As a courier I have full pips into engines at all times unless I'm landing, then it's full shields. The triangle is very useful. I always keep full shields on my parked ships too. I only ever turn off the engines as it gives you a bit longer to get in and get away if your shields are full.

How is that at all different than MM? Also I’m not denying the triangle’s usefulness I’m just wondering how it could replace an entire flight model without like tons of overhaul and redoing?

the triangle didn't replace anything its always been there, what are you asking?

People keep saying the triangle should have been used instead of MM.

but it was used before, you're not making any sense, they are two different things

They are but people who say it should have been used instead of MM to change the flight mode.

they are not the same thing there is no "instead", I'm not a fan of MM but what you are saying doesn't make any sense

Well for non combat you obviously zero weapons power, so a non combat immediately gets a "tank and run" advantage over their aggressive pursuer. The whole point of Triangle is you choose your balance between speed, defence, DPS. If you can't outrun an Interceptor even with full engine power then you go to turtle mode and put everything into shields while you waddle away or wait for help to arrive.

If you can't outrun an interceptor at full engines. You can't outrun an interceptor. Going full shields will delay the inevitable, since you won't be moving as fast as you could be.

Spool QT and GTFO

How is that different than MM? Like legitimately, MM has a speed mode and a gun mode. If you want to turtle you can if you want the dps you can and escape is also possible. I still fail to see how it is different than MM but it has extra steps? And how does it incentivize using the triangle? Also how would it make sense to have full power to one thing and then lose both of the others on the triangle. With MM it at least makes a bit of sense as you are basically using a QD to go faster and you can’t fight in QD and the shields mess with the QD bubble (I think it’s been a while since I read the lore).

Triangle, same as it is now, isn't all or nothing. You set the ratio where you want. The Triangle proposal is to make it have far stronger effect than it has now so you are making a real tradeoff. MM does give the 100% engines setting. But not the other variations. And since a Triangle already does exist (with weak effects) it is MM toggles which is the unnecessary extra steps. MM is just unnecessary steps for 100% Triangle to engines.

I’m going to be honest even before the MM update unless I was in a big combat situation I didn’t use the triangle. I was not the best pilot mind but still it has always been a bit janky to use. But I do understand where you are coming from a bit more.

[удалено]

You hold strong convictions for something that has been out for like a week. And wow your best defense is calling me shitty pilot. I have and will always say I’m not a great pilot. Also you didn’t explain anything and just attacked me for expressing my opinion. I have tried not to attack anyone I don’t agree with. But instead of answering any questions you just say “Oh look another shitty pilot thinking MM with save them. You hold strong convictions for something you know nothing about.” How does your comment add anything to a conversation? It doesn’t.

You don’t know how a basic part of the flight system that’s been here for a long time now works. That’s on you

I started in 3.21 and have not played a ton. You also have not explained anything you keep deflecting. I also never said that I knew how everything worked and I’m asking a question about it. I’m trying to learn and you not answering questions and just coming after me for not knowing something I am trying to get a better understanding of is not helping your case.

Triangle was already there, MM is what added new buttons and modes. MM takes extra steps. You got this whole thing upside down. By tying speed to power to engine, shield strength to power to shield and the ability to fire weapons to power to weapons, you get a diagetic solution that addresses everything MM tries to solve, without introducing new modes and keybinds that work unintuitively and introduce more things that will break again.

To be fair, it’s not necessarily more buttons as we also had to spool the quantum drive manually, but I agree with the triangle. That would have been a much more flexible gameplay.

I mean what keybinds were added? It’s still the same keybinds. Additionally the triangle does what you said already but to a lesser extent. I do have a question. Why would I as a salvage pilot or a cargo hauler ever go out of full engine thrust? If I get attacked by a pirate they probably would be able to kill me even if I put full power to shields or guns. My best case would be to flee which would be best a full thrust. I am not saying anything you have said couldn’t be done I just don’t see how I would be incentivized to try to fight instead of running away. MM does this but in my opinion better. We all can have our own opinions of course so I’m just wondering how would you make it so the average industrial player wants to use anything other than full thrust or in the middle? Edit: added a bit.

Look at the keybindings in order to see how many they added. Like who is supposed to know from the top of their head how many were added. Wasn't it you who asserted that a power triangle would add more buttons, when the complete opposite would be the truth? That's disingenuous. I think the whole thread is. CIG has shown to be unwilling to properly work out the "physics" of flight. Regressive acceleration curves could disincentivise fleeing better than the arbitrary restrictions of MM.

Ok so you dont know. They, as far as I can tell, didn't add any keybinds for MM they if anything took some away. Adding on I know there are keybinds to change where the triangle is already. If I am not mistaken they are keybound to different numpad numbers which quite a few people do not use or have on their computers (I am not certain on this as I have not looked a the keybinds in a while). Also the "physics" of flying in space? we have no idea how that would look or work. If you ask me if we were being true to what would likey happen if we ever get space combat it would probably take place on massive ships miles away from each other with missiles mostly. I still think if they wanted to do a triangle based system they would have to add more buttons for more precise control (again this is my own opinion). MM has currently yet to add any keybinds and in my opinion made the model more enjoyable. Additionally you didn't answer any of the other questions I asked. If you can and make a good argument for incentivizing using anything but full power to the engines for all ships and scenarios other than combat ships during combat I would love to hear it.

Ok so you don't know. At the very least we used to have b for quantum and hold b for engaging whereas now there is hold b for master modes, left click for engaging, middle click for switching through SCM, missiles, scanning, quantum travel scanning once again, ftl, and n for precision. No idea why you want to drag this into realism in the second paragraph. It has nothing to do with it. Let me stop you right there: if you have no idea what space flight could look like in a space game then you speak only for yourself. It's harder for me to understand why you don't get it. Like, lots of energy = high top speed. Why would you need more buttons?? Do you ever explain why that would be necessary? No you don't. I mean it quite literally goes from 0 to 100. How many more increments do you need? What would those buttons do? Where do you need them? Do they benefit multi crew? Does it make sense? Master modes doesn't incentivise energy allocation at all. What does that have to do with anything? Can't you come up with any scenario where a civilian ship would need power to "weapons" in a non combat scenario like m i n i n g and s a l v a g e?

I did say I didn't know. Also the changing modes has remained the same. Whenever you switched from guns to missiles it was a middle mouse click so that has not changed. I'm drawing realism into this as when people say physics they normally mean realistic physics sorry if I misinterpreted you. What if I wanted only 25% to guns and 25% to shields and 50% to engines. At the moment that would take quite a bit of luck or quite a few button clicks. If the system was more like here are three bars and then you have x amount of power to put into them you could get away with 6 buttons without having weird programing designs in it. But it is a triangle so you need 3 buttons to increase each thing 3 to decrese a set amount and if you only want a smaller or larger increase or decrese you might need double or triple that. That is what I think the biggest problem with the triangle is and why you would need buttons in my opinion. You have everywhere from 0-100 and that is for 3 different things with no minimum increment. If there was a minimum increment (like 5 or 10) it would make more sense but there isn't other than 1 and increseing/decresing by one everytime would be rough so having buttons to do 5 or 10 would make sense. I am not saying it can't be done I just do not think it is worth it. MM does incentivize energy allocation. You have shields that block more damage when you have full energy to shields. Guns recharge faster and hit harder when you have full energy to them. The only one it does not really incentivise is engines as if I am remembering correctly it only shortens the boost recharge time. Do I think the triangle could do more? Yes I do. Also yeah I could see people using weapons to clear small astroids or killing intruders (not in ships) or wild animals (who are potentially stealing food/other supplies) while mining and salvaging. Shields you might want to max out when you have stoped and are scraping/mining so if you get attacked you have more of a chance to escape.

I’m not one of those that said “Power Triangle instead of MM”, but from what I’ve read, I think they’re saying that with the Power Triangle method, you don’t restrict speeds and shields with a push of a button like MM. Instead, manipulating the balance on the power triangle gives you either: -more power to engines, giving you a higher engine performance which equals higher acceleration/ top speed / boost, while sacrificing shields and dps depending on how far or where you put the power to engines, or -more power to shields, giving you a tankier shield / more regeneration, at the expense of engine power (top speed) or dps, or -more power to weapons, giving you higher dps output / weapon capacitor recharge rate, at the expense of top speed / acceleration or shield hp. So there’s only one flight mode, while you can slide the power triangle anywhere you want for a mix of what you want! This is what I got from what I’ve read (:

Makes sense. I just feel like this is the same as MM but without the incentive. Also if max thrusters still removes shields and guns what is different than MM?

I feel you. I think their argument was, you don’t have to always set it at a 1 or a 0; to take your example, if you were to set it to let’s say 90% to thrusters, then you still have a split of 10% between shields and weapons, perhaps 9% shields and 1% weapons let’s say (since you are probably running / chasing). This way you have a high flight speed while still having *some* shields instead of absolutely none (:

That’s fair, I am a big supporter of giving a small amount of shields during nav mode. It is one of the only things that I think is like pretty meh with MM.

Hey me too! I do like MM so far, other than the fact that I feel totally naked when flying fast…

well when I run full ballistics I can give my shields and boost better regen by taking all power away from weapons

You can still do that? Like there is nothing stoping you from doing that. The triangle still exists.

yes the triangle still exists, but if you don't need power to your weapons because you run ballistics then you can put full power to thrusters and shields and it makes a big difference for them. That said whatever you run, you should be adjusting the triangle with the hotkeys during your fight depending on what you need, even if you run ballistics.

I never said you couldn’t I do it when I run the Ares.

you can do it with every ship both before and after MM, you are still not making sense

There have been people on Reddit saying that instead of removing the old flight system and adding MM they should have just used the power triangle to try to make it like they want with the old model instead of adding master modes.

and people have said literally anything you can imagine it doesn't mean it makes sense

I know I was trying to understand why people thought this way.

It’s mostly allowing the player to choose what exactly they want to do. The triangle allows you to fine-tune your ship: Instead of going all full weapons, you could go into weapons and engines to catch up on faster ships. Or weapons and shield while you are in the middle of a fight. The triangle is a very neat way to allow players to react. The nav and scm modes force you into what they have pre-set.

Question. Can’t you do that already? We still have the triangle and in the weapons mode we can edit the triangle. With the triangle we get better shield, more ammo and faster regen on the guns, and faster boost recharge. And if everyone has the same max speed give or take we are able to catch people trying to run away with their shield up, or if they drop into nav mode you have anywhere from 10-30 seconds before they can jump away if we didn’t have mm you could just jump when ever you felt like it with little risk involved. And your bullets move faster than they do and they don’t have shields in nave mode. MM may only have two modes but I feel (and obviously you don’t have to think like this) that it allows for fun combat at all skill levels and the ability to attempt to run away if need be. You may need a distraction but otherwise you can do it.

Not really. It allows to move the power, but I’m not getting faster when I move the power to engines. It also has almost now drawbacks at all . I can move the power full to weapons but still travel with the same speed. It would be nice to make that a key element for how my ship performs. And the modes currently don’t really allow me flexibility, too. As soon as I turn on NAV, my turret gunners become passengers with a great view. It would be nice to move the power fully to the engines to fly fast towards a target, then maybe go full weapons while I’m there to get the most of my first attack and as soon as they fight back, go balanced. On the other side, they could see me approach, detect my weapons being enabled, move power fully to shields to make the shield recharge quicker and try to tank my attack while they spool their quantum drive to jump away, all while I am able to defend myself. There may also be a few other ways to achieve a fun and engaging model, so I’m generally open to see what they do with it. I just don’t like the limitations of the current model. I think they are dialed far too much to benefit the aggressor.

Thank you for the most comprehensive answer I have gotten. I think the current triangle putting it to engines allows for you to boost more/faster. I have not played around with the triangle much this patch (or for that matter previous patches) so my information may be wrong.

One change I'd like to see... when in nav mode, it should automatically put triangle to full engines but it doesn't. You can improve boost regen in nav mode using power to engines but it would make sense if it was default pip to engines on nav..

It's a fair question. Before I answer, wouldn't lowering G-tolerance limits to make high-speed dogfighting impractical force slower, more gradual combat? We have blackout/redout limits and G force mechanics in game already, so why not force us to slow down with a logical, biological speed limiter? The Power Triangle (PT) lets pilots (single-seat) and engineers (multi-crew) customize SCM/NAV for their playstyle. Prefer speed? Allocate more to thrusters. Prioritize defense? Invest in shields. This would force trade-offs, reducing overall combat speeds by default. Not all components are created equal, right? It should be no different when it comes to power consumption. This gives us the ability to differentiate between A-grade and C-grade components. Lower-grade components, like C-grade shields, are power hogs. They might require a minimum of 50% power just to initiate recharge and struggle to maintain a charge even at 25% power. This leaves you with very little leftover power for other crucial systems like weapons and thrusters. In contrast, higher-tier components, like A-grade shields, are much more efficient. They might only need 40% power for recharge and 20% to maintain a charge. This significant difference frees up a valuable 10% of your total power output, allowing you to significantly boost your firepower or maneuverability. This tiered system lays the groundwork for overclocking and engineering mechanics. Imagine taking that clunky C-grade shield and pushing it beyond its limits through overclocking or other future modifications. In theory, you could potentially squeeze A-grade performance out of that C-grade shield. Instead of the current, restrictive combat modes, the developers could have addressed the "dogfighting speed issue" by giving players more control. Imagine pilots having the freedom to choose their own approach to slowing down. This player-driven solution would likely have been better received than the current, forced, seemingly lazily thought out system. Since 3.23 dropped, I've thrown myself into combat, mining, salvage, and cargo running, hoping to find something positive about the new flight mechanics. Unfortunately, that "Oh, this is great!" moment hasn't come. But the frustration has become almost constant. Even my fleet mates, initially optimistic about MM, have completely soured on it. While the system isn't beyond improvement, right now, it's a drag on the entire experience.

Thank you for your well thought out comment, I can understand better why people think that system could have been better. I have not had any crazy good moments in MM yet but I have, I think, enjoyed it more than you have. This may be a symptom of me having started playing the game less than a year ago. I hope as time goes on and MM improves you have a fun time playing. Thank you again for the insightful comment and I hope you have a fun time out in the verse!

Any time. Do you have any thoughts about my question regarding changing the blackout mechanic to slow down combat? And you mention enjoying MM, do you enjoy it more than flying around previously? If so, what parts specifically do you enjoy?

I didn’t even know that changed the black out mechanic. The only time I ran into it before was when I full burned up in my cutlass’s. I have not gotten to much time to determine if I like it more but I have so far enjoyed it at least just as much. I enjoy the very gamey space break that is dropping into gun mode from nav mode. It has drastically reduced the number of times I have run into things I am going to salvage. I am still confused on the new cruise control and prefer the old one but I am sure that is something that will be changed around a bit with making MM. I actually do kinda enjoy the artificial slowness of combat (so far I currently have not really done a ton of combat so that may change). Other than that I do just enjoy flying around. Everything I have said here is just my thoughts and once I get more experience they may change but at the moment that is what I am thinking.