was getting closer to him to start off at the same level?

Or does it automatically level you out as you get closer to fighting range.

Thanks for clarifying rotation on the Z axis though.

No worries. :)

I think it's more that you would "aim" your ship at the enemy. In other words, you'd (whatever key is bound, I'll probably use a joystick and/or the Q and E key's to pitch my nose up or down) point your nose up, so you go up. Like a bomber in flight, or the airship example that I used before. Just picture the airship with nacelles and a saucer section. :)

[Loekii]

If you have to aim your own weapons, then being approaching from different angles can give you advantages.

Take torpedoes for instance, those are usually only mounted forward, and sometimes aft, and generally only fire in straight lines. A strafing run from high and behind automatically negates your enemy's torpedoes and whatever foward firing phasers/disruptors they have for the pass.

I know there hasn't been a whole lot said about this but in a space based game, these are fairly basic ideas.

Combat will not be so Advanced.

You will not 'manually aim' your torpedoes. You will most likely [Target] [Fire torpedoes].

You will have some Firing arc restrictions, but it is not affected by the Z-axis really. Think of a Cone on the nose of your ship, with the launchers sitting on the edge (cannot be blocked by your ship).

So all you will need to do is get the target within that Fire Arc.

[Tribbler]

Yeah I know that, but that was a special case. Think of all the movies and episodes since then where we've seen torpedoes miss. First Contact, Nemesis and pretty much the entire Dominion War come to mind.

Silly Starfleet never watched the Star Trek 6 Movie huh?

I guess I am going Klingon. :D

[Tribbler]

No worries. :)

I think it's more that you would "aim" your ship at the enemy. In other words, you'd (whatever key is bound, I'll probably use a joystick and/or the Q and E key's to pitch my nose up or down) point your nose up, so you go up. Like a bomber in flight, or the airship example that I used before. Just picture the airship with nacelles and a saucer section. :)

Ok, if the ship is directly below you then spiraling down (winding staircase) would be the best way to close in on him?

[Kinjiru]

Best example that I could find... Imagine it being slower, and with Trek starships that have shields:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXbfWPyMLFI

Sure, it's hokey, but it works. :)

[Kinjiru]

Ok, if the ship is directly below you then spiraling down (winding staircase) would be the best way to close in on him?

Exactly. You probably (90% chance) won't be able to descend straight down, you'd need to pitch your nose down and spiral to him. Assuming he's sitting still of course, which he probably wouldn't. :)

[Loekii]

Exactly. You probably (90% chance) won't be able to descend straight down, you'd need to pitch your nose down and spiral to him. Assuming he's sitting still of course, which he probably wouldn't. :)

I expect it will be like say 85' pitch at best, and you have to consider your turning radius restrictions.

So in some cases, it might just be quicker to:

Pitch Down
Descend
Stop
level out and pivot around
Proceed.


As 'spiraling' with such a wide turning radius might take more time.

[Kinjiru]

Good point. I agree Loekii.

[Zepath]

The best way I've heard Ship combat explained (by Jack Emmeret (sp?) in a Youtube video) is that it will be more along the lines of Tall Ships (like pirate ships) with futuristic technology.

It will tactical, not twitch.

And personally, I find that perfect.

[Tribbler]

Best example that I could find... Imagine it being slower, and with Trek starships that have shields:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXbfWPyMLFI

Sure, it's hokey, but it works. :)

Nice link.

Ok so in the same fashion, in PVP the enemy will also be pitching up to your level unless he is trying to escape.

In escaping he could just continue downward along with you, hoping he could outdistance you and break off no?

[Loekii]

Nice link.

Ok so in the same fashion, in PVP the enemy will also be pitching up to your level unless he is trying to escape.

In escaping he could just continue downward along with you, hoping he could outdistance you and break off no?

If you can get far enough away, you may 'jump to warp' to escape -- per zinc in the Dev chat.

I would also be wary of putting stock in year old info. Remember, as some point earlier in Development, there were Rolls/Loops/Etc.

[Kinjiru]

Nice link.

Ok so in the same fashion, in PVP the enemy will also be pitching up to your level unless he is trying to escape.

In escaping he could just continue downward along with you, hoping he could outdistance you and break off no?

I have a feeling that escaping will be very similar to escaping combat in PotBS. Basically, the combat zone has an invisible "edge" to it. To escape combat, you'd need to reach one of these. (practically speaking, probably a cube shape in space) at which point, you could engage your warp drive and leave.

The kicker is that if your actually taking fire, or firing yourself, you can't leave, you'd need to go for some amount of time without either firing or taking fire. (I think it's like 2 minutes in PotBS, but it could be less.)

[DanSeale]

In Air and in Space, there is a term called Jousting as in the tournaments of Medievel Times.

2 opponents coming at each other, firing, then turning around and firing again, so-on and so-forth.

The ship with the faster turning radius is the one that can usually win with an opponet of equal size and strength.

The smaller ships will sure be able to out turn a larger ship if the dynamics are within the norms, but a larger ship will have stronger shields and stronger phasers with a longer reach due to the size of their warp core.

How do you think Cryptic is going to resolve constant jousting scenarios?

After so many passes, you may discover that the shields are recharging faster than the damage from each pass is making.

IMHO it depends upon how evenly "matched" the two ships are .. this would include the players at the controls ... AND how they are "loaded out" (if ya catch my meaning).

I've been in many a battle in SFC OP and SFC-3 where it was pretty much a draw ... unitl one player just wears down the other ... this can take time.

BUT ... heck .. that's a part of the game. Some of those battles can be fun .. and believe it or not you cna actually make a good friend on the opposite key board from time to time.

[Sobekeus]

If Arcs don't mean anything, expect jousting or ganking to be standard. If Arcs do mean anything, expect circlejerking or ganking to be standard.

[Loekii]

I have a feeling that escaping will be very similar to escaping combat in PotBS. Basically, the combat zone has an invisible "edge" to it. To escape combat, you'd need to reach one of these. (practically speaking, probably a cube shape in space) at which point, you could engage your warp drive and leave.

The kicker is that if your actually taking fire, or firing yourself, you can't leave, you'd need to go for some amount of time without either firing or taking fire. (I think it's like 2 minutes in PotBS, but it could be less.)

More or less that is what it sounds like:


<Bizarro_Rekhan> <Matt_Dravis> Relating to Vorador's question about warp in combat... How will one be able to escape from combat? Will a player be able to warp away from combat? If so, how will this be balanced so that escape is not too easy?

<CrypticZinc> Ah - that's the trick, huh?
<CrypticZinc> You currently can't warp while in combat. We're trying to balance the combat so that, if you get in over your head (like I sometimes do when I didn't expect the cloaked birds of prey) you can still "run away".
<CrypticZinc> Escape should be "easy" - but not "game-able".

[Loekii]

If Arcs don't mean anything, expect jousting or ganking to be standard. If Arcs do mean anything, expect circlejerking or ganking to be standard.

I think ARCS = Firing limitations.

However, I don't think we will be able to target specific weapons, so disabling firing arcs will not be part of the game tactics.

[Kinjiru]

I think ARCS = Firing limitations.

However, I don't think we will be able to target specific weapons, so disabling firing arcs will not be part of the game tactics.

I hope you're wrong man. But I fear not.

[Sobekeus]

I think ARCS = Firing limitations.

However, I don't think we will be able to target specific weapons, so disabling firing arcs will not be part of the game tactics.

Regarding Arcs, I mean having each weapon's recharge being independent.

In SFC ships, especially Fed ships, would fly in circles to utilize all of their arcs. In BC there was a similar phenomenon, but it was three dimensional, especially when the AI was controlling the ship.

[Loekii]

Regarding Arcs, I mean having each weapon's recharge being independent.

In SFC ships, especially Fed ships, would fly in circles to utilize all of their arcs. In BC there was a similar phenomenon, but it was three dimensional, especially when the AI was controlling the ship.

Again, I dont think there will be much use for 'additional arcs' in a 1v1 encounter.

For example, if you ship that has 10 Phasers (5 Port/5 Starboard), in a 1v1 combat, you are effectively a ship with only 5 Phasers.

I think all Phasers will share:

Same Power
Same Health/HP
Same reaction to 'debuffing' effects.


So tactics are simplified as if you were attacking 'one phaser'.

[DanSeale]

I think ARCS = Firing limitations.

However, I don't think we will be able to target specific weapons, so disabling firing arcs will not be part of the game tactics.

By firing arcs .. do you mean a LACK of them ?.. If not .. once a player knows how to use those arcs .. they can be an advantage. This sort of strategy was used extensively in SFC ... as well as "star casteling" .. slowing a ship down for better power management.

(edited for dumb spelling errot )

:D

[Tribbler]

Again, I dont think there will be much use for 'additional arcs' in a 1v1 encounter.

For example, if you ship that has 10 Phasers (5 Port/5 Starboard), in a 1v1 combat, you are effectively a ship with only 5 Phasers.

I think all Phasers will share:

Same Power
Same Health/HP
Same reaction to 'debuffing' effects.


So tactics are simplified as if you were attacking 'one phaser'.


Still, if i remember correctly, the Federation can use multiple bursts from a single array in short cycles, where disruptors were a single to 3 powerful shots.

You will only be able to do so much damage as you come towards each other, pass each other, turn around and come at each other again, unless you both stop and duke it out midway.

Unless you are able to fire behind

[Kinjiru]

Unless you are able to fire behind

Aft torps and phaser banks are pretty common in the series/movies, I'd say that's probably a given. I don't know, I'm hoping that we'll get power meters for each weapon (or at least each series of weapons in a given arc), so we can increase power to a specific arc (or aft) along with increasing power to one (or all) of the four shield sections.

But at this stage, it's anybody's guess. Dunno, is that too much complexity to ask for?

[renderpix]

I feel that the only way that jousting can be removed from the game is removing the attributes of what makes KDF ships Klingon in nature.

KDF ships will always joust or with the current system sit at a distance and just shoot. since side to side movement or drift in not there. Main foward firing weapons will require jousting unless Klingon ships are by look alone and the specs on the Raptor are a good example of this :eek:

[DanSeale]

Still, if i remember correctly, the Federation can use multiple bursts from a single array in short cycles, where disruptors were a single to 3 powerful shots.

You will only be able to do so much damage as you come towards each other, pass each other, turn around and come at each other again, unless you both stop and duke it out midway.

Unless you are able to fire behind

hmmm

not sure if this is what you ment bud .. BUT...

most games thus far

Federation: longer range, more powerful but slower recharging .. fewer shots fired

Klingon : shorter range, SLIGHTLY less powerful ... but recharges faster .,. multiple shots fired

AFT weapons: Both factions have ships that fire aft. This has been true sven since the old SFC days .

[DanSeale]

I feel that the only way that jousting can be removed from the game is removing the attributes of what makes KDF ships Klingon in nature.

KDF ships will always joust or with the current system sit at a distance and just shoot. since side to side movement or drift in not there. Main foward firing weapons will require jousting unless Klingon ships are by look alone and the specs on the Raptor are a good example of this :eek:

true .. though please keep in mind that as a general rule "most" Klingon ships are slighly more maneuverable than their Federation counter parts .. ( at least all Trek games have been thus far ... which is fairly close to canon).

[Loekii]

hmmm

not sure if this is what you ment bud .. BUT...

most games thus far

Federation: longer range, more powerful but slower recharging .. fewer shots fired

Klingon : shorter range, SLIGHTLY less powerful ... but recharges faster .,. multiple shots fired

AFT weapons: Both factions have ships that fire aft. This has been true sven since the old SFC days .

Unfortunately, we have not heard anything about the differnces between weapons (other than the nare effect of plasma :D ).

We can only hope that they include such, but it is possible that phasers and disruptors will just be different in 'color'.

true .. though please keep in mind that as a general rule "most" Klingon ships are slighly more maneuverable than their Federation counter parts .. ( at least all Trek games have been thus far ... which is fairly close to canon).

Again, I don't expect to see details like this in STO. Rather I fear we might simply be limited to the base class types (as in a Tier 1 escort is relatively the same for both Fed and Klingon, with graphics really being the difference --- rather than both being completely unique and iconic in performance).

[Tain]

I think some people are still expecting DS9 combat, when in fact we are getting more Wrath of Khan style. I don't see this sort of thing as being a problem really.

[DanSeale]

Unfortunately, we have not heard anything about the differnces between weapons (other than the nare effect of plasma :D ).

We can only hope that they include such, but it is possible that phasers and disruptors will just be different in 'color'.



Again, I don't expect to see details like this in STO. Rather I fear we might simply be limited to the base class types (as in a Tier 1 escort is relatively the same for both Fed and Klingon, with graphics really being the difference --- rather than both being completely unique and iconic in performance).

Well if they need a good guild line they can use SFC-3 the G.A.W. mod .. aside from "scaling" the models correctly .. they also tried to get the weapons firing and damage correct. For the most part that team did as reasonable a job as the programming would allow. And yes there was a differnece between torpedo and phaser and disruptor damage and the way they fired.

[Commander_Nate]

I think some people are still expecting DS9 combat, when in fact we are getting more Wrath of Khan style. I don't see this sort of thing as being a problem really.

I think that ought to depend on ship size. If I'm piloting a Defiant or K'vort or anything of similar class, I expect to be much faster and more manuverable than say a Neg'var or Galaxy.

[renderpix]

true .. though please keep in mind that as a general rule "most" Klingon ships are slighly more maneuverable than their Federation counter parts .. ( at least all Trek games have been thus far ... which is fairly close to canon).

errrr..... I need to correct myself. The one example we have of a Klingon vessel does not need to "Joust" as expected it has front and rear torps and disrupter banks. Look at Ships of the Line for the Raptor, it's weapons and description equal front and rear weapons except for Disruptor Pulse Cannon and it may be 360 axis also. Klingons looks like we need not fight like Klingons anymore, not that I can say sucks....... :eek:

Can't wait to see the specs on the BoP. Looks like several centruies of Klingon design and combat morals got flushed :mad:

edit - need to change my sig again :(

[Reinkaos]

I think some people are still expecting DS9 combat, when in fact we are getting more Wrath of Khan style. I don't see this sort of thing as being a problem really.

We can elevator in STO again?

[Loekii]

We can elevator in STO again?

Nope.

Still stuck to the 'driving the family station wagon'. ;)

[DanSeale]

errrr..... I need to correct myself. The one example we have of a Klingon vessel does not need to "Joust" as expected it has front and rear torps and disrupter banks. Look at Ships of the Line for the Raptor, it's weapons and description equal front and rear weapons except for Disruptor Pulse Cannon and it may be 360 axis also. Klingons looks like we need not fight like Klingons anymore, not that I can say sucks....... :eek:

Can't wait to see the specs on the BoP. Looks like several centruies of Klingon design and combat morals got flushed :mad:

edit - need to change my sig again :(

hmmm
I might be wrong .. BUT on some of the Klingon ships (D-7) and larger they have aft torpedos) .. please see ST the Movie .. Klingons fire aft torps at VGR.

the only thing I question is the BOP .. and for the life of me (having a senior moment) . can't remember where ... but it seems like certain versions of the BOP have aft torps.

might be wrong .. not sure .

[renderpix]

hmmm
I might be wrong .. BUT on some of the Klingon ships (D-7) and larger they have aft torpedos) .. please see ST the Movie .. Klingons fire aft torps at VGR.

the only thing I question is the BOP .. and for the life of me (having a senior moment) . can't remember where ... but it seems like certain versions of the BOP have aft torps.

might be wrong .. not sure .

Sure that is common with KDF ships but equal weapons fore and aft is not a KDF design. It is the same as a Federation design so far with stronger torps towards front with the KDF having the additional Disruptor Pulse Cannon

But you are correct with the D7 or K'tinga BoP haveing a rear facing torp but not disruptors equal front and rear. This is distressing that a basic concept of the Kningon experience is being removed, it would be the same as mostly frontal weapons on a Federation ship would that not be wrong?

[DanSeale]

Sure that is common with KDF ships but equal weapons fore and aft is not a KDF design. It is the same as a Federation design so far with stronger torps towards front with the KDF having the additional Disruptor Pulse Cannon

But you are correct with the D7 or K'tinga BoP haveing a rear facing torp but not disruptors equal front and rear. This is distressing that a basic concept of the Kningon experience is being removed, it would be the same as mostly frontal weapons on a Federation ship would that not be wrong?

hmmmm

depends upon the era they are developed .. if a new ship : aft guns would not be too bad (as long as they were not over done). It's like anything else .. Follow basic guidlines in canon. Canon is not a BIBLE ... it is canon .. and good to learn from and when ever possible watch for obvious problems.

In this case for Klingon design .. yeah .. a couple o aft guns not too bad. BUT if you find your self staring down a massive assault from the aft guns of a Klingon ship .. that would be overly done .. and yes that means the person who made the model should take a good look at what the canon designs are. We can all learn.

OH .. BTW.. another related subject is the firing arch of the Klingons. In often cases since the disruptors (for example) are 90% or better forward .. they also have a "wide" angle. The BOP for example is actually able to pivot. So that is another aspect to keep in mind.

I hope this helps.

[renderpix]

hmmmm

depends upon the era they are developed .. if a new ship : aft guns would not be too bad (as long as they were not over done). It's like anything else .. Follow basic guidlines in canon. Canon is not a BIBLE ... it is canon .. and good to learn from and when ever possible watch for obvious problems.

In this case for Klingon design .. yeah .. a couple o aft guns not too bad. BUT if you find your self staring down a massive assault from the aft guns of a Klingon ship .. that would be overly done .. and yes that means the person who made the model should take a good look at what the canon designs are. We can all learn.

OH .. BTW.. another related subject is the firing arch of the Klingons. In often cases since the disruptors (for example) are 90% or better forward .. they also have a "wide" angle. The BOP for example is actually able to pivot. So that is another aspect to keep in mind.

I hope this helps.

True I can see you point but aft guns and rear defense compareable to a Federation ship. Like I asked woudl Federation players feel that it is fair that their ships be made like the KDF mostly forward firing weapons. It's canon and it's not a bible but to change it on a whim.

I just have issues with Jack's statement that they are paying close attention to canon and the Star Trek storyline and that is not being reflected in so many ways. KDF ships with tactical like Feds takes away from the concept of Star Trek. Some are really hardcore about the StarFleet experience some of us want the Klingon experience not the Klingeration. Go figure what should I have expected the way things are shaping up so far.

[DanSeale]

True I can see you point but aft guns and rear defense compareable to a Federation ship. Like I asked woudl Federation players feel that it is fair that their ships be made like the KDF mostly forward firing weapons. It's canon and it's not a bible but to change it on a whim.

I just have issues with Jack's statement that they are paying close attention to canon and the Star Trek storyline and that is not being reflected in so many ways. KDF ships with tactical like Feds takes away from the concept of Star Trek. Some are really hardcore about the StarFleet experience some of us want the Klingon experience not the Klingeration. Go figure what should I have expected the way things are shaping up so far.

By chance did you ever play SFC-3? ... Did you ever down-load the GAW MOD ? If so you have a really good idea what should be there. It received a really great review from one of the better gaming magazines.

At any rate I keep bringing that up because it give me a common point of reference .. and it was successful in a few areas. The very thing we are discussing is one of them.

Frankly I cant wait to play STO to see what's out there. I'll reseve final "passage" unti then.

I do hope that the information I have been posting on this is taken the right way by the Dev team. It is not ment to be a harsh criticism .. but rather to point them in the right direction from the many months of discussing what we see here now .. only under other games.

Please believe me when I tell you we really are trying to point someone in the right direction.

No I don't have all the answers .. but I know where to find a few of them .. and look them up as to what really did work.

I hope this makes sense.

[Tribbler]

Where "Jousting" comes in handy, will be with the time to recharge Fore and Aft weapons.

While approaching your adversary, you launch or shoot you forward weapons, then as you pass you launch or fire your rear weapons.

Then as move on, your front weapons are again ready to fire, then you turn and advance again, giving your rear weapons time to recharge and your crew to load the torpedoe tubes.

Wash/Rinse/Repeat

[DanSeale]

Where "Jousting" comes in handy, will be with the time to recharge Fore and Aft weapons.

While approaching your adversary, you launch or shoot you forward weapons, then as you pass you launch or fire your rear weapons.

Then as move on, your front weapons are again ready to fire, then you turn and advance again, giving your rear weapons time to recharge and your crew to load the torpedoe tubes.

Wash/Rinse/Repeat

That depends ....

Some times I like to do some strange stuff... Shift power to starboard shields .. overload aft torp tubes .. bring forward phasers to target ... begin turn to port side while firing forward phasers. Stand by 360^ phasers ( see development USS Bass Master SFC-3 GAW MOD). HARD to Port ... hold 360's ... stand by overloaded rear torps ... shift power to aft shields ... fire 360s ... as soon as aft torps lock into arc ... FIRE ..

Accelorate to defensive posture, shift power to weapons charging ... shields nominal .

not exactly jousting .. but fun just the same.

[Gerrard]

Jousting as you put it is even part of the Canon. Quite a bit actually. How many times have you heard someone on the bridge crew say, "She's coming around for another pass Captain" or something like that.

As for the Klingon weapons, I would have to strongly agree with the majority here. Going away from very well known Klingon battle tactics would detract from this game in VERY large measure. Cryptic, I would seriously take a long look at that thought process. There is a lot of good to be said about using your ship as it was designed. A Klingon would not design a ship that was good at running away.


Just one old man's opinion.

[Tribbler]

That depends ....

Some times I like to do some strange stuff... Shift power to starboard shields .. overload aft torp tubes .. bring forward phasers to target ... begin turn to port side while firing forward phasers. Stand by 360^ phasers ( see development USS Bass Master SFC-3 GAW MOD). HARD to Port ... hold 360's ... stand by overloaded rear torps ... shift power to aft shields ... fire 360s ... as soon as aft torps lock into arc ... FIRE ..

Accelorate to defensive posture, shift power to weapons charging ... shields nominal .

not exactly jousting .. but fun just the same.

Indeed :D

Any way it is presented will be fun.

[Loekii]

I would hope that combat facilitates opportunities to use out of the box tactics, instead of being simplistic in its nature that such tactics nets no real effect -- much like they have said rolls, loops, and vertical position doesn't really net any effect.

I mean if OlBuzz decides to do something wacky, it will be disappointing if the end result is the same as if he just flew around in an arc and fired his weapons again.

[DanSeale]

I would hope that combat facilitates opportunities to use out of the box tactics, instead of being simplistic in its nature that such tactics nets no real effect -- much like they have said rolls, loops, and vertical position doesn't really net any effect.

I mean if OlBuzz decides to do something wacky, it will be disappointing if the end result is the same as if he just flew around in an arc and fired his weapons again.

It would depend upon who I'm up against ... I can think of one or two that the out come would probably be the same ...


fried buzzard !

:eek:

[Messer_Macheath]

No, I expect it to be more like a ship battle from a naval game but in three dimensions.

I agree. Especially because this game is not true space flight like Freelancer, where you could twist your ship more freely, I see this game as being a glorified naval game, except with the added challenge of the z-axis. In which case, there will be much more to positioning than simply "jousting."

Even in Freelancer, you didn't need to joust if you were good enough to anticipate your enemy's movements. The ships were so fast in that game that jousting certainly came naturally, considering you flew by each other so fast, but it was not necessary, or even the best tactic. Hopefully, positioning will play a larger part of combat than simply playing chicken with the other ship, or trying to keep your ideal targeting distance, like in EVE.

-Macheath.

[renderpix]

I would hope that combat facilitates opportunities to use out of the box tactics, instead of being simplistic in its nature that such tactics nets no real effect -- much like they have said rolls, loops, and vertical position doesn't really net any effect.

I mean if OlBuzz decides to do something wacky, it will be disappointing if the end result is the same as if he just flew around in an arc and fired his weapons again.

I'm kinda picturing it like this.

Close in on target and start 360 arc away while firing, on the return arc.... "Oops missed my position start new 360 arc. Or "S" into target pattern hoping it does not expose me while I'm too to close but in firing range.

Or if you think tight turning radius intstead of being 360 arc just streached ovals jousting.

I would like stright in full impulse, elavate while firing Pulse cannons, slow to quarter impulse invert start 180 arc hugging their hull while using my disrupter banks while curving around the vessel then while leading away from it's dorsal facing fire a rear torp at it then full impulse and gain distance for another run. That sounds more fun for some reason. :p

The second could be a tatic option when you opponent may be thinking your going to do a standard joust making a flyby. And yes it can be just a tight turn around their ship but then again there are only the two options fly by (joust) or curve around, the direction leaving is limited with the first but the second your not that limited are you. ;)

[Tribbler]

hmmm

not sure if this is what you ment bud .. BUT...

most games thus far

Federation: longer range, more powerful but slower recharging .. fewer shots fired

Klingon : shorter range, SLIGHTLY less powerful ... but recharges faster .,. multiple shots fired

AFT weapons: Both factions have ships that fire aft. This has been true sven since the old SFC days .

Well actually i was referring to battle sequences in the movies and TV shows. For instance while engaging the Borg, the Enterprise was changing the phaser frequencies/harmonics and had short bursts from the single phaser array on top of the saucer section here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PdnTkEzkK8 4:02 and 5:02 into the vid and then a longer continuous shot at 2:06 in this vid of "Yesterday's Enterprise" http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=80F4F2814AE503C2&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&v=Tmk7jCbETIE.

In the TOS, I remember a sequence that had a Klingon ship firing disruptors, and there were 3 short blasts, but now after watching the TNG, I see the disrupter fire were similar to evenly timed "bullets" per se.

In the first Star Trek movie, in the opening sequence you saw the Klingon shooting an aft torpedoe that went in a straight line, apparently aimed at V'ger, so it would appear there were no guidance systems, but in the Star Trek Online Battle sequence, you'll see a Federation ship hitting a Borg Sphere, and the torpedoe follows the Sphere as it moves here at :56 into the vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7lWHCtgzTk&feature=related

So what the questions are basically, is if you have to use the long firing phaser everytime you hit the key, or will it turn off and on as you hit tap the key. Ensuring that in PVP, the Federation has some control over the recharging of their weapons.

If when jousting you pass each other up, the klingons in essence can turn and continue to fire, but the federation will have to continue moving until their phasers recharge and then make their turn, if you lose phaser Lock from distance issues IE (Phaser Lock and Disruptor Lock is only available at 2000 KM etc.)

For the Federation, there will be a disadvantage in Jousting if you have to re-acquire the Klingon, from behind you and you have to pan around your back area until you can see him, but as for the klingon, you are still in his front viewport, and much easier to acquire if the distance between you is greater than 2000 km.

If Cryptic uses the automatic lock method, whereas, the ship you have targetted, stays on your screen, regardless of the position and course of your ship, well then this is all a moot point.

Hope this made better sense Buzz.

[DanSeale]

Well actually i was referring to battle sequences in the movies and TV shows. For instance while engaging the Borg, the Enterprise was changing the phaser frequencies/harmonics and had short bursts from the single phaser array on top of the saucer section here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PdnTkEzkK8 4:02 and 5:02 into the vid and then a longer continuous shot at 2:06 in this vid of "Yesterday's Enterprise" http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=80F4F2814AE503C2&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&v=Tmk7jCbETIE.

In the TOS, I remember a sequence that had a Klingon ship firing disruptors, and there were 3 short blasts, but now after watching the TNG, I see the disrupter fire were similar to evenly timed "bullets" per se.

In the first Star Trek movie, in the opening sequence you saw the Klingon shooting an aft torpedoe that went in a straight line, apparently aimed at V'ger, so it would appear there were no guidance systems, but in the Star Trek Online Battle sequence, you'll see a Federation ship hitting a Borg Sphere, and the torpedoe follows the Sphere as it moves here at :56 into the vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7lWHCtgzTk&feature=related

So what the questions are basically, is if you have to use the long firing phaser everytime you hit the key, or will it turn off and on as you hit tap the key. Ensuring that in PVP, the Federation has some control over the recharging of their weapons.

If when jousting you pass each other up, the klingons in essence can turn and continue to fire, but the federation will have to continue moving until their phasers recharge and then make their turn, if you lose phaser Lock from distance issues IE (Phaser Lock and Disruptor Lock is only available at 2000 KM etc.)

For the Federation, there will be a disadvantage in Jousting if you have to re-acquire the Klingon, from behind you and you have to pan around your back area until you can see him, but as for the klingon, you are still in his front viewport, and much easier to acquire if the distance between you is greater than 2000 km.

If Cryptic uses the automatic lock method, whereas, the ship you have targetted, stays on your screen, regardless of the position and course of your ship, well then this is all a moot point.

Hope this made better sense Buzz.

I think I understand ... Let me see if I can remember the old SFC "lock" .. seems like you selected the target and the weapon did not fire until you were in the firing arc. Now keep in mind that was just the "firing" side of the equence. From a mechanics stand point "hitting" was a different sequence of calculations as was damage. Those were determined by range, player setting on the weapon (note: the good thing about SFC-OP .. you could change or adjust the setting on weapons. ie: under load, standard , or overload). Once a player fired the weapons the speed of the "recharge" depended upon availability of power. Some times it was neccessary to turn off stuff .. OR slow down your ship to properly manage the power needed (some ships were power hogs). At any rate: as long as you kept that ship targeted .. you could maneuver .. keep the lock .. and wait for weapons to recharge or come back on line to fire. Again: once a player had the target within the firing arc .. the weapon would fire.

The problem was (for me at least) .. I usually had more targets than I knew what do with at the beginning of a mission... sooo while I might have done a bit of jousting .. it wasnt that much. I guess mu style of PvP (or PvE) is too agressive at times. There was more "jousting" done in SFC-3 in PvP as long as the match was fairly even.

A lot of it depends on player style.

But for what ever it is worth ... yes I follow ya .. It kinda depends upon player style ... (just my opinion)

[Tribbler]

I think I understand ... Let me see if I can remember the old SFC "lock" .. seems like you selected the target and the weapon did not fire until you were in the firing arc. Now keep in mind that was just the "firing" side of the equence. From a mechanics stand point "hitting" was a different sequence of calculations as was damage. Those were determined by range, player setting on the weapon (note: the good thing about SFC-OP .. you could change or adjust the setting on weapons. ie: under load, standard , or overload). Once a player fired the weapons the speed of the "recharge" depended upon availability of power. Some times it was neccessary to turn off stuff .. OR slow down your ship to properly manage the power needed (some ships were power hogs). At any rate: as long as you kept that ship targeted .. you could maneuver .. keep the lock .. and wait for weapons to recharge or come back on line to fire. Again: once a player had the target within the firing arc .. the weapon would fire.

The problem was (for me at least) .. I usually had more targets than I knew what do with at the beginning of a mission... sooo while I might have done a bit of jousting .. it wasnt that much. I guess mu style of PvP (or PvE) is too agressive at times. There was more "jousting" done in SFC-3 in PvP as long as the match was fairly even.

A lot of it depends on player style.

But for what ever it is worth ... yes I follow ya .. It kinda depends upon player style ... (just my opinion)

I agree, alot will depend on player style and "How" cryptic presents it.

I will tell you though, that "Jousting" gets old quick.

I am glad you followed it, it was very hard for me to write it without drawing this thread out to 100 pages :D

[DanSeale]

I think I understand ... Let me see if I can remember the old SFC "lock" .. seems like you selected the target and the weapon did not fire until you were in the firing arc. Now keep in mind that was just the "firing" side of the equence. From a mechanics stand point "hitting" was a different sequence of calculations as was damage. Those were determined by range, player setting on the weapon (note: the good thing about SFC-OP .. you could change or adjust the setting on weapons. ie: under load, standard , or overload). Once a player fired the weapons the speed of the "recharge" depended upon availability of power. Some times it was neccessary to turn off stuff .. OR slow down your ship to properly manage the power needed (some ships were power hogs). At any rate: as long as you kept that ship targeted .. you could maneuver .. keep the lock .. and wait for weapons to recharge or come back on line to fire. Again: once a player had the target within the firing arc .. the weapon would fire.

The problem was (for me at least) .. I usually had more targets than I knew what do with at the beginning of a mission... sooo while I might have done a bit of jousting .. it wasnt that much. I guess mu style of PvP (or PvE) is too agressive at times. There was more "jousting" done in SFC-3 in PvP as long as the match was fairly even.

A lot of it depends on player style.

But for what ever it is worth ... yes I follow ya .. It kinda depends upon player style ... (just my opinion)

I agree, alot will depend on player style and "How" cryptic presents it.

I will tell you though, that "Jousting" gets old quick.

I am glad you followed it, it was very hard for me to write it without drawing this thread out to 100 pages :D

jousting ? OLD ? What do you mean ... OLD ?

Watch it buster !

(j/k)
:D

Yes the sea-saw method ... AKA "jousting" can get to be both dull and boring. I also typically use more oblique attack forms to avoid having all damage on one shield as much as I can. I guess that is why I'm hoping for better ship controlls .. I really love to throw a monkey wrench into someones cookie mold idea of "Federation" battle strategy.

As for the 100 pages being cut short ... sorry about that ...

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

:D

[Loekii]

I think I understand ... Let me see if I can remember the old SFC "lock" .. seems like

you selected the target and the weapon did not fire until you were in the firing arc. Now keep in mind that was just the "firing" side of the equence. From a mechanics stand point "hitting" was a different sequence of calculations as was damage. Those were determined by range, player setting on the weapon (note: the good thing about SFC-OP .. you could change or adjust the setting on weapons. ie: under load, standard , or overload). Once a player fired the weapons the speed of the "recharge" depended upon availability of power. Some times it was neccessary to turn off stuff .. OR slow down your ship to properly manage the power needed (some ships were power hogs). At any rate: as long as you kept that ship targeted .. you could maneuver .. keep the lock .. and wait for weapons to recharge or come back on line to fire. Again: once a player had the target within the firing arc .. the weapon would fire.

The problem was (for me at least) .. I usually had more targets than I knew what do with at the beginning of a mission... sooo while I might have done a bit of jousting .. it wasnt that much. I guess mu style of PvP (or PvE) is too agressive at times. There was more "jousting" done in SFC-3 in PvP as long as the match was fairly even.

A lot of it depends on player style.

But for what ever it is worth ... yes I follow ya .. It kinda depends upon player style ... (just my opinion)

I hope we get similar micro weapon options (Uncharge, Charge, Overload) and targeting assignments.


I will tell you though, that "Jousting" gets old quick.



I agree. Combat needs to be an ever changing 'tactical dance', rather than just 'jousting'.

It needs to have a variety of calculations and factors, the more the better imo, rather than a simplisitc 'who gets first shot off', or 'chase the dog', etc.

[DanSeale]

I hope we get similar micro weapon options (Uncharge, Charge, Overload) and targeting assignments.



I agree. Combat needs to be an ever changing 'tactical dance', rather than just 'jousting'.

It needs to have a variety of calculations and factors, the more the better imo, rather than a simplisitc 'who gets first shot off', or 'chase the dog', etc.


Agreed .. Tribbler is right on this . A good maneuvering system with weapons control will go a long ways to making a good game better.

[PigUp]

Hopefully ships and weapons will vary enough to allow a lot of different tactics. Using SFC as an example, the PPD was a weapon which you could not fire under a certain range, couple that with the weak point defense of ISC ships and you had to use more sniping tactics than jousting when playing that race. Or take the "knife" fighting tactic that is used with fast firing weapons, where you try and stay as close as possible to a ship, knowing your weapons will charge faster, and, if timed right, you can take hits on your strong shields. If done right, STO will have plenty of tactics to choose from.

[Kinjiru]

Agreed .. Tribbler is right on this . A good maneuvering system with weapons control will go a long ways to making a good game better.

Not just things that you control the ship with, but I think we should mention the terrain factor. All of those things around us, whether it be wreckage, moons, asteroids, other ships, nebula hot spots... all of these things could work together to help avoid a situation where jousting becomes the best tactic, giving you a reason to not just charge at each other.

[Tribbler]

Not just things that you control the ship with, but I think we should mention the terrain factor. All of those things around us, whether it be wreckage, moons, asteroids, other ships, nebula hot spots... all of these things could work together to help avoid a situation where jousting becomes the best tactic, giving you a reason to not just charge at each other.

Thanks,

Yes these are the things I am getting at.

[Tribbler]

Agreed .. Tribbler is right on this . A good maneuvering system with weapons control will go a long ways to making a good game better.

Indeed Buzz,

Forever trying to figure the keys, HUD display (if re-arrangeable), staying on target as you pass, debris fields, along with everything else combined, could make this game fun and not a chore.

[Loekii]

Not just things that you control the ship with, but I think we should mention the terrain factor. All of those things around us, whether it be wreckage, moons, asteroids, other ships, nebula hot spots... all of these things could work together to help avoid a situation where jousting becomes the best tactic, giving you a reason to not just charge at each other.

I am hoping that we dont end up with system where every instance is filled with 'clutter', to help mask the jousting set up.

I want to see more 'deep space' instances where there is nothing but ships and white pin-holes in the black vail of space.

[DanSeale]

I am hoping that we dont end up with system where every instance is filled with 'clutter', to help mask the jousting set up.

I want to see more 'deep space' instances where there is nothing but ships and white pin-holes in the black vail of space.

yeah .... I agree. If we are relying on asteriod fields all the time to break up the battle .. then something went wrong.

Don't get me wrong .. I don't mind it from time to time ... but that too can become a negative factor.

While we are at it.

I'm seeing another trend : The "need" for ships that tend to fit a WoW player format: Healer,Tank super Zapper (caster) .. that is one big pile of junk ! Some of the best times I ever had in the last 10 years of this stuff has been with 6 players on each side (believe it or not "drafted" and held togeather by a player who was on "dial-up" ... and some of those single PvP battles lasted 20 to 30 minutes at a time). Each player had what ever the best ship they could manage from a prestige system on SFC-OP. We did not look to see how many BB's we had .. WHO had the really good ships ... we stuck togeather with ships that were made for combat .. None of us had the "X" ships at that time. I think I finaly did toward the end of that particular campaign server (that was the term used then) .. The servers were provided for free by players who LOVED the game.

There was not huge amount of money being made. But we learned how to make MODS and came up with some really cool stuff.

If a bunch of nobodys can kick some major butt and put on a show that held the attention of the SFC OP crowd dont tell me that we cant get BETTER results here !

Ok .. the old man will get off his soap box now ...

but ...

I'm still stired up !

This red blooded old man KNOWS it can be done ..

COME ON PEOPLE !

:cool::cool::cool:

[moessner]

In Air and in Space, there is a term called Jousting as in the tournaments of Medievel Times.

2 opponents coming at each other, firing, then turning around and firing again, so-on and so-forth.

The ship with the faster turning radius is the one that can usually win with an opponet of equal size and strength.

The smaller ships will sure be able to out turn a larger ship if the dynamics are within the norms, but a larger ship will have stronger shields and stronger phasers with a longer reach due to the size of their warp core.

How do you think Cryptic is going to resolve constant jousting scenarios?

After so many passes, you may discover that the shields are recharging faster than the damage from each pass is making.

yes cryptic has stated in irc chat ship to ship combat will be more tactics, and not a dog fight game.

[Sobekeus]

yes cryptic has stated in irc chat ship to ship combat will be more tactics, and not a dog fight game.

Yet evidence from other things they said points to a less tactical game than it should be.

[renderpix]

yes cryptic has stated in irc chat ship to ship combat will be more tactics, and not a dog fight game.
Yet evidence from other things they said points to a less tactical game than it should be.

True Sobekeus, this is a point that is overlooked too often. Comparing Starships to small fighters is never gonna fly...... lol never gonna fly. Like has been said the more you try to keep something from happening the more you make it possible.

With only able to manuver when forward movement is applied is going to make tactics difficult. For instance where Klingon ship design is involved and if and I mean "IF" KDF ships are designed close to canon being able to thrust side to side and reverse would make Klingon ship tactics very usable. Proper movement would stop any chance of the dogfight.

But with the current movement system this will not be possible and the Joust will be on also with tactics used in most of the SFC getting behind the opponent staying away from most of their weapons like the front facing multi torps or disruptor cannons picking on one weak rear shield, will in fact turn it into a dogfight. Not being able to rotate you vessel most likely you will take the only possible move, run and attempt a tighter turn causing a chase like in a dogfight. Or are we going to play fair and stay in weapons arc and trade damage.

[DanSeale]

True Sobekeus, this is a point that is overlooked too often. Comparing Starships to small fighters is never gonna fly...... lol never gonna fly. Like has been said the more you try to keep something from happening the more you make it possible.

With only able to manuver when forward movement is applied is going to make tactics difficult. For instance where Klingon ship design is involved and if and I mean "IF" KDF ships are designed close to canon being able to thrust side to side and reverse would make Klingon ship tactics very usable. Proper movement would stop any chance of the dogfight.

But with the current movement system this will not be possible and the Joust will be on also with tactics used in most of the SFC getting behind the opponent staying away from most of their weapons like the front facing multi torps or disruptor cannons picking on one weak rear shield, will in fact turn it into a dogfight. Not being able to rotate you vessel most likely you will take the only possible move, run and attempt a tighter turn causing a chase like in a dogfight. Or are we going to play fair and stay in weapons arc and trade damage.

yup .. wheather or not Cryptic realizes this or not .. it is still true. Once you drop a shield .. it's pretty much over. Also the most common battle practice was to take out any ship that was small or wounded first to reduce the number of enemy ships you were up against. After that your team could pick apart what remained at will. Usually that meant a dog fight with two or more players against 1.

[Tribbler]

Allright then, is everyone agreed that we will be dogfighting in...

s l o w m o t i o n?

and Jousting in

s l o w m o t i o n?

:cool:

[Loekii]

Allright then, is everyone agreed that we will be dogfighting in...

s l o w m o t i o n?

and Jousting in

s l o w m o t i o n?

:cool:

Yeap.

I think Crytpic's error was in choosing the wrong word.

They should have just stuck with 'not fast past, twitch' style like a Jet fighter, but a more slow paced 'Tall Ships' style -- though more like speed boats (not racing boats).