Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2365
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 04:56:12 -
[31] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Play KSP, then imagine trying to fly your ship in EVE using that physics engine, you will soon realize how unfun and silly this game would be with anywhere near real physics. Not really true. Flown a real life drone lately. They have automated corrective thrusters. Even the old space shuttles are able to stabilise themselves automatically in zero gee. In terms of physics an object travels in a straight line constant speed until a force is applied, it's hardly computer intensive math. Do nothing. Wow, I couldn't have written a more ignorant response even if I was trying to troll and was being ignorant on purpose. Nicely done. Sorry but I'm correct. There are systems all over the world that correct vehicles for that have automated position keeping for the purpose of simplifying navigation. It would be unthinkable to expect an advanced spacecraft not to have that and instead place the pilot into having to make manual adjustments.
CCP Fozzie GǣWe can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGǪ in null sec anomalies. Gǣ*
Kaalrus pwned..... :)
|
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
265
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 05:16:29 -
[32] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Play KSP, then imagine trying to fly your ship in EVE using that physics engine, you will soon realize how unfun and silly this game would be with anywhere near real physics. Not really true. Flown a real life drone lately. They have automated corrective thrusters. Even the old space shuttles are able to stabilise themselves automatically in zero gee. In terms of physics an object travels in a straight line constant speed until a force is applied, it's hardly computer intensive math. Do nothing. Wow, I couldn't have written a more ignorant response even if I was trying to troll and was being ignorant on purpose. Nicely done. Sorry but I'm correct. There are systems all over the world that correct vehicles for that have automated position keeping for the purpose of simplifying navigation. It would be unthinkable to expect an advanced spacecraft not to have that and instead place the pilot into having to make manual adjustments.
He was more referencing the fact that a space ship has no fixed point of reference and as such any autocorrecting measure is vastly more complex because of this.
IE your little drone does not equal a space ship. Though please.. Ask an astronaut if they can hit a button and auto correct a tumble. We would be able to hear the laughter in Alberta. |
Tenebria Gallentis
Whitewash Holdings
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 05:46:06 -
[33] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Play KSP, then imagine trying to fly your ship in EVE using that physics engine, you will soon realize how unfun and silly this game would be with anywhere near real physics. Not really true. Flown a real life drone lately. They have automated corrective thrusters. Even the old space shuttles are able to stabilise themselves automatically in zero gee. In terms of physics an object travels in a straight line constant speed until a force is applied, it's hardly computer intensive math. Do nothing. Wow, I couldn't have written a more ignorant response even if I was trying to troll and was being ignorant on purpose. Nicely done. Sorry but I'm correct. There are systems all over the world that correct vehicles for that have automated position keeping for the purpose of simplifying navigation. It would be unthinkable to expect an advanced spacecraft not to have that and instead place the pilot into having to make manual adjustments. He was more referencing the fact that a space ship has no fixed point of reference and as such any autocorrecting measure is vastly more complex because of this. IE your little drone does not equal a space ship. Though please.. Ask an astronaut if they can hit a button and auto correct a tumble. We would be able to hear the laughter in Alberta.
Well thankfully, eve doesn't have anything much to correct for so it doesn't have to be that complex. It just has to properly adjust thrusters to do the simple actions we can do now (approach, orbit align and keep range).
I personally would like ships to have no fixed point of reference (i.e., up and down) but instead have relative references (when orbiting, approaching etc), I'm pretty sure eve can easily handle that.
And agreed that drones != [internet] space ships but I see what he means (quadcopter engines compensating for wind/thurst variations to achieve desired orientation).
On a side note, why do we only have approach, orbit and align? just throwing in a few (potentially bad) ideas: - fly by at 10km -> flies in a tanget at 10km, useful for SBs, approaching without losing angular velocity - intercept -> like approach but takes into consideration the predicted future position of the object being approached. useful for agile ships. - fly side by side at 5 km -> like "keep range" but you get in range then try to mimic the targets movement (with a certain delay). Its like when a cop drives beside you and matches your speed and asks you to pull over. will only work if you are faster and as agile as the target. You can use this to keep angular velocity to a minimum but you also just web the guy to death an not worry about this crap. Other that that, you can just use this to fly side by side with your friends and take a pretty picture haha. |
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
265
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 06:08:33 -
[34] - Quote
Good questions but they basically boil down to the ship you see being a fake. I explained this a little in an earlier post but to resummerize consider all ships in eve as just a dot. Adding in some random rotations etc would be much easier than adding flight but still technically outside of the original ethos of EVE. EVE is not built as a flight simulator. Almost everything you see is a resource cheap simulation(smartly so) so we can have more internet spaceships in space at once.
|
Tenebria Gallentis
Whitewash Holdings
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 06:19:28 -
[35] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:Good questions but they basically boil down to the ship you see being a fake. I explained this a little in an earlier post but to resummerize consider all ships in eve as just a dot. Adding in some random rotations etc would be much easier than adding flight but still technically outside of the original ethos of EVE. EVE is not built as a flight simulator. Almost everything you see is a resource cheap simulation(smartly so) so we can have more internet spaceships in space at once.
Yeah, guess your right. Would be cool if it was a simulator too though (market and space sim) but maybe that's asking too much. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2365
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 09:42:33 -
[36] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Play KSP, then imagine trying to fly your ship in EVE using that physics engine, you will soon realize how unfun and silly this game would be with anywhere near real physics. Not really true. Flown a real life drone lately. They have automated corrective thrusters. Even the old space shuttles are able to stabilise themselves automatically in zero gee. In terms of physics an object travels in a straight line constant speed until a force is applied, it's hardly computer intensive math. Do nothing. Wow, I couldn't have written a more ignorant response even if I was trying to troll and was being ignorant on purpose. Nicely done. Sorry but I'm correct. There are systems all over the world that correct vehicles for that have automated position keeping for the purpose of simplifying navigation. It would be unthinkable to expect an advanced spacecraft not to have that and instead place the pilot into having to make manual adjustments. He was more referencing the fact that a space ship has no fixed point of reference and as such any autocorrecting measure is vastly more complex because of this. IE your little drone does not equal a space ship. Though please.. Ask an astronaut if they can hit a button and auto correct a tumble. We would be able to hear the laughter in Alberta. The ship is not a dot in reality. If it was a dot there would be no align time since a single point is already aligned. You could be moving the opposite direction of where you wish to warp and the ship would only need to decelerate and accelerate to warp in any direction.
So now we've discarded that nonsense we can get back to the reality that EvE ships have a bow (the direction of travel when thrust is applied) and apparently a set of thrusters that control pitch, yaw and velocity attached to a really bad Positioning System and a INS.
In regards to the drone reference yes it is a space ship, it's a ship that travels through space, the only difference is it operates in atmosphere rather than vacuum.
Here's a link to some up to date GPS / INS research.
link
CCP Fozzie GǣWe can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGǪ in null sec anomalies. Gǣ*
Kaalrus pwned..... :)
|
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
265
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 17:02:18 -
[37] - Quote
Oh really? So a dot with a flag to "warp" at a set speed cant exist eh? Totally not easier to code than a defined object. EVE in no way shape or form uses a "dot move to" mechanic for motion right? Even though that's exactly what it does.
You do understand that the entire graphical overlay is just a pretty picture right? CCP is a master at making you think you are seeing something without actually spending the resources to actually make that thing a reality. When you move the dot gains direction and velocity.. it never has structure. No part of the engine is flight sim. If it was trust me you would never have 3000 people in space fighting one another.
Also I've talked with INS development teams before. Cool story but it doesn't excuse the truth that without a point of reference everything becomes a guess. Maybe in the future when fuel is nearly unlimited and oxygen is not always in desperately short supply a wasteful system can be used. In reality we use extremely redundant series of calculations to predict paths so we don't have to use such wasteful methods. The Blackbirds(SR-71) use INS to a fairly accurate degree. Only a few inches of deviation over a half planetary trip. Downside of this system is space is really honking big. 1mm deviation over a mile doesn't sound like much until you start talking about millions of miles. Then it becomes a difference of uncontrollably smashing into the object, entering orbit of the object, or flying off into the big black. This is why INS systems are really not trusted yet.
Additionally in any uncontrolled event INS systems tend to freak out. So the first disaster that sends the craft into a slightly uncontrolled spin would be entirely unrecoverable if INS was your only nav method. NASA still uses good old Mark1 Eyeballs for a reason ya know. Point of References. |
Paranoid Loyd
8322
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 17:52:35 -
[38] - Quote
You're a good man for trying Naf but you'd have better luck explaining it to turnip. The funniest part is, this particular point IZ has latched onto barely even scratches the surface of what I said.
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
Fix the Prospect!
|
Nana Skalski
Poseidaon
4098
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 19:13:17 -
[39] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:Oh really? So a dot with a flag to "warp" at a set speed cant exist eh? Totally not easier to code than a defined object. EVE in no way shape or form uses a "dot move to" mechanic for motion right? Even though that's exactly what it does.
You do understand that the entire graphical overlay is just a pretty picture right? CCP is a master at making you think you are seeing something without actually spending the resources to actually make that thing a reality. When you move the dot gains direction and velocity.. it never has structure. No part of the engine is flight sim. If it was trust me you would never have 3000 people in space fighting one another.
Also I've talked with INS development teams before. Cool story but it doesn't excuse the truth that without a point of reference everything becomes a guess. Maybe in the future when fuel is nearly unlimited and oxygen is not always in desperately short supply a wasteful system can be used. In reality we use extremely redundant series of calculations to predict paths so we don't have to use such wasteful methods. The Blackbirds(SR-71) use INS to a fairly accurate degree. Only a few inches of deviation over a half planetary trip. Downside of this system is space is really honking big. 1mm deviation over a mile doesn't sound like much until you start talking about millions of miles. Then it becomes a difference of uncontrollably smashing into the object, entering orbit of the object, or flying off into the big black. This is why INS systems are really not trusted yet.
Additionally in any uncontrolled event INS systems tend to freak out. So the first disaster that sends the craft into a slightly uncontrolled spin would be entirely unrecoverable if INS was your only nav method. NASA still uses good old Mark1 Eyeballs for a reason ya know. Point of References. What I think, is you can have always a point of reference, Position of spacecraft now, then you can plan where to move in what direction. You can identify the other point in space if it emerges and plan to move there with a nice calculation algorythm that engineer wrote for it before.
For the game having the drag on space, its because of the warp engine. Warp engine is causing drag on space around you. If it is bigger warp engine to move more mass in the warp, it causes more drag. Warp engine in apaceship is constantly operational, dragging against space, you can call it "negative bend" when its not calibrated to bend it in certain direction for certain length. It is a side effect. This drag must be overcome with constant force to the ship engines. Microwarpdrive module adds to warp drive additional circuitry that acts like a calibrated warpdrive for lesser mass than vessel. It negates a lot of drag when working, but only to a certain level.
Why not switch it off? The warp engine to be operational must be constantly on. Repackaged vessels still have warpengines working on standby. Switching warp engine completely off breaks it and causes a huge explosion. When somene is shooting you and there is no hull to protect it, next shoot will definitely break it and ship will be destroyed in explosion.
( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ =ƒÅ¦ - my sandcastle
Every part of a game helps to tell a story. =ƒôò
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2366
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:42:21 -
[40] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:Oh really? So a dot with a flag to "warp" at a set speed cant exist eh? Totally not easier to code than a defined object. EVE in no way shape or form uses a "dot move to" mechanic for motion right? Even though that's exactly what it does.
You do understand that the entire graphical overlay is just a pretty picture right? CCP is a master at making you think you are seeing something without actually spending the resources to actually make that thing a reality. When you move the dot gains direction and velocity.. it never has structure. No part of the engine is flight sim. If it was trust me you would never have 3000 people in space fighting one another.
Also I've talked with INS development teams before. Cool story but it doesn't excuse the truth that without a point of reference everything becomes a guess. Maybe in the future when fuel is nearly unlimited and oxygen is not always in desperately short supply a wasteful system can be used. In reality we use extremely redundant series of calculations to predict paths so we don't have to use such wasteful methods. The Blackbirds(SR-71) use INS to a fairly accurate degree. Only a few inches of deviation over a half planetary trip. Downside of this system is space is really honking big. 1mm deviation over a mile doesn't sound like much until you start talking about millions of miles. Then it becomes a difference of uncontrollably smashing into the object, entering orbit of the object, or flying off into the big black. This is why INS systems are really not trusted yet.
Additionally in any uncontrolled event INS systems tend to freak out. So the first disaster that sends the craft into a slightly uncontrolled spin would be entirely unrecoverable if INS was your only nav method. NASA still uses good old Mark1 Eyeballs for a reason ya know. Point of References. The majority of spacecraft in real life are unmanned and already use INS / Gyros, accelerometers with an ACCS to correct attitude. References are provided by eyeballs in the form of cameras that fix onto the sun and another object or use reference points like white noise deviations. The ACCS fires vernier or ion thrusters independent of human input. Computers are infinitely better at it than humans, especially in an uncontrolled spin as they have millimetre millisecond accuracy.
CCP Fozzie GǣWe can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGǪ in null sec anomalies. Gǣ*
Kaalrus pwned..... :)
|
|
Thor Kerrigan
The High and Mighty Carebear Abortion Clinic
666
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 08:35:51 -
[41] - Quote
Wanted to say something witty... but then read the first 6 replies - We had covered the submarine sim, the lore warp drive drag and the fun factor. Damn son. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
26833
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 09:25:53 -
[42] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: Sorry but I'm correct.
Maybe, but how drones work have absolutely nothing to do with what he said: how unfun EVE would be if it used a KSP-style orbital mechanics rocket simulation rather than its current simple velocity vector. That's why your answer was ignorant.
Quote:The ship is not a dot in reality. If it was a dot there would be no align time since a single point is already aligned. You could be moving the opposite direction of where you wish to warp and the ship would only need to decelerate and accelerate to warp in any direction. The ship is a velocity vector. Sometimes, its length (the quantity we call GÇ£speedGÇ¥) is zero. At that point, it becomes a null-vector, which is effectively a point.
Being a point, there will still always be an align time because being aligned isn't just a matter of direction GÇö it's a matter of velocity. You have to be pointing towards your target and be at GëÑ75% max speed, and it always requires some time to achieve that velocity. If your velocity is already pointing in a different direction, it takes more time than if it is pointing nowhere (i.e. when you're standing still) because you're not just extending your vector in a direction GÇö you also have to cancel out the preexisting direction and speed. Inertia in EVE decides how quickly you can alter your velocity, be it by changing your speed or by rotating your vector. Exactly how it ties into rotation (i.e. turning) isn't well-known, other than by the standard formula of dv/dt = 10Gü¦V/(I+ùM) +ù e^(-t +ù 10Gü¦ / (I+ùM)), which doesn't tell the full story of what happens when we throw actual vectors in there.
As far as server representation goes, chances are that they're storing it as a unit vector and a magnitude, so while there may indeed be some implicit direction to your ship when it stands still, the actual velocity is still a null vector, which is why it aligns equally quickly in all direction: there is nothing to cancel out before elongating in the desired direction.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.3 - Vanguard Edition.
|
Demica Diaz
SE-1
193
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 10:57:41 -
[43] - Quote
Experts say that in EVE capsuleer universe pod has produced undesired side effects. Spending extremely long time in liquid enviroment of the pod has caused person go though "Pickle Jar" effect. Pickle Jar effect is where person brain starts to adapt to enviroment the body resides in, thus creating illusion that world is actually liquid.
Scientists have been working tightly to learn what drives this behavior and how to avoid it. Unfortunatelly so far tests have shown that now quite old capsuleer technology has "hooked" its users quite permanently and so strongly that pilots deliberately tend to reduce ship speeds to satisfy liquid space illusion. In capsuleer mind turning off ship engines and keep drifting does not make any sense. For capsuleers ship will stop eventually as if it was submarine underwater and not spaceship in space.
None can explain why this is happening and so far convincing capsuleer to stop reducing ship speeds and acting like they were commanding submarines has been unsuccessful. One expert said "Its like talking to brick wall!".
Today technical limitation of old capsuleer technology has been studied and modified and project Valkyrie and DUST 514 has allowed new generation of immortal entities that do not fall for illusion of Pickle Jar effect. Thus inspiring bright future that maybe one day EVE capsuleer Pickle Jar effect can be reversed and doors to their Captains quarters can finally open so that they may join others and no longer live like fish in aquarium. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2544
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 13:47:47 -
[44] - Quote
Sure, implement real physics. Then, we can all get stuck inside celestials whose gravity pulls us in when we warp toward them... |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |