Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Space, physics and EVE.
geetornsage
Member Posts: 40
in EVE Online
Eve players like to chastise those who offer suggestions regarding the lack of a true-to-physics game experience . I'm not talking about "Frontiers" sort of reality; rather a model that doesn't feel like "Voyage to the bottom of the sea."
It's like playing space war in a jar a Mrs. butterworth's clear baking syrup.
And don't even get me going on the out-of-scale windows (6 elephants could go through them on the bigger ships no problem.)
Clearly, it's not as bad as Star Dreck, Star Bores or even Battlestar GalacticallyStupid-a but it's still stupid.
Fix this and let me walk around in my ship and I'll consider returning to the game.
Comments
what is the point of having a poll if all answer are the same....
No vote from me.
Besides, it sounds like you hate sci-fi in general, maybe you should try something you like better
It's a game, not a simulation (although I would have liked it to be), thing is it would make combat quite difficult (as one of your options states) and would increase client<>server communication massively.
Is this ridiculous?
- tracking
- signature radius, signature resolution of turrets
- missiles explosion radius, explosion velocity velocity, missile speed and travel time
- mass, inertia, (de)/acceleration
I lack 'OP is troll' option in your poll.
He's talking about propulsion and inertia, I think you should have checked the "I don't have a clue but I'm gonna post anyway" option.
I played Elite once they put in real physics and it was awful to play.
So, my answer is NO.
Real life physics with a Titan deployed, that is brilliant!! CCP have stated the gravitational distortion of space would be so large the Titan would suck everything up and everything below cap ships would get stuck to its hull. Real life physics in EVE? WANT!!! LMAO
Oh, sure you want to explain how tracking and missile mechanic are not a part of Destiny...
If the game was not the way it is - "Voyage to the bottom of the sea.", then none of the combat mechanics would work, and they are definately not ridiculous.
You should definately quit following your suggested poll option, I stick with mine.
Ok, let me explain it to you one last time. Here's a quote from the OP:
"It's like playing space war in a jar a Mrs. butterworth's clear baking syrup"
He is talking about the fact that if you stop your engines in space, you don't actually stop moving (or slow down) you MAINTAIN your speed and momentum. In order to slow down you'd have to have reverse thrusters or turn the ship and apply thrust. Turning doesn't happen like planes do, I'm sorry if you thought it did from watching Star Wars or Battlestar Galactica (where they added 'control surfaces' to make people identify more with the ships). Changing direction in space comes from turning the ship around it's axis and apply power and THEN you'll see a change in vector.
Some older games played this way, also some people would LOVE to play a space game that behaved like that. THAT is what he's talking about, not about dumb crap like explosion radius or tracking, those are game mechanics. He's talking about the lack of RL physics when it comes to propulsion.
Can you comprehend this now or will you reply again showing you can't grasp logic?
{ Mod Edit }
Actually, no. At least frigates and destroyers, probably even hacs would exceed escape velocity of the titan.
For regular ships with less propulsion..well..the gravitational waves of the moving titan would probably do some fun stuff to their superstructure..
Your lack of comprehension amuse me so much, I had good laugh on that one
Your lack of comprehension amuse me so much, I had good laugh on that one
Yet i note you did not respond to his post's point.
And i agree EvE would be a lot more interesting with some Physics. For an example take a loot at the game Nexus: The Jupiter Incident, now that had some interesting battles in it.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
I think physics in Eve would be great (something along the lines of Starshatter).
It is because this is a pretty good description of how navigation in space really works that I would hate to have to deal with it to pilot a ship. Adding this level of detail would destroy EVE PvP. If they added orbital physics (and if we're going for realism, why not?) it would be even worse!
I am perfectly happy with the Mrs. Buttersworth physics we have now as it allows me to focus on combat over navigation.
Thanks CCP!
Thats only a matter of presentation. CCP could easily create shipmodels with reverse thrusters, this might look ridiculous but it's still only a matter of presentation. Navigation computers could controll reverse thrusters, making brake pedal expendable, and nothing would change but presentation of propulsion systems.
The one thing that's disturbing me is collision detection in EVE of vessels to other vessels or vessels to "static" objects.
There was a developer blog about this a very long time ago and it said that the gravitational force of a Titan is equal to that of a planet or, on the battlefield, a black hole (black hole is more precise) and that all ships caught within this field would get stuck which means even ammo being shot out would also get stuck to the hull. Now whether frigates and nano ships can escape is debatable as no real calculations have been done and never will be done by CCP because this is irrelevant and a stupid debate. It's like saying magic doesn't work like the games we play so everything should be overhauled.
The one good thing OP has done is troll. Well done to you and all those pretending to know something about physics.
I don't remember that devblog, please link it.
What i DO remember however, was the lore mentioning that the gravitational force of the empires titans affected the tides on the planets, and as such they were denied to be close to planets by the yulai convention, to prevent devastating tides killing the inhabitants when such a behemoth goes into stationary orbit.
Even ccp wouldn't make the error of saying that titans had the gravitational force of black holes, because angry internet men would threadnaught them back to stoneage if they did. Remember, the initial fanbase consisted of a lot of scifi nerds..
It's less disturbing if you know the technological background. Games always (read: i know of no exception) use simplified models of the actual models to simplify collision detection. Eve uses pretty rough "models", if i remember correctly they are just bubbles (of course stretched according to object dimensions) for ships. Stationary objects use a little more detailed model (because they can't move i presume, and thus generate less cpu cycles), and some do not have physics (anymore, like cans, corpses).A lot of stuff in eve is handled by those speres. All interactable objects have "influence spheres" around them, that dictate the range of which they can interact with things, with a hard limit of 249km (that's how far you can lock at max.), the undock bubbles around stations are similar. It also explains why certain stations are better for cynoing in than others, because dockingrange of complex stations includes large areas that have no station parts in them..
I did, twice. Not my fault he refused to read.
Tracking and missiles mechanic are part of physics engine same way as mass and acceleration. Chance to hit calculation and missile damage are done by Destiny, same engine that makes you flying like "space war in a jar a Mrs. butterworth's clear baking syrup".
Less piloting, more tactic.
I played Infinity technological demo and EVE combat is far more interesting but I guess it is more of personal preference.
To the OP's original POINT:
So, you don't want to play EVE, but would want a completely new game on the same principles?
Me, too. Though I will play EVE, gladly, at least until such a game comes around.
However, would I want EVE to suddenly go through complete reworking, so that it would work like this hypothetical master-game? No. Why not? Because it would kill EVE. Read up on SWG and the NGE controversy, especially the comments from old devs.
Changing an MMO post-launch so dramatically kills it. So, no thank you. I much rather play my tactical-boardgame-like EVE with 300k people then a forced simulator EVE with 3k.
In the meanwhile, I'm active in the Infinity: The Quest For Earth forums, and looking forward to the alpha of that game.
And also waiting for Jumpgate Evolution. Who knows?
Ruh roh, somebody missed the Fi in Sci-Fi . I'm surpised no one jumped up yelling, "THERE'S NO SOUND IN SPACE!" Anywho, EVE is a very beautiful and fun game. It's hard to get a physicist to design a game, they make plenty of real money designing real things...and I would want them too. My computer at home is useless to me if the bridge I'm driving across to get there collapses. For those who enjoy physics more than a good game, feel free to test your inertia calculations with this game: www.math.com/students/calculators/source/scientific.htm
http://www.allaboutgod.com/
Actually I do, but visual presentation of vessel and smal static objecs collisions are looking odd because of those tiny influence spehres used by collision detection. Larger spheres on small static objects would cause other problems, you might get stuck in an invisible labyrinth in an asteroid belt. I love EVE but collision looks more odd than "submarine flight simulation" movent of spaceships, regardless of technological background.
Meh! Some allowances have to be made in a game to keep it fun, so since I really have no idea what sort of propulsion these ships use that enable them to starhop the entire known universe, even if its a shuttle I have to accept "magic" physics.
They are powered by some sort of cool technology that has a virtually in exhaustable power supply that can be quickly regenerated somehow by simply stopping for a few minutes. Is it so hard to believe they are powered by some sort of gravitatiional /inertia type drive that only moves the ship when power is applied, and stops them when its taken off?
Unrealistic, maybe, but we are talking about a fantasy universe here, so sure, maybe its possible.
I guess I don't try to over think these things, I just enjoy EVE for what it is.
(And in a fantasy game like WOW I never questioned how I could run across the entire battlefield or world while wearing full plate mail and tirelessly swing a sword that was as tall as I was and probably weighed just as much)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Nononono, you're confusing things. :P
They are running with special reactors, i think amarr use fusion, matar use fission etc.
Those supply the energy for the whole ship. But as most weapon systems and modules suck more energy than the grid can supply, you got your capacitor. It temporarily stores the energy, which then is released.
This is actually something i'd do if i had like, laser weaponry on my spaceship.
Of course, from a game design standpoint (and that's from where the devs will look at every problem in eve, and change the lore accordingly), it makes sense to include something that limits and balances the costs of certain modules and ammunition against each other. Usually higher damage Ammo, as an example, sucks more cap. (Antimatter vs. Iron, Multifrequency vs. Radio), or mightier modules use more of it (neutralizers are very mighty, thus use a lot of it. Remote repairers, repairers etc., too).
From a game design standpoint, and this is the only standpoint we should argue about, it's imo the best choice the devs ever had. It makes sense, can be explained by lore, and adds some micromanagement :P
Well dont worry, we dont miss you.
Maybe trying Aunt Jemima? Although Mrs. Butterworth's rightfully touts the rich buttery flavor, because we have so much butter in our diets it may be "butter overkill". Aunt Jemima may offer a more diverse alternative. Aunt Jemima brings a better balance by the inclusion of a more maple flavour. It isn't thin and blasted with sugary flavour like Karo or pungent like King syrup. Aunt Jemima also offers a choice between Original or Butter Flavor.
The choice is ours to make. We can continue with Mrs. Butterworths even though it doesn't suit our tastes, or we can take a progressive step forward by making the switch to Aunt Jemima. It's better to go to your aunt than a Mrs. for breakfast anyway. I've made my decision so I can confidently say with a smile, "those are some mighty fine pancakes!"
http://www.allaboutgod.com/
Astrophysics buff here
IMHO the physics are just fine, think about this, if we're already manipulating gravitational fields in our day and age, what's to say that by the time of New Eden, they haven't mastered everything related to space flight, and found something to change the speed and direction of a spacecraft W/o a gigantic engine of some kind.
There's about as much realism in the game's physics as there are in the game's weapons and shields.
You may jump to say, "but shields and force fields are totally possible, we're already experimenting with small scale impenetrable energy fields", well we're about as far along with that as we are with anything else in this game.
Not to mention, space isn't a complete vaccum and there is a medium that provides an incredibly miniscule ammount of resistance.
"Oh my god I flew through a planet"
"Oh my god, my ship slowed down on its own!"
"Oh my god its a video game and its not real life!"
^the point right?^