Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
1064
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 17:08:26 -
[31] - Quote
Oh noes!!!111eleven
That was one of those undockumented things that could make your day and confuse pilots that would use the orbit command in the first place.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Kagehisa Shintaro
Back Door Burglars The Otherworld
21
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 17:32:30 -
[32] - Quote
Does this mean the end of Webbing Freighters off gates through Uedama/Niarja (to name a few)? I know the trick is used in combat, but Freighters can be made to warp backwards in certain situations, making it relatively safe to travel through certain areas if you have a webbing partner. Will we now have to wait til the Freighter is fully, or almost, aligned in the right direction?
Any company can ship. We space ship. - CCP Guard
|
Zarvox Toral
Lightly Seared on the Reality Grill Apocalypse Now.
23
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 17:36:30 -
[33] - Quote
Kagehisa Shintaro wrote:Does this mean the end of Webbing Freighters off gates through Uedama/Niarja (to name a few)? I know the trick is used in combat, but Freighters can be made to warp backwards in certain situations, making it relatively safe to travel through certain areas if you have a webbing partner. Will we now have to wait til the Freighter is fully, or almost, aligned in the right direction?
This will still work - unrelated phenomena :D |
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
335
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 17:42:09 -
[34] - Quote
Kagehisa Shintaro wrote:Does this mean the end of Webbing Freighters off gates through Uedama/Niarja (to name a few)? I know the trick is used in combat, but Freighters can be made to warp backwards in certain situations, making it relatively safe to travel through certain areas if you have a webbing partner. Will we now have to wait til the Freighter is fully, or almost, aligned in the right direction?
If you were orbiting with your freighter to get into warp I hate to tell you this but you were doing it wrong. |
Kagehisa Shintaro
Back Door Burglars The Otherworld
21
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 17:50:16 -
[35] - Quote
I'm not supposed to orbit my friend in his Rapier? Doh!!!
Any company can ship. We space ship. - CCP Guard
|
Annia Aurel
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 18:07:01 -
[36] - Quote
There is a blatant error in Eve's physics calculations related to orbiting.
Angular velocity is calculated in an approximate fashion that takes into account the relative speed and position of the two ships in question but ignores their rotation.
Easy example, a frigate orbits a stationary target in a circular orbit. In real world physics, the angular velocity of the stationary target, as seen by the orbiting frigate is zero. In other words, the guns of the frigate will always point at the target without the need to turn in any way. Build a paper model if you don't believe me.
In Eve physics, on the other hand, the same 'angular velocity' is calculated for both ships. Which is only correct if none of the ships are changing direction and is thus plain wrong in case of orbiting.
Now, the error would be very simple to fix by calculating velocities based on position changes between server ticks and factoring in the corresponding rotation (just subtract this rotation from the present wrong formula, and voila, everything is correct).
Now, it can be argued that a) this will complicate calculations and b) it is desireable from a gameplay point of view.
a) Can only be answered by the devs
b) Is up for debate. I never get why orbiting in a fast frigate should give me any problems with tracking. A change of the formula would benefit people who actively pilot their ships, would benefit people in smaller ships (new players anyone?) and would make much more sense to the dedicated physics loving space nerd
Thoughts? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
33289
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 18:20:23 -
[37] - Quote
it's 2016
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Dr Cedric
Independent Miners Corporation Care Factor
138
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 18:23:58 -
[38] - Quote
I'm surprised that with all of the deeper mechanics and code they have been looking at that they haven't looked at gun tracking and some of the other formulas. I'm sure there is room for improvement somewhere in there, whether its for server performance, or realism or something.
As far as I know, after the end of POS's once Citadels are a thing, the tracking formula is one of the only things not touched since the beginning of the game!
Cedric
|
Zarvox Toral
Lightly Seared on the Reality Grill Apocalypse Now.
23
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 19:16:28 -
[39] - Quote
Annia Aurel wrote:There is a blatant error in Eve's physics calculations related to orbiting.
Angular velocity is calculated in an approximate fashion that takes into account the relative speed and position of the two ships in question but ignores their rotation.
Easy example, a frigate orbits a stationary target in a circular orbit. In real world physics, the angular velocity of the stationary target, as seen by the orbiting frigate is zero. In other words, the guns of the frigate will always point at the target without the need to turn in any way. Build a paper model if you don't believe me.
In Eve physics, on the other hand, the same 'angular velocity' is calculated for both ships. Which is only correct if none of the ships are changing direction and is thus plain wrong in case of orbiting.
Now, the error would be very simple to fix by calculating velocities based on position changes between server ticks and factoring in the corresponding rotation (just subtract this rotation from the present wrong formula, and voila, everything is correct).
Now, it can be argued that a) this will complicate calculations and b) it is desireable from a gameplay point of view.
a) Can only be answered by the devs
b) Is up for debate. I never get why orbiting in a fast frigate should give me any problems with tracking. A change of the formula would benefit people who actively pilot their ships, would benefit people in smaller ships (new players anyone?) and would make much more sense to the dedicated physics loving space nerd
Thoughts?
Absolutely agree with this. |
Esnaelc Sin'led
The Unchained Club
54
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 19:42:31 -
[40] - Quote
Annia Aurel wrote:There is a blatant error in Eve's physics calculations related to orbiting.
Angular velocity is calculated in an approximate fashion that takes into account the relative speed and position of the two ships in question but ignores their rotation.
Easy example, a frigate orbits a stationary target in a circular orbit. In real world physics, the angular velocity of the stationary target, as seen by the orbiting frigate is zero. In other words, the guns of the frigate will always point at the target without the need to turn in any way. Build a paper model if you don't believe me.
In Eve physics, on the other hand, the same 'angular velocity' is calculated for both ships. Which is only correct if none of the ships are changing direction and is thus plain wrong in case of orbiting.
Now, the error would be very simple to fix by calculating velocities based on position changes between server ticks and factoring in the corresponding rotation (just subtract this rotation from the present wrong formula, and voila, everything is correct).
Now, it can be argued that a) this will complicate calculations and b) it is desireable from a gameplay point of view.
a) Can only be answered by the devs
b) Is up for debate. I never get why orbiting in a fast frigate should give me any problems with tracking. A change of the formula would benefit people who actively pilot their ships, would benefit people in smaller ships (new players anyone?) and would make much more sense to the dedicated physics loving space nerd
Thoughts?
That's what i was talking about with guns tracking mecanics. +1
That would add so much to the actual gameplay if it was rewrote. |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17449
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 19:50:42 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks. While we were implementing the Stasis Grappler module we dug into some of the code governing orbiting and movement commands. While we were there we saw a clear path to making the orbit command act in a more logical fashion. As of the March patch, when you use the orbit command and your speed or orbit radius changes, the plane of the orbit will no longer re-randomize. This means you will no longer switch direction when turning on a propulsion module, and stasis webifiers will no longer cause direction changes. We still highly advise players to learn how to use manual piloting for best performance, as the orbit command does not include any advanced logic for managing transversal or avoiding slingshot maneuvers. However now the orbit command will no longer freak out whenever your speed changes, which should bring it in line with reasonable expectations for how it should behave.
Ok this is pretty ******* good
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Bandalon Ominus
Splinter Cell Operations inPanic
21
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 20:37:41 -
[42] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Bandalon Ominus wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
We still highly advise players to learn how to use manual piloting for best performance, as the orbit command does not include any advanced logic for managing transversal or avoiding slingshot maneuvers.
I still highly advise to increase the tickrate to at least 4/s to make manual piloting a nonsluggish experiece, or at least consider 2/s.. I know EVE isnt supppsed to be a twitch game but irresponsiveness is not an adequate and enjoyable way of achieving that.. Its 2016! Servers should be able to handle that. Going from any responsive game to EVE is quite an off putting experiece. id rather have a bigger chance of tidi while having a much much better experience during (lets be fair) the majority of the time where there is no tidi. I'd absolutely love to do that, but it's also not a trivial task and would reduce our performance headroom quite a bit. Hopefully someday.
Thank you for your reply. From what I understood from Veritas this is just one server side setting (like with any game server really) that can easily be changed. Veritas indicated that right now it cannot be made adaptive however (requires server reboot /downtime to change the rate). I really hope you consider testing this on sisi. As I said, most of EVE happens outside of tidi. Increasing the tickrate might lower the threshhold for tidi due to higher load, but the trade off could very well be worth it to improve the general game experience (a lot).
Its worth noting that a tickrate increase doesnt not neccesarily increases the load proportionally. This is at least my experience with a wide variaty of game servers, though EVE may different in this regards. Again, ideally this would be testes on sisi (though you might already have :)) |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3490
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 20:46:16 -
[43] - Quote
Annia Aurel wrote:There is a blatant error in Eve's physics calculations related to orbiting.
Angular velocity is calculated in an approximate fashion that takes into account the relative speed and position of the two ships in question but ignores their rotation.
Easy example, a frigate orbits a stationary target in a circular orbit. In real world physics, the angular velocity of the stationary target, as seen by the orbiting frigate is zero. In other words, the guns of the frigate will always point at the target without the need to turn in any way. Build a paper model if you don't believe me.
In Eve physics, on the other hand, the same 'angular velocity' is calculated for both ships. Which is only correct if none of the ships are changing direction and is thus plain wrong in case of orbiting.
Now, the error would be very simple to fix by calculating velocities based on position changes between server ticks and factoring in the corresponding rotation (just subtract this rotation from the present wrong formula, and voila, everything is correct).
Now, it can be argued that a) this will complicate calculations and b) it is desireable from a gameplay point of view.
a) Can only be answered by the devs
b) Is up for debate. I never get why orbiting in a fast frigate should give me any problems with tracking. A change of the formula would benefit people who actively pilot their ships, would benefit people in smaller ships (new players anyone?) and would make much more sense to the dedicated physics loving space nerd
Thoughts?
yeah i remember when i started the game it was one of the most confusing game mechanics. It is more intuitive to have a approximation of real world physics in a game (with some common scifi shortcuts) than having fantasy physics and rules. Eve sadly has fantasy physics. A stationary slicer should have a harder time hitting a orbiting slicer, than the orbiting slicer the stationary slicer.
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
367
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 21:07:06 -
[44] - Quote
This is a great and thoughtful change, and it is actually a buff to the grapple mechanic coming in March...but I have to admit I am a bit sad at how many kills I've gotten from this mechanic using it to gain better tracking etc. Now if only the server tick/response times were faster and I would be the happiest camper |
Circumstantial Evidence
255
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 22:31:26 -
[45] - Quote
Bandalon Ominus wrote:... Increasing the tickrate might lower the threshhold for tidi due to higher load, but the trade off could very well be worth it to improve the general game experience (a lot). The "performance headroom" CCP Fozzie mentions might refer to players with poor connections: the current tick lets more players be reasonably competitive.
|
Alexis Nightwish
404
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 22:48:23 -
[46] - Quote
At least something good came out of the grappler module.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Bandalon Ominus
Splinter Cell Operations inPanic
23
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 23:21:52 -
[47] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:Bandalon Ominus wrote:... Increasing the tickrate might lower the threshhold for tidi due to higher load, but the trade off could very well be worth it to improve the general game experience (a lot). The "performance headroom" CCP Fozzie mentions might refer to players with poor connections: the current tick lets more players be reasonably competitive.
Doubt this, but Fozzie could clarify. Either way: Max global ping is around 500 ms (but generally under 250ms, and under 100ms within your continent). 1/s tickrate is extremely low. I played quake against venezualans on 250ms ping on a 25/s tickrate server. From what I uderstand the packetsize in EVEis rather trivial. Also, clientside sendrate could differ from serverside tickrate, depending inter alia on how clientside commands / packets and their quieing are treated.
|
Alhira Katserna
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2121
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 23:38:31 -
[48] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks. While we were implementing [url=https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=468244]As of the March patch, when you use the orbit command and your speed or orbit radius changes, the plane of the orbit will no longer re-randomize. This means you will no longer switch direction when turning on a propulsion module, and stasis webifiers will no longer cause direction changes.
Can you please provide a way for us to change the orbit direction? Some people had a good use for the way it works right now. Even though this is a good update i would approve a way to change the orbit in some way. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2965
|
Posted - 2016.02.09 23:46:51 -
[49] - Quote
Annia Aurel wrote:There is a blatant error in Eve's physics calculations related to orbiting.
Angular velocity is calculated in an approximate fashion that takes into account the relative speed and position of the two ships in question but ignores their rotation.
Easy example, a frigate orbits a stationary target in a circular orbit. In real world physics, the angular velocity of the stationary target, as seen by the orbiting frigate is zero. In other words, the guns of the frigate will always point at the target without the need to turn in any way. Build a paper model if you don't believe me.
In Eve physics, on the other hand, the same 'angular velocity' is calculated for both ships. Which is only correct if none of the ships are changing direction and is thus plain wrong in case of orbiting.
Now, the error would be very simple to fix by calculating velocities based on position changes between server ticks and factoring in the corresponding rotation (just subtract this rotation from the present wrong formula, and voila, everything is correct).
Now, it can be argued that a) this will complicate calculations and b) it is desireable from a gameplay point of view.
a) Can only be answered by the devs
b) Is up for debate. I never get why orbiting in a fast frigate should give me any problems with tracking. A change of the formula would benefit people who actively pilot their ships, would benefit people in smaller ships (new players anyone?) and would make much more sense to the dedicated physics loving space nerd
Thoughts? This is because of the EVE physics model. Ships in EVE do not have an actual heading. The physics server represents them as a sphere with a velocity. The local client then uses that to apply a graphical heading onto your ship within constraints. This is what causes things like freighters warping 'backwards' since the backwards is only a local graphical artefact, not something the server sees.
To change the entire physics model is a non trivial exercise.
Alhira Katserna wrote: Can you please provide a way for us to change the orbit direction? Some people had a good use for the way it works right now. Even though this is a good update i would approve a way to change the orbit in some way.
Double click and then start a new orbit once you've changed direction? You are literally asking for manual piloting which already exists. |
Helene Fidard
CTRL-Q
34
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 00:02:40 -
[50] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:To change the entire physics model is a non trivial exercise. If I'm reading this right Annia's suggestion is to have the gun tracking formula guess at the ship's "real" heading using the ship's velocity during the previous tick. I suspect it is impractical, but it wouldn't involve changing the entire physics model. More like making an addendum to it. |
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2966
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 00:07:19 -
[51] - Quote
Helene Fidard wrote: If I'm reading this right Annia's suggestion is to have the gun tracking formula guess at the ship's "real" heading using the ship's velocity during the previous tick. I suspect it is impractical, but it wouldn't involve changing the entire physics model. More like making an addendum to it.
And that is how you get spaghetti code that then breaks. :) |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
1093
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 01:39:16 -
[52] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks. While we were implementing the Stasis Grappler module we dug into some of the code governing orbiting and movement commands. While we were there we saw a clear path to making the orbit command act in a more logical fashion. As of the March patch, when you use the orbit command and your speed or orbit radius changes, the plane of the orbit will no longer re-randomize. This means you will no longer switch direction when turning on a propulsion module, and stasis webifiers will no longer cause direction changes. We still highly advise players to learn how to use manual piloting for best performance, as the orbit command does not include any advanced logic for managing transversal or avoiding slingshot maneuvers. However now the orbit command will no longer freak out whenever your speed changes, which should bring it in line with reasonable expectations for how it should behave. OH MY GOD YES
I've always been annoyed by this, but I never would have thought it could be fixed. |
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 02:18:11 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Stasis webifiers will no longer cause direction changes.
Would this statement include the use of webifiers to reduce time to warp for large or capital?
|
IcyMidnight
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
11
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 03:11:41 -
[54] - Quote
This is a great change!
Why not just set the orbit plane as the one that minimizes the change in heading, though? If I go through the trouble of setting up my approach to be tangent to the orbit plane I want, why not just give it to me? |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
340
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 05:28:09 -
[55] - Quote
A very welcome change. Thank you |
Esnaelc Sin'led
The Unchained Club
57
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 07:41:54 -
[56] - Quote
GetSirrus wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Stasis webifiers will no longer cause direction changes. Would this statement include the use of webifiers to reduce time to warp for large or capital?
Since when the word "direction" is a synonym for "speed" ?
No, this change is not about speed decrease when webbed. |
Karim alRashid
Starboard.
208
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 09:39:14 -
[57] - Quote
Bloody awesome, good sir.
Pain is weakness leaving the body
http://www.youtube.com/user/AlRashidKarim/videos
|
Mister Ripley
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
155
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 11:17:42 -
[58] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Alhira Katserna wrote: Can you please provide a way for us to change the orbit direction? Some people had a good use for the way it works right now. Even though this is a good update i would approve a way to change the orbit in some way.
Double click and then start a new orbit once you've changed direction? You are literally asking for manual piloting which already exists. But this will apply a new orbit vector to my ship.
This change makes it so that there will be no new orbit vector every time my ship changes its max. speed while orbiting something.
The initial vector according to your current maximum speed will still be reapplied every time you hit orbit. |
Captain Campion
Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
9
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 13:53:50 -
[59] - Quote
I'm not quite following what this change means, any chance you could dumb it down for me, perhaps with pictures? :D |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
1843
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 16:45:10 -
[60] - Quote
GetSirrus wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Stasis webifiers will no longer cause direction changes. Would this statement include the use of webifiers to reduce time to warp for large or capital?
wat.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |