Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 19:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
Add new weapons that fire in a straight line and have splash damage, etc. Add fleet formations to minimize damage taken by these kind of weapons. Different formations have different pros and cons. The formation type would effect how damage is dished out and taken by other types of formations. This provides new tactical game play. Just throwing this out there.
What ideas can you guys come up with that could make this awesome? |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
4181
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 19:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
Reminder: Line of sight calculations require server resources exponentially increasing with the number of objects on grid.
Also, while I'm a fan of warp-in formations, I do realize they would fall apart with the first drag bubble dropped. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 19:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Reminder: Line of sight calculations require server resources exponentially increasing with the number of objects on grid.
Also, while I'm a fan of warp-in formations, I do realize they would fall apart with the first drag bubble dropped.
I need more info on, "Line of sight calculations requiring more server resources exponentially" on why this is? Because that just sounds like horrible programming. I'm a programmer and drawing a line in 3D space and checking if anything is colliding with the line is very low cost. For example when you play any first person shooter there are weapons that just shoot in a straight line through enemies.
I do agree drag bubbles would make it a lot more interesting. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1989
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 20:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Reminder: Line of sight calculations require server resources exponentially increasing with the number of objects on grid.
Also, while I'm a fan of warp-in formations, I do realize they would fall apart with the first drag bubble dropped. I need more info on, "Line of sight calculations requiring more server resources exponentially" on why this is? Because that just sounds like horrible programming. I'm a programmer and drawing a line in 3D space and checking if anything is colliding with the line is very low cost. For example when you play any first person shooter there are weapons that just shoot in a straight line through enemies. I do agree drag bubbles would make it a lot more interesting.
People like to throw that line out anytime someone suggests something to advance the game beyond 2003 tech.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1159
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 20:10:00 -
[5] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Reminder: Line of sight calculations require server resources exponentially increasing with the number of objects on grid.
Also, while I'm a fan of warp-in formations, I do realize they would fall apart with the first drag bubble dropped. I need more info on, "Line of sight calculations requiring more server resources exponentially" on why this is? Because that just sounds like horrible programming. I'm a programmer and drawing a line in 3D space and checking if anything is colliding with the line is very low cost. For example when you play any first person shooter there are weapons that just shoot in a straight line through enemies. I do agree drag bubbles would make it a lot more interesting.
Your FPS do it from a single point to all object. EVE have to do it from every single ship to every other ship in space. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
2844
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 20:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
So every ship in a fleet moves at the same speed as the slowest, and therefore bombers become even more of a thing? |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 01:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:So every ship in a fleet moves at the same speed as the slowest, and therefore bombers become even more of a thing?
If it's a wide formation that's good against bombers you'd actually have an advantage against bombers. |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 01:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Orion Pax wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Reminder: Line of sight calculations require server resources exponentially increasing with the number of objects on grid.
Also, while I'm a fan of warp-in formations, I do realize they would fall apart with the first drag bubble dropped. I need more info on, "Line of sight calculations requiring more server resources exponentially" on why this is? Because that just sounds like horrible programming. I'm a programmer and drawing a line in 3D space and checking if anything is colliding with the line is very low cost. For example when you play any first person shooter there are weapons that just shoot in a straight line through enemies. I do agree drag bubbles would make it a lot more interesting. Your FPS do it from a single point to all object. EVE have to do it from every single ship to every other ship in space.
A good programmer wouldn't check against all the ships like that. They would write the code so it eliminates ships that aren't in the vicinity almost instantly so they'd be checking only a very small number. |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 01:35:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Orion Pax wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Reminder: Line of sight calculations require server resources exponentially increasing with the number of objects on grid.
Also, while I'm a fan of warp-in formations, I do realize they would fall apart with the first drag bubble dropped. I need more info on, "Line of sight calculations requiring more server resources exponentially" on why this is? Because that just sounds like horrible programming. I'm a programmer and drawing a line in 3D space and checking if anything is colliding with the line is very low cost. For example when you play any first person shooter there are weapons that just shoot in a straight line through enemies. I do agree drag bubbles would make it a lot more interesting. People like to throw that line out anytime someone suggests something to advance the game beyond 2003 tech.
Yeah, I agree. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
2844
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 01:40:00 -
[10] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:Danika Princip wrote:So every ship in a fleet moves at the same speed as the slowest, and therefore bombers become even more of a thing? If it's a wide formation that's good against bombers you'd actually have an advantage against bombers. Also if you're moving slow, i.e., not using MWD, you'd take less damage for that too as your signature radius is smaller.
And you're also well out of range of things like reps, gates and the like. And with your logi all anchored with the rest of the fleet and moving slowly, they're sitting ducks. And your fast tackle can't tackle, your dictors can't bubble, your anti-support can't do it's thing...
And as for eliminating everything not in the vicinity, in fleet vs fleet, you're checking 256 ships against 256 other ships. That is a LOT of things the server has to check, every second, and that's without drones. Also, you can no-longer shoot POS, supers, guys who warped in on the other side of your fleet, the tackle crawling all over your caps, people with drones out...
Can you explain why fleet formations or LOS targeting would be good for the game in any way? Other than the obvious potential for flying a rifter between someone's marauder and their target of course. |
|
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 01:48:00 -
[11] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Orion Pax wrote:Danika Princip wrote:So every ship in a fleet moves at the same speed as the slowest, and therefore bombers become even more of a thing? If it's a wide formation that's good against bombers you'd actually have an advantage against bombers. Also if you're moving slow, i.e., not using MWD, you'd take less damage for that too as your signature radius is smaller. And you're also well out of range of things like reps, gates and the like. And with your logi all anchored with the rest of the fleet and moving slowly, they're sitting ducks. And your fast tackle can't tackle, your dictors can't bubble, your anti-support can't do it's thing... And as for eliminating everything not in the vicinity, in fleet vs fleet, you're checking 256 ships against 256 other ships. That is a LOT of things the server has to check, every second, and that's without drones. Also, you can no-longer shoot POS, supers, guys who warped in on the other side of your fleet, the tackle crawling all over your caps, people with drones out... Can you explain why fleet formations or LOS targeting would be good for the game in any way? Other than the obvious potential for flying a rifter between someone's marauder and their target of course.
You can change the fleet formation on the fly. It's all about tactical decisions. Yes, you could be out of rep range based on what formation your fleet is using because the fleet deemed that formation for that moment to be more beneficial than reps. Ships can move independently of formation if they want to too. Fast tackle can move separate and doesn't have to be in formation. For example in the movie 300, the scout moves ahead of the army to check out the enemy and they move independently. Different formations have different strengths and weaknesses. The type of formation the fleet uses would effect how they move, how damage is done, and how damage is taken by other different types of fleet formations. This provides new tactical game play and wider variety to combat. It provides more depth to gameplay as no single formation is the win all.
I've done game development, I've programmed for 15 years and 256 ships vs 256 is nothing. Think of how many polygons are on screen and being taken care of in real time. And any programmer worth their salt would calculate those ships as dots in space. So the only values you need are the xyz values. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
2844
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 02:05:00 -
[12] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:
You can change the fleet formation on the fly. It's all about tactical decisions. Yes, you could be out of rep range based on what formation your fleet is using because the fleet deemed that formation for that moment to be more beneficial than reps. Ships can move independently of formation if they want to too. Fast tackle can move separate and doesn't have to be in formation. For example in the movie 300, the scout moves ahead of the army to check out the enemy and they move independently. Different formations have different strengths and weaknesses. The type of formation the fleet uses would effect how they move, how damage is done, and how damage is taken by other different types of fleet formations. This provides new tactical game play and wider variety to combat. It provides more depth to gameplay as no single formation is the win all.
I've done game development, I've programmed for 15 years and 256 ships vs 256 is nothing. Think of how many polygons are on screen and being taken care of in real time. And any programmer worth their salt would calculate those ships as dots in space. So the only values you need are the xyz values.
So what's the point of formations if half of the fleet is still doing thier own thing? Where's the advantage to slowing my battleship with maxed navigation skills down to the speed of newbie mc badfit who's got four plates fitted? How would one stay in formation anyway, or would it hand all manoeuvring controls completely to the FC? If so, why should the FC have so much control over my ship? (for example, there are FCs who you always wait a few seconds before obeying, in case of 'warp to me warp to me DON'T WARP IF YOU WARPED YOU'RE DEAD' moments. Why would I want to give them more control over my ships?)
And eve already works ships out as single dots. That does not allow for line of sight calculations, at all. Unless you think that line of sight targeting means that ships should still be able to shoot through one another, which isn't los at all... |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 08:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Orion Pax wrote:
You can change the fleet formation on the fly. It's all about tactical decisions. Yes, you could be out of rep range based on what formation your fleet is using because the fleet deemed that formation for that moment to be more beneficial than reps. Ships can move independently of formation if they want to too. Fast tackle can move separate and doesn't have to be in formation. For example in the movie 300, the scout moves ahead of the army to check out the enemy and they move independently. Different formations have different strengths and weaknesses. The type of formation the fleet uses would effect how they move, how damage is done, and how damage is taken by other different types of fleet formations. This provides new tactical game play and wider variety to combat. It provides more depth to gameplay as no single formation is the win all.
I've done game development, I've programmed for 15 years and 256 ships vs 256 is nothing. Think of how many polygons are on screen and being taken care of in real time. And any programmer worth their salt would calculate those ships as dots in space. So the only values you need are the xyz values.
So what's the point of formations if half of the fleet is still doing thier own thing? Where's the advantage to slowing my battleship with maxed navigation skills down to the speed of newbie mc badfit who's got four plates fitted? How would one stay in formation anyway, or would it hand all manoeuvring controls completely to the FC? If so, why should the FC have so much control over my ship? (for example, there are FCs who you always wait a few seconds before obeying, in case of 'warp to me warp to me DON'T WARP IF YOU WARPED YOU'RE DEAD' moments. Why would I want to give them more control over my ships?) And eve already works ships out as single dots. That does not allow for line of sight calculations, at all. Unless you think that line of sight targeting means that ships should still be able to shoot through one another, which isn't los at all...
It's not about half the fleet doing their own thing. It's about moving the whole fleet as a single unit. Sure, there can be poor fleets that have all sorts of different ships mixed together (which is always a bad idea anyway). Optimally a good fleet would have all the same ships with the same fittings. It's not about handing controls to the FC. It's about tactical options, you could easily move as a separate unit if you want.
The idea is about fleet formations and new weapons that fire in a straight line and have splash damage. The talk about line of sight was started by the Abrazzar toon at the beginning of the thread, so you can ask him about more details on that. Line of sight has little to do with my suggestion. |
Sigras
Conglomo
827
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 08:46:00 -
[14] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Orion Pax wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Reminder: Line of sight calculations require server resources exponentially increasing with the number of objects on grid.
Also, while I'm a fan of warp-in formations, I do realize they would fall apart with the first drag bubble dropped. I need more info on, "Line of sight calculations requiring more server resources exponentially" on why this is? Because that just sounds like horrible programming. I'm a programmer and drawing a line in 3D space and checking if anything is colliding with the line is very low cost. For example when you play any first person shooter there are weapons that just shoot in a straight line through enemies. I do agree drag bubbles would make it a lot more interesting. Your FPS do it from a single point to all object. EVE have to do it from every single ship to every other ship in space. A good programmer wouldn't check against all the ships like that. They would write the code so it eliminates ships that aren't in the vicinity almost instantly so they'd be checking only a very small number. And how exactly do you determine whether ships are "in the vicinity"?
The overview displays distances calculated by the client, but CCP cant trust the client or any information that comes from the client. All that stuff has to be tracked server side meaning that it is at the very least a distance and comparison calculation for each object on grid.
Then after you've eliminated all ships not "in the vicinity" you still need to determine whether or not any of the other ships that havent been eliminated are in the line of fire. But since we're going for a LOS calculation here you cant use spheres any more, you would then have to do a ray trace through dozens of points that would determine the profile of any given ship as viewed from any possible perspective.
best case scenario, youre looking at dozens of calculations per ship on grid per weapon fired. This would get out of hand fast, and as a computer programmer you should understand just how fast n^2 calculations can get crazy, its programming 101 |
elitatwo
Congregatio
267
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 09:38:00 -
[15] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote: -snip- I'm a programmer and... -snap-
Oh god no, so you are gooder(er) than every single one else on earth.
Behold, our saviour hath arrived.
Now before you make any more announcements any time some, let me help you understand something. In order to do this I will use a learning method that got lost over the years.
First you take a pen and a piece of paper, then you write the following a hundret times until you can no longer forget it,
EVE is a database and not a 3D world simulator.
After doing that you may or not comprehend that our clients are just a visual approximation of millions of database polls per seconds.
Sigh... script kiddies.. signature |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
2844
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 09:49:00 -
[16] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:
It's not about half the fleet doing their own thing. It's about moving the whole fleet as a single unit. Sure, there can be poor fleets that have all sorts of different ships mixed together (which is always a bad idea anyway). Optimally a good fleet would have all the same ships with the same fittings. It's not about handing controls to the FC. It's about tactical options, you could easily move as a separate unit if you want.
The idea is about fleet formations and new weapons that fire in a straight line and have splash damage. The talk about line of sight was started by the Abrazzar toon at the beginning of the thread, so you can ask him about more details on that. Line of sight has little to do with my suggestion.
A fleet consisting of entirely the same ship will lose every single time against half the numbers of a mixed size fleet. A fleet of all the same ship will have no logi, no boosts, no tackle, ewar, bubbles or anti-support, which are all vital roles. On top of that, skills play a part. I will fly a battleship faster than someone with half the SP in navigation.
All that means that yes, half of the fleet WILL not be in formation, making this pretty pointless.
Weapons that fire in a straight line just means you'll lose every time to someone more manoeuvrable than you are, which will be someone not in a silly formation. Ishtars, for example.
And splash damage is just asking for trouble. Are you limiting these formations to nullsec only? And are you actively encouraging people to not only slaughter their own tackle, but to blow the bubbles off of their targets?
Where is the benefit in taking a worse fleet composition, with worse weapons and no way to dictate position or hold your opponent on the field, much less rep your other ships, compared with a fleet of any of the current doctrines people use for this sort of thing? |
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Brothers of Tangra
44
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 10:04:00 -
[17] - Quote
for true los shooting in the game, your basically adding collision physics into the game so your average anomaly will be pushing the same sort of cpu stress that most physics simulators presently pull, like a full match of 'next car game' now multiply that into a fleet fight of 3 or 4 thousand, all with say average 10 drones each you now have 44,000 objects all moving independently. now add weapons onto each of these say an average of 4 guns each onto the ships that's another 16,000 items
so now you have 56,000 weapons firing, every single one of them has to check the position of every other object on grid to make sure its LOS is clear for its shot to hit its intended target. That's 56,000 x 60,000 = 3,360,000,000 calculations per tick just to see if los is clear or not, which gives 3 results with branches
Yes it can hit the target > does it hit >yes - hit quality, tracking, speed of target, sig of guns, ect >no -
No it cannot hit the target > Does the shot hit a different target? > Yes >> hit quality, tracking, speed of target, sig of guns
Did the shot miss all targets? yes no
so that 3 billion calculations just got multiplied out by 3 simple yes no questions, which then lead to multiple questions them selfs. this also does not include questions like, whats the ships resists, angular velocity, signature, and hundreds more
LOS physics in eve would require teraflop computation speeds to even remain playable with anything about 200 players. |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 11:12:00 -
[18] - Quote
**** it. Just give me some new skills to train. |
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 11:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
Anyway, any of you here going to check out Star Citizen? |
Velicitia
Arma Artificer
2434
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 11:26:00 -
[20] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:Anyway, any of you here going to check out Star Citizen?
I did, then saw the prices of things, and was like "**** that", and came back here on teh double. (also, my PI finished) One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia |
|
Cervix Thumper
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 16:06:30 -
[21] - Quote
Actually I like the idea of fleet formation. Especially while mining. As an FC I'd like to have to option do click a key and have the ships in fleet move into a specific formation. We can already warp them. We can make different formations with probes, why not with the ships under our command? |
Mathegar
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.19 18:51:48 -
[22] - Quote
This post contains tons of Line of Sight calculations etc... i dont know anything about any of that, all i want to know is whether fleets could land in a cube as opposed to a ball/sphere as they do now? And if a cube why not a pyramid? If the only way to do this is through LOS calculations, then were done with Fleet formations... |
Hopelesshobo
Tactical Nuclear Penguin's
341
|
Posted - 2014.10.19 19:03:42 -
[23] - Quote
Granted, LOS in this game probably wouldn't work in blob warfare, however it would be a fantastic tear generator if a ganker suddenly lost point on a mackinaw and it warped off because the mackinaw put an asteroid between it and the ganker.
But yeah, LOS would probably melt the servers, but it would be wonderful for the small force vs the blob because they could utilize the LOS in various locations (Stations, belts, POS etc), to avoid the fire from a large force. It could possibly even bring back the drake blob because missiles could skirt around said LOS blocking objects lol.
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
145
|
Posted - 2014.10.19 21:36:30 -
[24] - Quote
I like the idea of being able to give a "tell the squad/wing/feet to keep at range/orbit/align" which is then able to be overridden by the individual pilot, but do not support trying to maintain relative position or velocity. This would give more control to the FCs and so on, while also reducing the advantage of IS boxer over regular pilots and fleets in precision maneuvers. I am also dead set against FCs being able to jump the fleets, which means you can't get an FC moving the fleet to position by themself and then telling everyone to tab back to eve for the fight.
That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did.
|
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1611
|
Posted - 2014.10.20 00:29:45 -
[25] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Orion Pax wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Reminder: Line of sight calculations require server resources exponentially increasing with the number of objects on grid.
Also, while I'm a fan of warp-in formations, I do realize they would fall apart with the first drag bubble dropped. I need more info on, "Line of sight calculations requiring more server resources exponentially" on why this is? Because that just sounds like horrible programming. I'm a programmer and drawing a line in 3D space and checking if anything is colliding with the line is very low cost. For example when you play any first person shooter there are weapons that just shoot in a straight line through enemies. I do agree drag bubbles would make it a lot more interesting. Your FPS do it from a single point to all object. EVE have to do it from every single ship to every other ship in space. A good programmer wouldn't check against all the ships like that. They would write the code so it eliminates ships that aren't in the vicinity almost instantly so they'd be checking only a very small number. you then have to have it constantly check for what is within that "sphere", and the fact that there are more points in EVE than a standard FPS, that the core programming of the game at this point does not do well with separating space on non-defined barriers (why we have grid-fu)
and lets not forget, until fixed, EVE STILL CAN ONLY RUN ON ONE CORE, it caps out its processing speed ALOT faster than a "modern" game because it was coded and made in an era where they didnt think dual-cores and up would be a thing |
shimiku
Black VooDoo Asassins The Kadeshi
23
|
Posted - 2014.10.20 23:34:49 -
[26] - Quote
i dont think LoS will be that good when the games geometry is so broken as it is have fun trying shoot through a structure that appear to be some where alse according to the 3D image i space |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent
851
|
Posted - 2014.10.22 19:15:21 -
[27] - Quote
LOS would require some thinking about the game physics models, such as collision spheres.
Reminder: For physics purposes, every object in Eve-O is an elastic sphere suspended in a liquid medium with perfectly neutral bouancy.
Now that I think about it, we already have collision detection. Is that not already an n^2 number of calculations? I'm wondering if LOS could somehow use that mechanic.
"Remember remember the 4th of November!"
Phoebe. Coming soon to Eve Online.
|
Wolf Incaelum
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
36
|
Posted - 2014.10.22 19:44:58 -
[28] - Quote
Orion Pax wrote:Different formations have different pros and cons. The formation type would effect how damage is dished out and taken by other types of formations. This provides new tactical game play. You can also add new weapons that fire in a straight line and have splash damage, etc. And different fleet formations will minimize damage taken by these kind of weapons. Just throwing this out there.
What ideas can you guys come up with that could make this awesome?
Having formations like that would require a strict fleet doctrine that EVERYONE in the fleet would have to know to the letter. They'd all have to know exactly where they're supposed to be relative to the rest of the fleet at any given time, and exactly what they are supposed to be doing relative to the rest of the fleet at any given time. Something like that wouldn't be too terribly difficult to accomplish for post-military players like myself who are used to having to work in perfect unison with a group of people, but not everyone is post-military, not everyone comes from a military background, and most importantly, not everyone WANTS to be militarized, especially in a game that they play for fun in their free time. It's the same reason that so many people already hate fleet doctrines. They want to be able to fly what ever they want to fly. They don't want to be told that they HAVE to fly a certain ship. Even fewer people will want to be told HOW they have to fly that ship.
I'll give the idea a +1 though, just because I like the thought of increasing teamwork to a level where the team relies on everyone who is part of the team.
The deer can get it right. What's YOUR problem?
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |