It'd be nice if we had a plugin system where developers could use either, I'm much happier in C++ despite being able to code in either.

A lot of this stuff is maths intensive so it really needs some stuff implementing in C++ anyway, especially where it's going to be gathering a lot of information from the engine side or doing a lot of calculations.

Yeah cpp is much faster. Lua should be used to call heavy cpp functions.

However LuaJIT could be used to significantly speed up lua processing.

 

the missile is always dificult to hit the target, combat in space is diferent than combat in planet "atmosphere" (or Other Space Sims) where the missiles almost always hit the target. (like Freelancer or X3)

 

Since bullets are free and missiles cost good money, I can sure expect them to have a better kill-ratio. Otherwise they're not economical, and therefore wouldn't be bought, and as a consequence not produced, in the gameworld.

I wouldn't mind making missiles somewhat more expensive, but also somewhat more effective (for example, a 100% chance of the ECM to get rid of certain missiles is somewhat unfortunate. There should always be a slight chance of failure for the ECM). Alternatively keep them cheap and ineffective, but change the system to enable a Macross-Missile-Massacre, that can be quite effective too (and oh so satisfying).

I don't like the current ECM mechanic... I think Electronic Warfare is such a large part of Space Combat that it deserves more than just a token presence as an anti-missile system. Personally I think that Electronic Warfare is a natural fit for any future implementation of Beam Weaponry... target the incoming missile and then pulse the sensor beam as a MASER or LASER to literally cook it, a directed energy CIWS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIWS

It could work against ships, too... I think raising the hull temperature makes sense as an effect but it could easily do other things like dazzle cameras, disrupt target locks... even hack ship systems or seize control of missiles in flight...

I also don't think bullets should be free... I think that if the game is going to use projectiles for the main weapons (something I'm strongly in favour of) then they should use ammunition of some kind. Not only would it encourage more thoughtful shooting but it would open up the option of specialized ammunition types.

The missiles are already Newtonian as far as I know, its more an issue of thinking about different types of missile types and behaviour... then finding some kind of mutant genius to write the actual code 😉

 

And They need to behave like missiles in Real Space based in the Newtonian modeling

 

It would actually be quite a challenge to put something into the physics engine that does not behave newtonian... Trouble is, missiles in "real space" would be fired far beyond visual range. If we make them too realistic in capabilities, we'll get a too realistic scenario. I.e. Ships trading blows over hundreds of thousands of kilometers instead of frantic dogfighting.

yeah probably

Why in combat, recent builds "we" have a problem!?(or you don´t know!?) 

because Pioneer is Alpha status!?

 

Your question does have nothing whatsoever to do with my statement that it would be difficult to make anything behave not newtonian in Pioneer, but I guess that's probably our "language problem" again...

To answer your question: Yes. Pioneer is far from finished, so combat isn't what it's supposed to be yet. You can't expect an Alpha to behave like a finished and balanced product. It's that simple, really.

 

So can you or others explain this to me!!?

 

In a game like this, you first need to do a physics engine. That is a piece of code that will control the behavior of all objects you put into the game world. The objects (for example a ship, a missile or a cargo container) Do not control their behavior. Their behavior is controled by the physics engine.

If a ship fires a thruster, it doesn't go "ah, I need to get faster now". Instead it sends a notification to the physics engine that it applying a certain ammount of force in a certain direction. The physics engine then calculates and applies the appropriate changes in velocity and position to the ship, based on the ships attributes and, of course, the physics that you programmed it to follow.

This means that the behavior of all objects you introduce into the game world are controled by the same rules. If those rules are newtonian, then everything behaves accordingly.

To make an object break those rules, you have to write its own behavioral rules for it. It can be done, but it is a lot more work making something not behave as the physics engine dictates than vice versa. This can make sense at points. The hyperspace clouds, for example, are not subject to gravity. To enable this, either they need their own code to counteract gravity, or (more probably) the physics engine knows (i.e. has been programmed) that these objects are an exception from the rule. So everytime you add an object that does not behave newtonian, you have a lot more work on your hands than when you add one that does.

For an object in Pioneer to behave newtonian, you just put it in there, and it will automatically be subject to the rules of the physics engine.

If a ship fires a thruster, it doesn't go "ah, I need to get faster now". Instead it sends a notification to the physics engine that it applying a certain ammount of force in a certain direction. The physics engine then calculates and applies the appropriate changes in velocity and position to the ship, based on the ships attributes and, of course, the physics that you programmed it to follow.

Just to confirm, this is exactly how Pioneer does it.

The hyperspace clouds, for example, are not subject to gravity. To enable this, either they need their own code to counteract gravity, or (more probably) the physics engine knows (i.e. has been programmed) that these objects are an exception from the rule.

Closer to the second. In Pioneer, all objects in the space are of type "Body". Free-moving bodies like ships, missiles and laser projectiles are of type "DynamicBody", a sub-type of Body. Anything that is a DynamicBody gets gravity and other forces applied to it. A hyperspace clouds is not DynamicBody, and does its own physics (just a linear velocity*time relative to the centre of the system).

Great explanation 🙂

 

Finnally someone wise, and i learn a lot with this,

 

There are wise people here who wrote the whole engine, I merely did some explaining. I am not wise, I am merely new here and hence still have more patience left for your escapades. If you'd asked nicely and showed that you're interested in the subject matter, instead of ranting on about how things were better in an earlier alpha and how every dev is involved in some kind of conspiracy against Frontier and the old dev team, you'd have gotten these explanations a long time ago.

That's what you should think about most.

 

I think that´s what´s happen in combat,

 

I am most certain no such thing happened. Everything in combat is behaving physically correct. There are multiple other problems: The AI is a bit of a crapshoot at times (also in the sense that it is literally a crappy shooter and has a tough time destroying your ship). The lack of computer aid for aiming and maneuvering in turn makes it very difficult for the player to hit anything. 

And last but not least, as I gather from posts in the contributor forum, there is a problem with collision detection. The projectiles were made faster at one point so it was easier to hit (faster projectiles = less time for the enemy to evade). This revealed a problem with the collision detection: The faster projectiles weren't registered when they hit, they flew "through" the target because they were too fast and (presumably) the timestep between frames large enough to let them cross the occupying space of the target between frames.

This is what happenes in Alphas: You have a problem, you try a solution, and more often than not, this solution shows more serious problems. This is a good thing, a process that eventually leads to a game without bugs. As far as I can see from the contributor forum, the projectile speed is again reduced to old levels (I assume it is already updated in the latest nightly build). The collision system will still have to be fixed though, and once it is fixed, it is possible that the speed will be increased again, if only to see if it is actually more fun when everything works as it should.

In other words, the deterioration of combat quality is part of a process that aims at making it better. It's just that by trying to make stuff better, you often discover problems that you didn't know were there, and then you have to fix them. And until they're fixed, things are worse than before.

Pls you need to help me with "Mechanics of Space Flight",

can i use this in my guide, or can you post something there about all this Newtonian Modelling.

 

You don't need to describe the inner workings of a program if you want to describe the mechanics of space flight. Indeed, you shouldn't. You should describe how things behave in reality. If they behave differently in your game, then it's not modeled correctly.

I.e. go play some orbiter until you understand the mechanics yourself, then go and write down what you've learned. 

 

But most of the time when i talk about Frontier, i´m censored. I don´t understand this very well

 

It's not talking about frontiers that gets you censored. On the one hand it's where you do it (there are threads where it's simply not apropriate), and on the other hand it's how you're doing it. There's a few basic things you must accept if you want to discuss the issue. The first is, Pioneer is not frontier. That's a fact you simply have to accept. It's not because anyone here hates frontier, or because the new devs hate the old devs, it's simply because time has marched on and it doesn't make a lot of sense to spend as much effort as is going into the development of Pioneer just to have a clone of a twenty years old game with prettier graphics, but none of its problems fixed.

Second, connected to the above, you must accept that Frontier has, indeed, flaws. Some of them grievious. Saying that has nothing to do with hating it or wanting to make it look bad. But at the end of the day it has to be said that Braben&co, back in the day, were visionary, enthusiast, briliant mathematicians and ingenious programers, but not the best game designers. It also has to be said, in their defense that the game was released unfinished.

If you accept these two basic facts, and behave accordingly, and post your concerns in appropriate threads, without personal insults like "they changed it, now it's different from Frontier, they are bad people", you won't get censored. Maybe it's connected to the language problem and you're not fully aware of it, but basically you repeat over and over again that anyone that changes something from Frontier is commiting some kind of crime, hates frontier and the old Pioneer devs and should go to hell. And you do it over and over, in every thread, in every topic... THAT's the reason you get censored, not because you talk about Frontier.

Tactical Mod thread... if it ain't about killing people and breaking things, please shut up.