Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Prograde and Retrograde Indicators

Discussion in 'Suggestions and Feedback' started by inventor200, Sep 28, 2015.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. kcjunkbox Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,131
    Why would you not want more indicators to help you navigate and control your ships better? How would that hurt anything?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Ulfsark Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,057
    Not that one of those guys who gets up in arms over people disagreeing with me, but why did you disagree with me when you basically said the exact same thing I said that you disagreed with? O_o
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  3. inventor200 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    446
    Haven't seen him in forever. He rejected a lot of ideas with a bit of cold snark. However, he wasn't as illogical. Just, again, a little harsh once in a while.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. Mr Ixolate Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    276
    This would be a very useful feature especially as it would give me a better view of where I am travelling during a tight curve.

    One other thing, has anyone else noticed that the horizon indicator is a physical object that can be seen in spectator floating about 100m in front of the pilot? Would be funny to see the same happen again with this.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
  5. kcjunkbox Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,131
    I misread your double negative. My bad. I do in fact think the hud should be expanded a lot it's way to minimal now
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. PlanetS1de Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    216
    Youre wrong. And its not a slippery slope if it already happened. Additionally youre the 1 who consistently holds "cuz i like it" as good argument.

    But youve certainly read how he thinks its a good idea , perhaps just partly, due to him not liking the way the game works, and by that i dont mean that there isnt an indicator, i mean he doesnt like to have dampeners on.
    The actual correct way is to have the big thrusters in every direction. Just cause we build ships mostly with going forwards in mind is our fault and wishful thinking.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 4
  7. EternityTide Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,950
    Evidence? Citation?
    Your arguments tend to follow the line of "It's different, I don't like it, it shouldn't be added".
    And stop with this pseudo-aggression, it really undermines your arguments.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  8. PlanetS1de Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    216
    No peer-reviewed papers about redundant systems in SE published yet. Arc furnace and refinery, including modifiers modules, laser antennas, antennas, beacons, wheels in space, mass blocks.
    My argument follow the line of "what does it change, can it be done already otherwise, can the effort be better spent elsewhere".
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  9. EternityTide Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,950
    Your argument is more along the lines of "It's not in SE, therefore it can't happen".
    On the rare occasion, you do bring up good points, but most of the time you shut people down and crush their ideas underfoot. you don't offer any amendments to the idea, you don't attempt, WHATSOEVER, to improve on ideas. Your comments can be essentially summarized as "It's not in the existing game. Therefore I don't like it, bugger off"
    Your hard-line mentality crushes any modicum of creativity, and really puts people off making suggestions.
    as regards my statement:
    I was talking about your supposition that my typical argument is, as you so eloquently put it, "cuz i like it"
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2015
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. PlanetS1de Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    216
    its the opposite - it already is in SE under a different name.
    I have no obligation to amend somebodys idea, especially since most often its the core solution thats wrong, not execution. I dont have to propose a different kind of wood for a bridge 3m above a lava pit, so it doesnt burn.
    on the contrary, it promotes only the most creative ideas; liquid implementation instead of another different kind of engine. And some people need to be put off making suggestions.
    And searching for your "i like it" quote is too long, too short or too common.
     
  11. Ulfsark Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,057
    Actual correct way? According to who? Lets see, in Mass Effect games, they thrust only in one direction, and then spin to slow down. In the Expanse series of books (and now TV show) they thrust in one direction, and spin to slow down. NASA and the Air Force and other present day REAL space vehiclesonly have thrusters in one direction.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  12. PlanetS1de Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    216
    According to physics. We are not in Mass Effect, current space vessels have rocket nozzle in 1 direction. Heard about RCS and how it faces all directions? Do we have RCS in SE? Do we already put thrusters in every way?
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  13. EternityTide Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,950
    I'm talking about your attitude on this forum generally.
    You are also under no obligation to voice your opinion, stomping on someone's idea every 10 minutes. The suggestions forum is exactly that - a suggestion forum. Not a criticism forum, a suggestions forum. You can criticise something, but only if you suggest another way of amending it (unless it's absolutely whackjob insane)
    No... that's not how creativity works. Plants do not grow well when they are constantly be crushed into the ground. Same thing with ideas. Keep stomping, eventually they stop coming, or they are stunted and misshapen. Criticise, sure, but also suggest means of improvement
    No it just represents that you also din't understand how search functions work.
    RCS is used for fine manoeuvres (such as docking), not high ΔV thruster burns.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  14. GotLag Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,114
    Real spacecraft need RCS for fine movement and attitude control, SE needs gyros for attitude control and only requires minimal thrusters on each direction for fine movement. Adding large amounts of thrust to each facing is a waste of mass and materials, if you don't have to do it.

    I'm not sure what you need for attitude control PlanetS1de, but whatever you've got now isn't working.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  15. PlanetS1de Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    216
    youre either wrong or talking about something else.
    but i choose behavior based on my preference and youve failed to convince me not to stomp everyone, especially since basic behavioral motivators are emotional, so logical arguments are ineffective.
    So its only for people who agree? And its you who decide how i can disagree?
    No, its is. Plant growth isnt creativity, and not every plant is being stomped.
    No, it represents you didnt.
    so why dont we have it? We do have docking ports. And since we are so rich to put high dV thrusters all over the place, we might just as well put the bigger ones on.

    No, thrusters control attitude, gyros allow you to turn the ship in the axis. Adding large amount of thrust in space is a waste, since you can reach that 100m/s speed with the smallest engine anyways. You just have to fire for 10mins. Whos wasteful now, huh?
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  16. EternityTide Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,950
    No, I'm most definitely not talking about someone else.
    Creativity is not solely born from hardship. If it did, this forum would be spouting a fantastic idea every 30 seconds.
    also:
    do you actually know what attitude is?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. Ulfsark Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,057
    Ultimately, who are you to tell someone how to build their ship? Small thrusters can easily act as RCS thrusters. If someone wants to keep their main thrust in the rear and have to navigate themselves around like a real life space fairing vessel would, who are you to say they are doing it wrong? Also, why are you against the actual core of this suggestion; the addition of a more informational HUD?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  18. PlanetS1de Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    216
    You mistook "something" for "someone", as i mistook "attitude" for "altitude".
    No, creativity is rare and people use tried methods to deal with hardship, so your assumptions and conclusions are wrong.

    Who are you to tell KSH to put in rails or indicators? If you want do not balance the thrust, its gonna be harder. Noone needs to make it easier.
    If you werent raging about how much i disagree you wouldve focused on the contents of my posts, where you wouldve found, that i disagree with 1 argument thats supposed to sell it. That argument is "i want to build it my way and i want you to make it easy for me". Theres also already a strong directional indication in the form of those bloody flight particles. Alternatively cluttering. Good indicators are good, but its increasingly harder to just add another gauge. We could have the ui scratched and be given a navball. Why are you agains Navballs?
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  19. Ulfsark Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,057
    I'm pretty sure when Navballs were brought up, the general consensus was "that'd be cool."
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  20. Ghostickles Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,077
    Have you tried using cameras on a few different grids axis? Results are interesting....
    :)
     
  21. GotLag Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,114
    Hey guys I found a way to dramatically improve the quality of discussion in this thread.

    Edit: this whole forum, really
     
    • Funny Funny x 6
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  22. KissSh0t Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,558
    I would love rcs... if they were kind of like camera block in size and shape, like a little nozzle, and it had up down left right nozzles on a flat plane... that would be cool... kind of like in ksp I guess... then you could have the big forward thrusters and the little rcs nozzles..

    But yeah, Prograde and Retrograde indicators inside the cockpit like on a hud would be super cool.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  23. sioxernic Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,535
    Definitely
     
  24. Tayrtahn Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    60
    It really would've been great if you could have clarified that earlier. I don't think anyone reading this thread understood that that was what you were disagreeing with. The desire to avoid cluttering the UI is a good point too. A navball would be most welcome too, though I wouldn't expect that until there's a major UI revamp.
     
  25. Sinbad Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,788
    if you think you can get used to reading numbers instead of looking at a graphical representation (you would be surprised how quickly you can get used to it) try this:
    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=569092217 for in zero-g
    and this http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=584362292 for planetary use (doesnt show motion vector yet, but the section in the zero-g one should be able to be ported in).
    ill be extending the planetary one in the future, and making master script that will transition from one environment to the other.
    both are just demonstrators, but anyone can take the idea, the code or whatever and set it up for their specific use.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  26. Grit Breather Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    874
    This is a good suggestion and I'm completely behind it.
    However, cockpits in smaller ships or bridges in larger ships are missing many more control and feedback options.
    A short and partial list of the ones I find missing most are:
    • Ship momentum vector indicator
    • Current thrust vector indicator
    • Indicator for 'time until thrust and momentum vector convergence'
    • Various nav options
    • Various "radar" options
    Essentially, SE is in need of a complete UI revamp (and I'm sure one will come eventually) as well as shifting most of the current UI elements to in-game readouts. For proper ships, large or smell, SE needs cockpits and seats to be more than just somewhere for you to sit. SE needs cockpits and seats to actually work.
    A good example for a well designed cockpit can be found in Elite: Dangerous. There are practically no non-cockpit UI elements at all. Every bit of information is fed to the player through the cockpit itself.


    So basically, I don't think this should be added to the current (rather broken) UI, but to the future revamped player-interaction-systems.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  27. sioxernic Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,535
    Sad that this got buried.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  28. malteins Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    163
    Well now that you unburied it, I wishfully think that maybe with the new revamped UI Keen has to work on before final release, we will get some nice HUD indicators that many have proposed.
    Cheers!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  29. n1ghty Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    34
    let's keep it up then.
    +1 velocity vector or something similar
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  30. Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,212
    Well, now that it has been demonstrated that LCD's can show animations without crashing the game, I'm hoping all this navigation stuff can leave the HUD and show up on the cockpit console.
     
    • Like Like x 3
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.