[Vehicle] ESF hover mechanic. How it should actually work.

Greetings fellow Planetsiders.

Recently I've come up to a thought "Why the hell hovering ESF is so maneuverable?!" Seriously, why?

Why do aircrafts even roll, pitch and yaw? Because of ailerons, elevators and rudder. But they work only if aircraft is moving forward.





By the look of ESFs they have them too, hence their maneuverability depends on their horizontal movement. By the same way Harrier VTOL can't fly like our ESFs, losing it's horizontal movement it loses majority of it's maneuverability, making it viable only for landing and taking off.

So if ESF loses it's horizontal speed below 25% it should receive 75% pitch, yaw and roll penalty. With Hover Stability Airframe it might be more forgiving and take 25-30% penalty.

Why do I want to see that in game:

1. Actual dogfights. Not hover waltzing. Players would have to chase each other, use terrain and maneuver.
2. A2G pilots gonna have hard time aiming and evading while hovering. They gonna have plan their attack, picking targets and do actual strafes.
3. Death of Reverse Maneuver.

So I want to hear your "Yay" or "Nay".

PS I know God have killed plenty of catgirls because I brought real physics in the video game, but hope their sacrifice won't be in vain for the sake of better gameplay.

you realise that ESF don't carry any wing-like surfaces and fly purely by virtue of GIANT ENGINES?

Which would work horribly IRL.

Personally I wish we had actual airstrips for aircraft (at least ESFs & Liberators) to land at and restock and losing those meant losing air support (nowhere to take off or land.)

And in replace of the ESFs & Liberators losing hover functionality they would gain really good damage, so they would be called in for airstrikes and what not, flying down, carpet-bombing an area and flying back to restock.

But instead we have hover mechanic and aircraft which either get wiped out immediately or survive forever based on how much dedicated AA there is.

I'm not bringing the topic of why ESF is flying in the air. I'm talking about why they maneuver.

And for you to know, Harrier doesn't have wide wings too and mostly flies because of it's GIANT ENGINES.

You are going to get torn apart by almost every pilot. They have a hard on for the RM.

I know.

Where are the flaps on the ESF's? Have I just not noticed them? Does the Scythe even have any moving parts?

Still not sure about Scythes though. But since i haven't seen it turning using sort of mini jet engines, it has the same mechanics.

Edit: It seems that Reaver design is outdated. But I guess it still uses same principles.

All they would have to do to explain it would be to add animations for lateral thrusters.

Eh, same as any helicopter would or VTOL would? By changing the direction and amount of thrust you give in each engine?

They also have to have some kind of semi anti-gravity field generator. There is no way they can sport that much armor while also fielding that much ammunition, some of the choices give you more destructive power in ammo than a 2/2 MBT fully stocked. Oh, and that auto-loader thing that's placed on ESF but not on MBT's, allowing them to reload without having it already reloaded at least 50%, and that thing that allows them to operate two weapons at a time, and... and...

Another ESF thread, and AA is still OP.

U guys Thing about 2015 Fligh mechaniks, but that game Play in future, and an ESF is like a Heli, Heli have Hoovermechaniks too.

2015 we have a Hooverfighter, and Irak, Afganistan don`t cry about it, but u guys cry hole time about ESF.

The 1st VTOL was boring 1922. sure 100 Years ago
The 1st real Hoover Jet was Hawker Siddeley Harrier and was Born 1966

Sure he can`t good moves but that Game is in the Future, and People Still work on a good Hooverfighter 2015.
The new F-35 have a new Avionik Mechanik and is the 1st step to the Hooverphysiks on PS2


:/ We are not in the 60, out Jets have much better Performance, and an ESF is not a LierJet :/

I haven't used a Reaver in a pretty long time, I knew it had those surfaces, but they seemed completely solid and without flaps. Highly likely that SOE was too lazy to animate them. That would be just too much work.

Thinking of ESFs as a hybrid between fighter jets and attack helicopters would probably be more healthy for your sanity. Basically, rather than honing in on how things OUGHT to be for traditional jets (with a few minor concessions, such as a "75% pitch, yaw and roll penalty"), it might be more impressive if you can tell us why the current situation is bad and a new one would bring "better gameplay". Not only that, there are already plenty of games that do aerial combat far better than PS2, so if you really are a stickler for traditional air combat, perhaps looking elsewhere is a good idea.

Terrain is already an important part of flying; if you can use it well, you can turn a dire situation into a glorious victory. Sure, it becomes less of an issue, when you are hovering about, 500m from the ground, but that's exactly the same with traditional jets as well. If anything, being so maneuvrable in hover mode allows you to exploit even tighter and more complex spaces. So, that point is moot.

I'd also like to point out that while A2G hoverfarming doesn't necessarily require much mechanical skill to pull off with any deftness, it does require quite a bit of thinking. Hovering in one spot is an easy way to get shot apart in an instant, so picking the wrong target to glare at for 10 seconds could quickly result in a fiery death.

And...well, other than the expected, what do you have against the reverse maneuvre? It adds a ridiculous amount of variety to the game. The major sticking-point with it for many is, of course, learning the knack for it (which DOES need more official recognition and resources to teach it, at LEAST), but why should learning be a problem? I've taught plenty of people things like that and they have gone on to enjoy the airgame immensely.

Anyway, Tl;dr - Explain why the current situation is bad/your idea is better. Helijets > regular jets. Your current arguments are rather flimsy.

Something to note about PlanetSide Classic "ESFs."

Here we have a Classic Reaver, although a Mosquito was not too dissimilar (below).

Those massive engines on the wings rotate as the vehicle turns, and point downwards when teh Vehicle is still, allowing it to pitch and hold being pitched in place. The tail is solid and constant lift was generally considered to be a property of some other system. Altitude could be perfectly stable. Forcing the vehicle to engage in classical flight physics with things such as escalators and airlions would be a huge step back in technology.

OP just wants Airgame tailored towards his close minded ideas and lack of skill.

ESF should be able to strafe sideways and backwards like an actual helicopter
right now they just... hover and move forward

I told already why that system would be better. Even highlighted it a bit.

And ESFs are not helijets. It's more like Harrier aircrafts. VTOL. Not helijets. They were designed like so.

And yes, I hate RM and Hover Waltzing with passion because that crap is not fun and kills good dogfights.

I brought this system because I want to remove hover mechanics from combat. It should be landing/takeoff utility, no more.

And speaking about technology regression... yeah, with most of game weapons/vehicles/mechanics that somewhere at WWII era, but just have cool Sci-Fi look? Rrrrrrrrriiiiiiight.

And I don't want "other game". I want it in THIS game. I don't want to switch games if I want to play tank, or infantry, or aircraft.

Go eff yourself.

Also they use either rsc systems or reaction wheels instead of control surfaces
They should be even able to work even in space

Dude, worse, flak weapons, tanks on tracks, powder weaponry. We're in 40's.