Front Engines < Back Engine

The ship in bitfighter has 3 engines total. 2 front engines that moves you backwards, sideways, and diagonally with the back engine. 1 back engine that moves you forward or diagonally with the other two front engines.
The back engine is bigger and is used in 1 direction only unlike the 2 front engines.

I think the ships in bitfighter should move slower when moving backwards than moving forward like a car. You can't go over 70 mph driving backwards on a car. It makes sense both realistic/sci-fic. This would fix the problem I was talking about when an enemy is running away while shooting backwards.

Zoomber said, ..."I totally see where his viewpoint stands, and shooting backwards is an outright obvious advantage just due to the plain fact you only have to shoot backwards. And who cares where the bullets go or of they are "too slow". That's not the issue here sam. It's the fact that the bullets create a maze you must evade around to get to the player, like speed-zones, which will set you back but just damage wise instead, or force you to use shield to block them phasers. Take it from an advanced player, that following someone is much harder to accomplish, than being followed by another, but escaping..."

Sam686 wrote:
in Bitfighter, you can go forward, sideways, backwords using either relative controls or absolute controls. Note, joystick only have absolute controls, relative controls doesn't work yet in joysticks. In StarFighter, there is no moving sideways, and is relative controls only.

We could make the ship move slower in relation to the aiming device in relation to the ship. If the ship is facing/pointing toward the same direction as it is moving, then it is moving forward and is at normal speed. If the ship is facing away from the direction it is moving, then it is moving backwards and is moving slower. However, turbo isn't reduced when moving backwards, so you can still kite.

[sam686]

This feature may cause strange inconsistent speed moving left on absolute controls, and turning around in circles.

I might not want this feature, as absolute controls may not function right.

Can someone please explain to me why this is even an issue?

[karamazovapy]

It's not. He likes to chase flag carriers and gets killed when they trail phase, so he wants to take that out of the game. That's all this is, in yet another thread.

This feature may cause strange inconsistent speed moving left on absolute controls, and turning around in circles.

I might not want this feature, as absolute controls may not function right.

It would cause more bugs...

[bobdaduck]

Why on earth should ships in space move like a car?

Why on earth should ships in space move like a car?

I didn't said they would move like a car specially. Spaceships cannot move around like the ones in star wars because of physics. You need engines on all/most sides/angles to "barrel roll" and other stuff. However, the main engine is the one pushing you forward, therefore it should have more "work force" than the other smaller engines. However, like sam686 said, it would create more problems/bugs in the game.

The idea itself was more of a concept than a feature. Thus it won't be in the game.

[bobdaduck]

Sounded like you want game physics to act like real life physics.

The problem is mostly just how ridiculously it would affect gameplay. Every strategy that is currently in the game would have to be completely changed because of the change.

That's the way it is with most of these new ideas...

[raptor]

I'm sorry to say that the thruster physics will probably not change for a long, long time, if at all.

Closing thread

[watusimoto]

I just want to toss out there that my first reaction was "interesting idea". I can't imagine implementing it, but the possibility had never before occurred to me.

Sorry for posting on a locked thread