Unique aspects of JK...that would be nice in JK2

[HitMan]

Is this really still about JK2 or are you all just arguing about science?

 

This is much more entertaining

 

[Eternity]

WD_ToRMeNt: Oh, please, for my sake, be quiet. It seems the only times you post on these forums is to bring up the 'l33t skillz' and how everybody should 'ph3ar them'.

 

Reality check, you little egotistical man:

 

You ramble on about how you must have the right mindset, and how skills must be perfected in JK, etc. etc. Reality is, in the cosmic sense of things, you have pretty much nothing on anybody, besides this game you have. Even when it's not in the cosmic sense of things, you pretty much are doing nil. This 'game' you are so good at is four years old. Nobody plays it anymore besides the hardcores. (No offence to those who do; I'm not saying it's a bad game, just that it's audience has waned.) And lastly, those who are truly liked and appreciated for their skills don't boast about it. The true leaders, in a nutshell, don't do what you do.

 

I try to be nice in these boards, as it is such a nice place. But you've made me lose my temper, and I apologise to those who had to read that.

 

Shakes his head.

[Guest JaGReiKo]

Actually torment is giving out advice to people who play q3 and never played jk, and how it could be in jk2. Everyone boasts everytime or another, its just a game dont get to offended.

[Raze]

But it IS changing velocity. Remember that velocity is a vector, not just speed.

 

Fine fine fine, I meant to say speed, English is not my primary language, I thought it'd be the same

[SS_Foxy]

Originally posted by WD_ToRMeNt

I don't give damn about the SP, but JK's MP is absolutely unique. Most people don't understand the force dynamics and the extremes they can be taken to.

 

Playing JK FF is like playing chess at mach 2. I'm serious.

 

To be good in JK FF you need everything to be good in any other FPS and much more.

 

1) Aim

2) Ability to think ahead of your opponent. Force speed (plus lag) is to fast to aim at where they are, you must be thinking ahead of your opponent to dodge his conc/desctructs and hit him with yours. You must out think him.

3) extreme multi tasking

4) Ability to watch 2d map and 3d screen at the same time

5) Keep a steady count in your mind and time one or more power ups.

6) Lightning fast reflexes

7) Knowleadge of the lag/netcode

8) better then avarage hand-eye coordination to control speed/jump combos

 

This is what made JK to complex and extreme. Most JKers can't handle the above (and definately not all at the same time) and just stick to NF sabs.

 

Today I got into a game of BGJ FF FFA... I had 53 kills, and the guy who was in 2nd had only 2...

 

Woiah! what's your zone name?

[WD_ToRMeNt]

WD_ToRMeNt is my zone name hehe. I do teach newbies who ask.

[MikeC]

Originally posted by Raze

 

Fine fine fine, I meant to say speed, English is not my primary language, I thought it'd be the same

 

Most people wouldn't know the difference. You just had the misfortune of getting into this discussion with an engineer.

[Lucky]

It's not reality we're describing, its JK.

 

Someone once described warping to me by saying 'JK doesn't like sharp turns'.

 

Lemme give you an example raze since I'm having a tough time getting this across, mostly cause i keep posting drunk, lmao.

 

In nf sabs, when you turn gradually your velocity increases slightly. This is actually more apparent in ff sabs, but nf sabs is easier to describe fer me. That'll be item a.

 

Item b. The 'double jump'. While its not really double, it is essentially an acceleration followed by a quick pivot that sends you flying along the direction you came from going faster and farther than you could achieve normally.

 

Basically that means that if you turn gradually you are going to go a lil faster. If you turn sharply yer going to go a heck of a lot faster. Now the centripetal force[f=ma f=mv^2/r] is the force drawing you towards the center of the circle, when that force is snapped by you leaving the ground you go farther and faster than you could have by running in a straight line. That velocity you achieve is the vector tangent to the circle.

 

Since the speed you trace around the circle is constant, the only thing that could be adding to your velocity [adding/accleration ahem] is the fact that you are traveling along a circle. Now you describe the circle by the speed at which you move your mouse. If you move your mouse really quickly, the radius of the circle is smaller and that translates into a greater velocity tangent to the circle you ran in.

 

If you still don't get it, boot up JK. Host a FF game of sabs. first run straight into a wall airborn with 4 stars in speed. Then try running directly away from it and pulling a 180 degree turn along with a jump and hitting that wall. I guarantee you will take more damage with the double jump than with the straight run.

 

Now how would you describe that? No other FPS has anything similar to that. The only thing I could reason out over the years was that the radius of yer circle was directly related to a time component of you moving your mouse. That was related to the centripetal force/acceleration because a=v/t. When you decrease the radius/time you take in describing a circle you accelerate to a greater degree producing a greater velocity vector tangent to that circle. That make sense?

 

Is it physically possible in real life? I don't think so. I think its all about the user input of JK coupled with that one situation. You accelerate by turning/moving yer mouse in a circular pattern.

 

There are all sorts of holes in that theory but the basis of it is pretty sound and observable. Like if you turned infinitely precisely and jumped perfectly you should be able to accelerate to an enormous degree. So there must be a ratio in there that limits it. What'd be fun would be to get a 0 g game going and have 3 people double jump at different degree's of tightness and see who gets going the fastest.

 

Anyhow the centripetal force is what accelerates you increasing your tangent velocity. You could think of it in terms of momentum if you'd like. I still stick to that idea even if I butchered it when relating it to db a while back.

 

That make sense Raze?

 

 

Anders

[MuRaSaMuNe]

Hmmm.... I'm going to have to agree with you HitMan Science and Gaming skills really don't mix.

[Yodimus Prime]

uh...yeah. I'm glad people cleared up the "no acceleration" thing. It was bugging me when i read it.

 

 

 

I was going to post something good for this topic. But by the time i had finished reading the posts, i had forgotten what we were supposed to be talking about.

 

 

 

Oh, and i no one ever got me a chocolate jedi medalion when i first came in. What? Do i suck that much?

[MikeC]

Nobody gave me one either.

[Yodimus Prime]

yeah, we must have both inadvertently registered on Everyone-who-registers-on-this-day-sucks day.

 

Either that or there's some crazy loophole we haven't heard of.

 

but that would go along with the "we suck" deal anyway.

[Redwing]

I never got one either. Of course, I never was a newbie, since I cam here after the forums merge so I had my ridiculously high RS.net post count. (Still do btw )

 

FYI: The JK engine was modified from the XvT engine (a space sim) Thus the *bug* you speak of.

 

As for this Centripetal Force animal: I never mastered this, tho I was told of it previously. It was too hard to understand for me, I suppose. I do not think it should be included in JK2...it's not *realistic* according to Star Wars. There's no reason to carry it over, since relative few mastered it anyway. Same for mouse warp.

[Fardreamer]

Can't ever leave physics out of a thread, eh, Mike?

 

You people forget that JK2 isn't a remake of JK, made specially for veteran JK players. It's an entirely new game, meant to appeal to people who've never played JK as well as people who still play it. JO should be just as different from JK as JK was from DF, and therefore SHOULD NOT feel and play like Jedi Knight. Personally I'm looking forward to something different altogether, and not just JK on steroids.

[Raze]

Luke, really, I am fully aware that JK's way of handling movement is wicked. I have found about that a long time ago and I have taught many people of my clan how to use it. I know that you can take your momentum with you when you turn, I know how and why warping occurs.

 

I was just pointing out that this is a BUG in JK, not a feature, like Deathbolt called it.

 

 

Anyhow the centripetal force is what accelerates you increasing your tangent velocity. You could think of it in terms of momentum if you'd like.

 

Wrong in RL, possible in JK, though I don't think it has to be true necessarily.

 

When you decrease the radius/time you take in describing a circle you accelerate to a greater degree producing a greater velocity vector tangent to that circle. That make sense?

No, doesn't make sense, I am afraid. The time component in a=v/t is not the time you need to do 1 cirlce (which indeed is 1/f [frequency], often referred to as T (capital letter) ) but the time during which you accelerate. Say you accelerate your speed by 10 m/s for/in 1 second then you acceleration a=v/t is a=10/1 m/s² = 10 m/s² .

 

 

Now the centripetal force[f=ma f=mv^2/r] is the force drawing you towards the center of the circle, when that force is snapped by you leaving the ground you go farther and faster than you could have by running in a straight line. That velocity you achieve is the vector tangent to the circle.

Untrue in RL, I am not sure if you were talking about JK or RL when saying that, just thought I'd point that out once again.

 

 

Sincerely,

Raze

[Lucky]

im only talking about JK's physics, im using actual descriptions of stuff where it applies.

 

 

It boils down to: if yer radius is smaller you decrease the t in a=v/t which increases yer acceleration.

 

You keep getting tangled up in rl physics and not describing whats going on in the game. Think about how you would describe it with math and not what you've learned in school. It doesn't apply to a game thats spoofing the stuff anyhow. The equations they used to simulate it might not even look remotely the same. Take friction for instance, there's no way they used the actual equation for friction. Its too easy to spoof a force parallel to whatever surface of such and such magnitude.

 

If you carve out a tighter circle then your acceleration is greater for a period of time which results in a greater tangental velocity when you break your lock on the ground.

 

I never bothered to come up with an equation that describes it precisely because the ratio may or may not make sense. It might require some experimentation to figure it out. Yer mouse has to translate into some acceleration thats added to the v tangent. But the faster you turn your mouse the smaller your radius. So yer radius and mouse acceleration have to be inversely related. Which means you should be able to come up with somthing that relates the radius of yer circle to the v tangent of it, without worrying about the mousey accel. If you can't get rid of the user input variable we'll never figure it out.

 

I'll try to come up with somthin in the next few days that actually describes it. I think it has to do with the way they spoofed centripetal force which was why I brought it up in the first place. The force drawing you towards the center of the circle gets snapped and it gives you some added momentum; accelerates you.

 

Gimme a hand raze, I've got other things to worry bout.

 

 

Anders

[DeathBoLT]

I'd love it if someone could ask about the presence of the bug that turned out to be a plus, that causes you to gain momentum when you put an arch in your movement at the chat on march 1st if I can't make it.

[Raze]

I must have missed the part where you said you were trying to figure out a formula for the game-physics heh.

 

Well, let's rest it here, I got other things to do as well, I am just an arguing type of guy =) .

 

 

-Raze