| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Mr Phogel
Wanted Men
    |
Posted - 2008.06.21 06:00:00 -
[31]
I dunno; the only thing that really needs improvement is the mechanism when you turn on your mwd. My ship often starts to move into a complete different direction when you hit/pulse your mwd. It's quite stupid because no one would make a u-turn when you put the pedal to metal. Think of eve more like a turn based game or chess, you make move; your enemy has to counter it and vise versa. Implementing a "joystick" movement would skrew the balance of the game, think of missiles they would need a complete overhaul as every other weapon system would need.
Trolls: don't feed them! But they are like kitten, you just can't resist
WE'RE SORRY SOMETHING HAPPENED TO OUR PLANCK BUBBLE STABILIZER!
500 - Internal Error
|
Lucius Nahme
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 06:37:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Originally by: CCP Whisper
Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is.
HIRE PEOPLE THAT PLAY THE FRIGGIN GAME, NOT GREEN CODERS.
Siigari, no offense intended, but you are an idiot of the highest caliber.
Actually...yeah, offense intended.
QFT and because the WIN must be acknowledged
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 17:55:00 -
[33]
they usually are
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 20:05:00 -
[34]
Fan Made Trailer from ingame shots that rival the offical trailer.
New Ship Idea: Tender Supply Ship, The Logistics Sister |
xStormwingx
The Aftermath.
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 20:26:00 -
[35]
The non-EVE sound effects are a little jarring though. 
But anyway, sure manual controls would be kinda cool, but what they have now is good enough. If you're flying something fast like a ceptor and doing nothing but orbiting (besides when attacking large stationary targets I guess), you shouldn't be complaining.
-------
 |
Vincent Gaines
Avis de Captura
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 20:41:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Sral TBear
THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!! freespace II, that is the best G`darn bloody space sim ever made....realistic feeling in space....well you got it lmao...i can remember first time trying to manouver lol...i whent all over the place.....why cant ccp make freespace III 
FS2 FTW!!!
and the SCP is even better.
|
Vincent Gaines
Avis de Captura
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 20:43:00 -
[37]
Originally by: F'nog
Originally by: Sral TBear
why cant ccp make freespace III
Haven't you heard? Derek Smart is making Freespace III.
The horror. The HORROR!
isn't he the guy that was making that crap campaign "unholy alliance?"
|
Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 21:20:00 -
[38]
Freespace 3 may or may not happen, interplay may be back but violation owns the rights for it still and they arent interested at all.
If you like freespace google up "beyond the red line" or you tube it, youll be most pleased with this fan project.
Homeworld 3 is rumored that relic reobtained rights, no confirmations though....
New Ship Idea: Tender Supply Ship, The Logistics Sister |
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr
Shadow Company
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 22:48:00 -
[39]
The logical conclusion to all of this fuzz is:
CCP needs to make a spin-off. "EVE: Tactical Combat" where ships and stuff is controlled Freespace-style.
Of course that means that engagements will be smaller and it won't be a 1 shard game (necessary limitation to reduce the inevitable lag).
More of a "relive classical battles of EVE such as the attack on the rogue Gallente Titan stuff".
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Ekrid
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 03:17:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Ekrid on 18/08/2008 03:19:30
Originally by: Shakuul
Originally by: Robert Rosenberg
Originally by: Malcolm Gerwulf
Last time I checked, you can only achieve a maximum velocity equal to the speed of the particles leaving your ship.
QFT
Uh...this is false. If particles are leaving your ship (burning fuel), they exert a force on your ship. If a force is exerted on your ship, it will accelerate. This is assuming of course you're going slow enough where relativity isn't significant (ie all non-warp/non-jump travel in EVE).
Newton's second law
Quote:
LAW II: The alteration of motion is ever proportional to the motive force impressed; and is made in the direction of the right line in which that force is impressed. ù If a force generates a motion, a double force will generate double the motion, a triple force triple the motion, whether that force be impressed altogether and at once, or gradually and successively.
Im just going to say that max speeds are realistic, the continued thrust isnt. Why is it realistic? well because at those speeds, their lateral thrusters and main thrusters can still turn them around relatively quickly. have you ever gone to loot a wreck, see yourself overshoot it, and see your ship have to slow down, about face and jet back to it?
How fun would that be if instead of a max speed you have a max acceleration until you reach near relativistic speed? you would take an hour to yo-yo back and forth until you're finally close enough to loot that wreck.
Im going to assume you want to be able to fight in eve, nd not get frustrated by going ridiculously out of range, taking hours to 1v1. Im going to assume you want to go places quickly, and not have to deal with slowing down all the time.
Less is more, slow is smooth, smooth is fast. your argument is not so smooth.
/me brings a little logical competency to some physics nerds emorage.
|
|
Frug
Repo Industries
R.E.P.O.
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 03:25:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Ekrid
Im just going to say that max speeds are realistic, the continued thrust isnt. Why is it realistic? well because at those speeds, their lateral thrusters and main thrusters can still turn them around relatively quickly. have you ever gone to loot a wreck, see yourself overshoot it, and see your ship have to slow down, about face and jet back to it?
How fun would that be if instead of a max speed you have a max acceleration until you reach near relativistic speed? you would take an hour to yo-yo back and forth until you're finally close enough to loot that wreck.
Im going to assume you want to be able to fight in eve, nd not get frustrated by going ridiculously out of range, taking hours to 1v1. Im going to assume you want to go places quickly, and not have to deal with slowing down all the time.
Less is more, slow is smooth, smooth is fast. your argument is not so smooth.
/me brings a little logical competency to some physics nerds emorage.
You appear to be confusing the words "realistic" and "playable".
No, max speed is not "realistic" so starting your argument off saying that it is... is... pretty stupid.
It's really very simple physics.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - -
If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO
BOOO!! - Ductoris
Neat look what I found - Kreul
Hey, my marbles |
Black Phlanx
Caldari
Kingfisher Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 03:30:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Sral TBear
Originally by: CCP Whisper
Originally by: Bruce Deorum
And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes.
It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is.
Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game.
THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!! freespace II, that is the best G`darn bloody space sim ever made....realistic feeling in space....well you got it lmao...i can remember first time trying to manouver lol...i whent all over the place.....why cant ccp make freespace III
Actually, I'd put Wing Commander over Freespace I and II.
|
Jim Raynor
Caldari
Shinra
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 03:59:00 -
[43]
Originally by: CCP Whisper
Originally by: Bruce Deorum
And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes.
It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is.
Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game.
Out of curiosity would adding something like "attack maneuvers" be possible? One thing I don't like about EVE is the way ships tend to turn and maneuver it doesn't seem 'natural'. Adding some kind of attack pattern of other types of movement other than the default 'orbit' would be kinda nice also I think the way ships turn could be looked at as well, I think ships should turn on a wider arc not try to 'spin on a dime' as they tend to currently.
Anyways, just wondering..
------
I'll make a sig later. |
Alkeena
Gallente
Unitas Nusquam Est
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 04:27:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Black Phlanx
Originally by: Sral TBear
Originally by: CCP Whisper
Originally by: Bruce Deorum
And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes.
It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is.
Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game.
THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!! freespace II, that is the best G`darn bloody space sim ever made....realistic feeling in space....well you got it lmao...i can remember first time trying to manouver lol...i whent all over the place.....why cant ccp make freespace III
Actually, I'd put Wing Commander over Freespace I and II.
X3: Reunion w/ XTM and the proper script packs >> All, eve included
|
Ekrid
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 04:41:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Frug
Originally by: Ekrid
Im just going to say that max speeds are realistic, the continued thrust isnt. Why is it realistic? well because at those speeds, their lateral thrusters and main thrusters can still turn them around relatively quickly. have you ever gone to loot a wreck, see yourself overshoot it, and see your ship have to slow down, about face and jet back to it?
How fun would that be if instead of a max speed you have a max acceleration until you reach near relativistic speed? you would take an hour to yo-yo back and forth until you're finally close enough to loot that wreck.
Im going to assume you want to be able to fight in eve, nd not get frustrated by going ridiculously out of range, taking hours to 1v1. Im going to assume you want to go places quickly, and not have to deal with slowing down all the time.
Less is more, slow is smooth, smooth is fast. your argument is not so smooth.
/me brings a little logical competency to some physics nerds emorage.
You appear to be confusing the words "realistic" and "playable".
No, max speed is not "realistic" so starting your argument off saying that it is... is... pretty stupid.
It's really very simple physics.
you seem to be confusing realistic and playable with your own stupidity.
yes its realistic and its playable, because if it was like real life, people wouldn't want to go 2394238423828 m/s due to permanent acceleration in thrust, because that means you need 2394238423828 NEGATIVE thrust to slow down, and its going to take you as long to slow down as to speed up, and try turning and doing combat maneuvers in something so massive as the ships in eve that are going that speed.
its realistic because its a scenario that would happen in real space battles. Its playable because its like what would happen in real space battles.
conclusion: gj tard.
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente
Battlestars
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 04:44:00 -
[46]
You people are even worse than the necro itself.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
techzer0
Minmatar Mafia
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 05:01:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Jim Raynor
Originally by: CCP Whisper
Originally by: Bruce Deorum
And i dont think is something extremely undoable. The mechanisms and routines are there, only some minor inteface changes.
It is not quite as easy as you think. Many of us at CCP have played other sci-fi themed games where you had first-person views and joystick control and know that this is a nice control mechanism. However implementing it in EVE is a lot more complicated than making some minor interface changes and tweaking our graphics and physics engines. It would mean rewriting large chunks of the core functionality of the game, and that is very, very unlikely to happen. Believe me, one out of three new employees asks about it (including me) and is presented with the long, technical answer about why implementing it runs an unacceptably high risk of breaking the core functionality of the game for all players. Then the person who asked gets emo, and then they get over it and continue to enjoy playing the game as it is.
Fact is that the mechanisms and routines for joystick control are not there, and cobbling a quick and dirty workaround like simulating mouseclicks based on joystick input would be really clunky and inelegant. So yeah, it is not a bad idea but right now it's unfortunately one that is unlikely to make it into the game.
Out of curiosity would adding something like "attack maneuvers" be possible? One thing I don't like about EVE is the way ships tend to turn and maneuver it doesn't seem 'natural'. Adding some kind of attack pattern of other types of movement other than the default 'orbit' would be kinda nice also I think the way ships turn could be looked at as well, I think ships should turn on a wider arc not try to 'spin on a dime' as they tend to currently.
Anyways, just wondering..
It's space. You fire a thruster at the front of the ship at a 90 degree angle and it is going to spin on a dime. EVE doesn't generate graphics for those maneuvering thrusters but they are there in theory. Turning on a wider arc would require resistance, and in reality ships would also need to turn a full 180 degrees and fire the main thrusters just to slow down, that or have some big damn retro rockets in front that you only use to slow down... how fun would that be coming into every gate 
My ship already flies like a submarine due to the game being based off a submarine sim. Please don't make it worse 
Also when losing thrust, ships would not automatically slow down at the rate they do in eve, there is some kind of magical invisible resistance in EVE space that makes them do so.
------------
CCP > Let's play the nerf a race game! Next up minmatar! |
|
CCP Mitnal
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.08.18 05:22:00 -
[48]
Locked.
Necro.
Mitnal
Community Representative
CCP Games, EVE Online
Email / Netfang
Special Agent Mitnal; Saving the forums one thread at a time! |
|
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |